With Scottish education under the cosh, your well-informed Education HQ supplement (The Herald, May 15) was well-timed. Whether it be school organisation, the curriculum, teaching methodology, special educational needs, school discipline or our national qualifications, serious questions are being raised but sensible answers that will take us forward are few and far between.
I have every sympathy for our schools. Staff and students are facing significant challenges – challenges aggravated by the demoralising effects of poverty punishing so many decent families. It is very much to the credit of our schools that they continue to have the positive support of parents and their local communities, conscious that they are trying their best in challenging circumstances.
Things were so different when I started teaching in 1969. Yes, there were undoubted challenges but there was a sense of excitement that positive changes were on their way. In just a few short years, our old selective system with junior and senior high schools had changed to a national comprehensive system. New schools were being built; the school leaving age was raised to 16 and a new system of examinations was introduced that was designed to offer national qualifications to students of all abilities. In addition, corporal punishment was abolished and supportive Guidance systems introduced. For young probationer teachers there was a network of invaluable support. Each secondary school was staffed with a team of subject principal teachers who really were the backbone of the school. They were the subject experts familiar with the curriculum and the various exam requirements; they offered encouragement to the members of their departments and used their experience to support the effective running of the school. The removal of these posts to save money was a serious mistake which has had a negative effect on academic results. In addition, the loss of these promoted posts has made teaching a less attractive career option for graduates.
So what needs to be done? It seems that there is an administrative mindset at all levels of government that we don’t need to look elsewhere for answers to our challenges. It’s almost as though Johnny Foreigner can’t teach us anything. So for example, after over 50 years is our comprehensive system still fit for purpose? Are there lessons to be learnt from different models of school organisation?
Our two grandchildren both attend their local schools in Japan. As grandparents my wife and I are impressed with what we have learnt about Japanese education. One feature that we should seriously consider is the emphasis in Japan on teamwork rather than here where we still cling to the notion of child-centred education. Interestingly your feature commented very positively on education in Finland. Our son in Tokyo reports that there has been a recent visit from a team of Finnish educationalists to look specifically at the place of teamwork in Japanese schools. We really have to be honest rather than defensive when considering changes to our education system.
Eric Melvin, Edinburgh.
Read more letters
- Be in no doubt: the legal fight for trans rights will go on
- Glasgow has shown a sad lack of ambition with George Square proposals
Triumphalism is disappointing
Surprisingly I find myself in agreement with Mark Smith when he states that the Supreme Court judgement on the definition of a woman was crystal clear (“The death of Pride and how Glasgow is helping to kill it”, The Herald, May 17). In delivering the findings of the court Lord Howe was clear that nobody should be indulging in triumphalism, he made it clear that trans people exist and have rights and, finally, he was clear that the 2010 Equalities Act as it stood could not operate without contradicting itself unless women were defined as biological women. (One wonders how the Act managed to work for the first 15 years of its existence but that bird has now flown.)
While the last of these pronouncements has been grasped enthusiastically by the gender-critical movement, the first two parts lasted for all of about 10 minutes. This was not helped by the unfortunate comment from the EHRC that trans people should “use their advocacy” to pursue their rights. One would have thought that it was part of the function of a body called the Equalities and Human Rights Commission to do just that and not leave a minority floundering in the morass created by the decision.
Those who enjoy clarity should also be careful with the results of the Sex Matters poll as reported by you ("New survey finds most people believe Supreme Court biological sex ruling was right", The Herald, May 19). The finding that 77% of those polled felt that they would not be affected by the ruling should give pause for thought as, in a professionally constructed survey, it is safe to assume that a fair proportion of them were women.
Frankly, the thing that is most clear in the aftermath of the decision is that, in the 21st century culture wars, people continue to carefully select the facts that suit their particular point of view and reject those that don’t.
Robin Irvine, Helensburgh.
• Not only is Mark Smith dead wrong to say that Pride is dead, he clearly doesn’t know his gay history. More than 50 years ago the Gay Liberation Front was steeped in trans and gender-fluid fabulousness. I recall a veteran of those days explaining that the most impactful means of consciousness-raising was for a group of male GLF members to go to a “straight” pub and quietly drink their beer whilst getting on with their knitting – apparently that freaked out the other customers. The Stonewall riots in New York in 1969, which are credited with starting the modern LGBT movement, were led by flamboyant trans people such as Marsha P Johnson. The first modern LGBT rights movement, Magnus Hirschfeld’s Wissenschaftlich-humanitäres Komitee, founded in 1897 and destroyed by the Nazis in 1933, was fully inclusive of trans people.
Brian Dempsey, Dundee.
Will it ever be Sir David?
There they are, the two of them having a merry exchange at the Chelsea Flower Show in a picture on the front page: the King with David Beckham ("In Harmony", The Herald, May 20). Even acting as an ambassador for the King’s Foundation has so far not proved enough to secure the much-desired knighthood for David. He is finding that those with the job of approving such things have long memories. After all it was reported that the previously-snubbed David had had the temerity and lack of manners in 2017 to call them "unappreciative" and "a disgrace" . Maybe it needs a quiet word from Charles to let bygones be bygones and to allow David to get the recognition which he thinks he and Posh deserve.
Ian W Thomson, Lenzie.
Teacher's words did not add up
I do enjoy David Miller’s observations on language and particularly on today’s buzzwords and expressions.
His latest contribution (Letters, May 20) reminded me of my maths teacher in Kirkwall in the early 1970s. He used "look" and "listen’"in a fairly random manner, on occasion using the former when he was talking and the latter when he was scribing on the blackboard. Needless to say, class members totalled up the use of both words using five-barred gates.
Nevertheless, he was a first-class teacher and I’m sure his English was better than my English teacher’s maths.
Willie Towers, Alford.
Share