Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 27 October 2011
27 Oct 2011 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Raising Attainment and Ambition (Young People)
I will refocus attention on the subject of the debate. I do not think that there is a more important subject for debate than how we should raise attainment for pupils in Scotland.
I do not doubt that good things are happening, as the minister said. Scotland is a leading light when it comes to teacher training, we are leading the way when it comes to the process of pupil self-evaluation and there are imaginative developments in the early years, as well as signs of some improvements in attainment levels, so I am not prepared to share the view of some who write on educational matters that our schools are always seen to be struggling; neither am I prepared to accept, however, some of the Government’s extraordinary rhetoric when it comes to the reality of certain trends in Scottish education.
How extraordinary it is that, on a subject as important as attainment, we have such a benign Government motion that does not flag up the key policy directions. A wealth of excellent work has been done in the recent Donaldson, McCormac and Cameron reviews that has been given only passing mention this morning. We should be focusing all our attention on two important recommendations from those reports. First, we must ensure that we have the best teachers and headteachers in all our schools. Secondly, we must ensure that we can raise the motivation and aspiration of all our pupils from the youngest age.
As McCormac said in his report, we need to do far more to tackle some of the disturbing evidence from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education and from other countries, which makes for such sober reading. The fact that just over half of Scottish school leavers finish school without receiving a higher is nothing to be proud of, nor are the statistics on the extent of the attainment gaps that exist between geographical areas and socioeconomic groups, which were so brutally exposed in the Sunday Herald at the weekend.
I am very clear indeed that the evidence before us from those reports suggests that raising attainment is not all about money. If that were the case, we would be well ahead, because since 1999 we have doubled the amount of spending on schools, yet we have not seen comparable changes in attainment and, sadly, there has been little improvement in our performance according to international measurements. Although I believe that comparisons with other countries can be useful—and, in some cases, extremely useful—the most important measurement is often how much better we are doing against ourselves, and that is why we must be prepared to look at much more than just the efficiency of public spending on our schools.
I suggest that a combination of five things, if delivered together, will raise attainment levels among pupils—especially those in our most deprived communities who, for me, must be our priority. It is simply not acceptable to say that weaker local economies, or more disadvantaged communities, are necessarily an excuse for poor performance. Of course the challenge is greater—no one would deny that—but so, too, is the prize of being able to deliver better educational outcomes for those pupils.
Let us not be shy about telling the truth and being up front about what needs to be done. First, let us consider carefully not only the broad principles of the combined reports of Donaldson, Cameron and McCormac, but some of the small print too—because that is where some of the most important comments lie. They make it clear that, as well as increasing professional support for teachers, leadership in schools is crucial. I am talking not simply about the usual traditional concept of leadership, which most people think lies with the headteacher, but about leadership in our classrooms and among our pupils. The issue is competence—and confidence in that competence.
Let us not dismiss the concerns raised by Graham Donaldson when he said that too many young teachers have issues with literacy and numeracy, which has a major impact on their teaching abilities—even if many of them have many of the other talents that can help to make them outstanding teachers. The problem cannot be ignored, nor can the issue of literacy and numeracy at large, because it is nothing short of a disgrace that one in six pupils leaves school without being functionally literate. Although I think that there is genuine intent to tackle the problem, I still do not believe that we are doing enough to ensure that the best practice of teaching traditional methods, and testing accordingly, is more widespread—methods that in local authorities such as West Dunbartonshire and Clackmannanshire have produced better results, for weaker pupils just as much as for more able pupils.
Secondly, it is becoming patently clear that comprehensive education beyond S2 has failed. The one-size-fits-all approach is not working. It does not provide the flexibility and diversity that we need. Our system is too centralised and too overregulated. We need greater flexibility so that we can do much more to expand the vocational and technical training that this country so desperately needs.
There are more lessons to be learned from David Cameron’s review of devolved school management, particularly as he binds together the underlying philosophy of curriculum for excellence with the need to allow heads to have greater control over the provision that they make for their pupils. He points out that the curriculum for excellence is not compatible with the existing structure of school management. How much I agree with him on that point.
