SO John Swinney has chosen to go on the attack (“Swinney to ignore Holyrood vote over P1 tests”, The Herald, September 20). When cornered, Mr Swinney uses his party’s tried and tested formula to strike back: blame the Tories for “playing politics” with the issue. Mr Swinney appears to have not realised all the other political parties in Scotland do not subscribe to his Primary 1 tests either. In launching an attack only on the Tories he has shot himself in the foot.

He has also damaged the credibility of Holyrood decisions by openly suggesting he will ignore this advisory motion. The motion to have another independence referendum was also purely advisory as Holyrood lacks the powers to call one, so the SNP can have no complaints that Westminster has been less than helpful on this front. It is the SNP which has turned playing politics into an art form like banning / not banning fracking at the same time or not taking notes when important actions are being taken. Mr Swinney may want to keep calm and carry on, but can he?

Dr Gerald Edwards,

Broom Road, Glasgow.

JOHN Swinney knows that he is right, so will try to insist that his testing regime for P1 children will go ahead, despite being voted down in the Scottish Parliament. This means that the same people who claimed that there was a mandate for another referendum, on the basis of SNP and Green MSPs having voted for it, now dismiss a majority vote against the testing regime as a mere inconvenience.

The nature of the test itself is puzzling. Instead of finding out children’s attainment in the initial skills required for the rest of their education, it presents pictures in a multiple choice format. If there are three choices, a child has a one in three chance of being right even if it is through guesswork. But how do children know what to do in the test? Because there are written instructions that give the precise method to be followed.

This is presented in language that very few P1 children will be able to read and/or comprehend. This means that an adult has to assist the child by explaining what he or she needs to do. How can we be sure that some adults will not give a child more help than merely explaining the method? Perhaps by giving a little nudge in the direction of the correct answer, especially if the child becomes flustered? The entire test is problematic. I would bet that someone has been paid handsomely (by us) for inventing a complicated test on a computer when a simple test of letter and number recognition and use could have been accomplished without complex instructions and with pencil and paper.

Jill Stephenson,

Glenlockhart Valley,

Edinburgh.

FOR many years we have had to listen to the SNP MPs in Westminster bleat about lack of democracy and parliamentary votes being ignored by the UK government.

The stench of hypocrisy once again emanates from the SNP when we see how it regards being beaten fairly and squarely at Holyrood on its P1 assessment schemes.

This is a party that is unfit to govern.

Alexander McKay,

8/7 New Cut Rigg,

Edinburgh.

IT would appear that if you don’t agree with the SNP you are evil and divisive. What a great basis for democracy.

Two months ago after months of planning, the SNP dropped its flagship education bill to have a rethink and we were told it was responsible and sensible behaviour. However, because the Tory Party changed its mind on a point after considering it for two years, it’s apparently merely playing politics.

I wish Serena Williams would move to Scotland. She could be our minister for sport.

Graham McKee,

2/1, 37 Cranworth Street,

Hillhead, Glasgow.

FOLLOWING reports about P1 standardised testing, Marie Todd, MSP Minister for Children and Young People tweeted: “You do it when the teacher thinks you can manage it.”

If the teacher has already assessed that the child can manage it, what is the point of the test?

Maggie Openshaw (Retired Depute Headteacher Early Years),

42 Earlswells Road,

Cults, Aberdeen.