I HAVE long since ceased to be amazed by the ability of the present Cabinet Secretary for Education to achieve the exact opposite of stated outcomes, be it tackling the "attainment gap" or indiscipline in schools. Andrew Denholm's article ("School subject squeeze 'hitting deprived pupils'", The Herald, June 5) includes the following quotes: "A larger reduction in the number of subject entries for National 5 level qualifications took place in schools in more deprived areas" (Stirling University, Marina Shapira/Mark Priestley) and "what matters to me is that schools should be satisfied that the curriculum model they take forward has been the subject of active dialogue with their pupils and communities" (John Swinney).
Given that such "active dialogue" will be conducted with pupils and parents in highly deprived communities, many of whom will be struggling with the privations of Universal Credit, will be based on the educational experience and expectations of that demographic, and will be subject to budget constraints, resources and teacher shortage, one comes to the conclusion that what Mr Swinney is actually saying is, that in the present circumstances, they "should be satisfied" that they're getting an education at all.
Bearing in mind "more socially advantaged parents" (Edinburgh University, Cristina Ianelli) "were better placed to ensure their children made the best decisions over what subjects to take", whose expectations are equally based on experience, the reality of closing "'the attainment gap" is made plain. What is described as "flexibility over curriculum choices" (Professor Ianelli) leads to what Mr Swinney cheerfully describes as a "variety of models", the outcome of which is surely a reinforcement of, if not increasing, the already established attainment gap.
May I congratulate Mr Swinney on this exercise in social engineering by the school gates and in the certain knowledge that, in the not too distant future, Scotland too, will be able to describe areas of the country as "not having a university tradition", as a justifiable excuse for the dearth of social mobility.
Maureen McGarry-O'Hanlon, Balloch.
Read more: John Swinney: ‘I don’t see any narrowing of choice in schools’YOU carry a report of an exhibition of Ancient Egyptian artefacts currently touring Scotland ("Mystery solved: Meet Meramuniotes the 2,300-year-old Egyptian musician", The Herald, June 5). I am surprised that the SNP has not banned this most unwelcome rival for the fascinated devotion of young people who will visit it and, horror of horrors, possibly become so enamoured of Egyptology as to wish to dedicate their careers to it. After all, STEM (science, technology, engineering and maths) subjects are all the rage these days and those bright intellects among the secondary school population whose interests, temperament and professional aspirations could be triggered to pursue a very different (elitist?) discipline like Egyptology are seemingly to be quashed and indoctrinated into more economically productive fields. And not just Ancient Egypt, but the vast, wider ancient world with its perennial lure of countless specialisms like Roman Britain, Pompeii, Linear B, Flavian epic, Ciceronian rhetoric, Aristotelian philosophy, Assyriology, Semitic philology and Biblical criticism.
The present controversy over contraction of subject options is well documented. What hope is there, then, for a potential distinguished Egyptologist, such as those nurtured in 19th century Scottish schools, when the necessary foundation of linguistic expertise in French, German, Latin and Greek (prior to Egyptian hieroglyphics at university) is nowhere on offer? Not a single Scottish university boasts a venerable department of Egyptology such as is found in Liverpool, Birmingham, London, Oxford and Cambridge. Furthermore, such foreign language courses as are offered in schools (I can't speak for Gaelic or Mandarin) are not just threatened by paucity of patrons but are ludicrous dumb-downs of the rigorous syllabuses required for Highers a generation ago.
Mr. Swinney may trumpet his well-rehearsed responses to criticism of his impoverished Curriculum for Excellence and its basic, six-subject provision at National 4. But the real truth was expertly captured and pointedly portrayed bySteven Camley (June 5), who comically illustrated the Education Secretary's "expanded choice" to include "History Rewritten".
So children: be very wary of any stirring urge to explore the wonders of Egyptology. Your political masters have no taste for such waste of intellectual energy. As a field of life's work, consider it taboo.
Stuart Mitchell, Glasgow G13.
IN response to Andrew Denholm's front-page article ("Swinney accused of 'rewriting history' on P1 tests" , The Herald, June 4) as Vice-Chair of Upstart Scotland, one of the charitable organisations involved in the campaign to bring to the public's attention our opposition to testing five-year-olds, I would like to stress that this campaign was never motivated by antipathy to any political party.
The only reason that Upstart became involved was to highlight the inappropriateness of assessing our youngest pupils in this way and how detrimental it could be to the benefits of the pupils' wellbeing and engagement with learning that a play-based approach is having for this age group. We are a relatively new organisation who are delighted by the spread of outdoor nurseries and the number of schools who are implementing play. Time and time again, we hear that the children are happy and want to come to school. Headteachers are advising others to "be brave and go for it" as they take the plunge and follow the advice of Curriculum for Excellence.
Upstart Scotland was cheered when our Parliament voted against this assessment after a very knowledgeable debate from some of the participants but sadly disappointed that Mr Swinney chose to ignore this vote. Glasgow City Council has now voted to support its headteachers if they choose not to participate. Upstart Scotland is awaiting the results of Mr Swinney's independent evidence-led review of the tests for P1 which were due at the end of May. Why have they not been published?
We would rather be campaigning for a protected kindergarten stage for our younger pupils. I am asking our Government to let us do this.
If anyone is interested in discussing the testing debate further from an informed viewpoint, Upstart is happy that they have been chosen as the pilot for a non-confrontational platform where the discussion can continue with evidence being offered from both sides until the 24th June 2019. Please sign on at Spraph.com.
Kate Johnston, Edinburgh.
ANYONE contemplating coming to Scotland, upon reading The Herald today (June 5) would be having serious reservations. There were a number of headlines which are bad news not only for the SNP Government politically, but also for the people who live here and are reliant upon its public services. Let us consider health ("Most vacant consultant posts left unfilled for six months" and "Number of youngsters waiting a year for mental health help soars"), justice ("Judge: Drug dealers may walk free if sentencing rules changed"), and education ("School subject squeeze 'hitting deprived pupils").
All of this adverse publicity, which was measured and to the point, does little for the image of Scotland as a place to live in. Those who may be dissuaded from coming here as a result can be added to those already put off because of the higher income tax bands for some, when compared to England, imposed by the Scottish Government.
Ian W Thomson, Lenzie.
Share