I do not doubt that good things are happening, as the minister said. Scotland is a leading light when it comes to teacher training, we are leading the way when it comes to the process of pupil self-evaluation and there are imaginative developments in the early years, as well as signs of some improvements in attainment levels, so I am not prepared to share the view of some who write on educational matters that our schools are always seen to be struggling; neither am I prepared to accept, however, some of the Government’s extraordinary rhetoric when it comes to the reality of certain trends in Scottish education.
How extraordinary it is that, on a subject as important as attainment, we have such a benign Government motion that does not flag up the key policy directions. A wealth of excellent work has been done in the recent Donaldson, McCormac and Cameron reviews that has been given only passing mention this morning. We should be focusing all our attention on two important recommendations from those reports. First, we must ensure that we have the best teachers and headteachers in all our schools. Secondly, we must ensure that we can raise the motivation and aspiration of all our pupils from the youngest age.
As McCormac said in his report, we need to do far more to tackle some of the disturbing evidence from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education and from other countries, which makes for such sober reading. The fact that just over half of Scottish school leavers finish school without receiving a higher is nothing to be proud of, nor are the statistics on the extent of the attainment gaps that exist between geographical areas and socioeconomic groups, which were so brutally exposed in the Sunday Herald at the weekend.
I am very clear indeed that the evidence before us from those reports suggests that raising attainment is not all about money. If that were the case, we would be well ahead, because since 1999 we have doubled the amount of spending on schools, yet we have not seen comparable changes in attainment and, sadly, there has been little improvement in our performance according to international measurements. Although I believe that comparisons with other countries can be useful—and, in some cases, extremely useful—the most important measurement is often how much better we are doing against ourselves, and that is why we must be prepared to look at much more than just the efficiency of public spending on our schools.
I suggest that a combination of five things, if delivered together, will raise attainment levels among pupils—especially those in our most deprived communities who, for me, must be our priority. It is simply not acceptable to say that weaker local economies, or more disadvantaged communities, are necessarily an excuse for poor performance. Of course the challenge is greater—no one would deny that—but so, too, is the prize of being able to deliver better educational outcomes for those pupils.
Let us not be shy about telling the truth and being up front about what needs to be done. First, let us consider carefully not only the broad principles of the combined reports of Donaldson, Cameron and McCormac, but some of the small print too—because that is where some of the most important comments lie. They make it clear that, as well as increasing professional support for teachers, leadership in schools is crucial. I am talking not simply about the usual traditional concept of leadership, which most people think lies with the headteacher, but about leadership in our classrooms and among our pupils. The issue is competence—and confidence in that competence.
Let us not dismiss the concerns raised by Graham Donaldson when he said that too many young teachers have issues with literacy and numeracy, which has a major impact on their teaching abilities—even if many of them have many of the other talents that can help to make them outstanding teachers. The problem cannot be ignored, nor can the issue of literacy and numeracy at large, because it is nothing short of a disgrace that one in six pupils leaves school without being functionally literate. Although I think that there is genuine intent to tackle the problem, I still do not believe that we are doing enough to ensure that the best practice of teaching traditional methods, and testing accordingly, is more widespread—methods that in local authorities such as West Dunbartonshire and Clackmannanshire have produced better results, for weaker pupils just as much as for more able pupils.
Secondly, it is becoming patently clear that comprehensive education beyond S2 has failed. The one-size-fits-all approach is not working. It does not provide the flexibility and diversity that we need. Our system is too centralised and too overregulated. We need greater flexibility so that we can do much more to expand the vocational and technical training that this country so desperately needs.
There are more lessons to be learned from David Cameron’s review of devolved school management, particularly as he binds together the underlying philosophy of curriculum for excellence with the need to allow heads to have greater control over the provision that they make for their pupils. He points out that the curriculum for excellence is not compatible with the existing structure of school management. How much I agree with him on that point.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Tricia Marwick)
NPA
Good morning. I remind members to switch off all mobile phones and electronic devices.The first item of business is a debate on motion S4M-01134, in the name...
The Minister for Children and Young People (Angela Constance)
SNP
I am delighted to open this morning’s debate. Apart from allowing me to outline the Government’s ambitions for all of our children and young people, it also ...
Liam McArthur (Orkney Islands) (LD)
LD
The minister will be well aware that there is cross-party support for what is set out in GIRFEC. She may also be aware that the Education and Culture Committ...
Angela Constance
SNP
Liam McArthur is right that, despite the fact that Scotland is a small country, the implementation of the early years framework and GIRFEC is uneven. That is...
Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab)
Lab
I cannot disagree with the intent behind the minister’s words, but I question the actions that are being taken and the implementation. With regard to post-16...
Angela Constance
SNP
As Mr Macintosh well knows, this Government, through its work with the Scottish Further and Higher Education Funding Council, will ensure that the £2 billion...
Ken Macintosh
Lab
In the middle of that answer, the minister said that the Government is still committed to maintaining student numbers. Could she further clarify that point? ...
Angela Constance
SNP
We are meeting our commitments and we will be doing the best by children and young people, starting in the early years and going right through to post-16 edu...
Ken Macintosh (Eastwood) (Lab)
Lab
I am pleased to have the opportunity to debate attainment and the achievements of our young people. This is the first chance in the current session of Parlia...
Angela Constance
SNP
I remind Mr Macintosh that this Government has invested £4 million in activity agreements that have reached out to children who are furthest away from educat...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
Mr Macintosh, you can be assured that, following that very lengthy intervention, you will get additional time.
Ken Macintosh
Lab
Thank you very much.My argument was not that the Government is in hock to vested interests; it was that it is taking a rather elitist approach to education. ...
Angela Constance
SNP
What is elitist about our leadership on and investment in the early years? We are the first Government to really grasp the nettle of preventative spend, whic...
Ken Macintosh
Lab
If the Government were committed to early years intervention, we would be with it entirely, but the trouble is that the talk is there, but the £50 million ch...
The Presiding Officer
NPA
Can we hear the member, please?
Ken Macintosh
Lab
Glasgow City Council, which has been trying for years to invest in nurture groups, is continually criticised by the Government for the work that it does. Int...
The Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning (Michael Russell)
SNP
Will the member give way?
The Presiding Officer
NPA
The member is over his time.
Ken Macintosh
Lab
The basic EMA is still there, but all the additional money to retain people has gone.Schools of ambition have gone, colleges’ funding has been cut, EMAs have...
Liz Smith (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Con
I will refocus attention on the subject of the debate. I do not think that there is a more important subject for debate than how we should raise attainment f...
Claudia Beamish (South Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
As a former teacher, I find Liz Smith’s arguments about the inability of the present management structure to connect well with curriculum for excellence extr...
Liz Smith
Con
David Cameron put the argument across strongly when the Education and Culture Committee took evidence. The curriculum for excellence allows individual school...
Paul Wheelhouse (South Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
Although members around the chamber might disagree about the means by which to achieve this, we as parliamentarians are all motivated by our strong desire to...
Ken Macintosh
Lab
Does Mr Wheelhouse simply judge the success or failure of Scottish policies on whether they are better than English policies?
Paul Wheelhouse
SNP
No, indeed not. This debate has been characterised by reference to Scottish Government cuts and people need to recognise that, within a tight financial settl...
Jenny Marra (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
A report that was published in the Sunday Herald last weekend, which has been referred to many times already in the debate, showed just how clear the link be...
George Adam (Paisley) (SNP)
SNP
First, I apologise for my voice; I have man flu. As all the women in the chamber know, men have difficulty with dealing with a slight cold.When I came to the...
Ken Macintosh
Lab
Is Mr Adam guaranteeing that, when a child enters a class of 18 in primary 1, he will stay in a class of 18 throughout his school career?
George Adam
SNP
I was talking about your idea that there would be constant change throughout a child’s primary school education. That simply will not happen in any school.
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Elaine Smith)
Lab
Mr Adam, would you address your remarks through the chair, please? Thank you very much.