Hansard

That is an important point, which the working group needs to look at. As I will go on to explain, many of us have experience—personal experience or experience in our constituencies—of a good level of engagement with Scottish literature and culture in schools. We will wait to see whether the working group identifies any gaps. Any MSP who engages with the Parliament’s education service will know that primary and secondary schools throughout Scotland are engaging with our modern history and democracy, so I do not feel that the minister’s speech reflected the reality in our classrooms, but that is an area that the working group needs to investigate.

I am sure that the working group will be delighted to engage with schools that are already celebrating Scots poetry, marking important dates in the school calendar, exploring Scottish culture, discussing the huge influence that entrepreneurial Scots have had on trade and industry, discovering Scotland’s incredible changing landscape and, in history classes, exploring the complex and turbulent history of our great country. The Government has shown commitment to the broad teaching ethos of the curriculum for excellence, and in developing those proposals the working group must adhere to that ethos. The curriculum for excellence provides more opportunities for schools to be engaged in their local communities and brings subjects to life with experiences that are relevant to pupils. Scottish studies have a valuable role to play in that.

The working group may find that Scotland is a thread that runs through the entire curriculum, but one that is rightly balanced with an international and a local perspective. There is a danger that the working group could be too prescriptive. The curriculum for excellence is all about having a flexible curriculum that puts teachers’ professionalism at the heart of its delivery. It is important that the working group reflects on that. If there are gaps in the curriculum, it must produce evidence of that and proposals for enriching the curriculum.

Complementary to the embedding of Scottish studies throughout the curriculum—although, as I have suggested, that is already the case—there is the matter of the creation of a new subject, which would include qualification development. As a graduate who approached the poetry of Sylvia Plath through an understanding of cultural materialism, I recognise the value of cross-disciplinary understanding in a subject. At university level, American studies is well established and Scottish studies is increasingly being offered, although cuts and lack of research investment threaten the viability of some of those courses and there are clear boundaries in the discipline. If the working group is to propose a model for Scottish studies, it needs to be clear about the relevance and interconnectedness of areas of study. Some of the Government’s comments about Scottish cookery and horticulture raise issues about the need to have a rigorous Scottish studies subject that could lead to a qualification. Proper guidelines need to be developed on what is appropriate, and that will be an important area of work for the group.

Our amendment also calls for an assessment of the skills and knowledge of the teaching profession, especially if a new qualification is to be introduced. There will have to be discussion of schools’ ability to deliver the qualification. There are already concerns over provision in modern languages and history, for example; therefore, the question must be asked whether there is capacity in the sector to deliver in this new area if there is to be a distinct subject. Any addition to the curriculum would need to be supported with good resources and continuing professional development opportunities—areas that are under pressure at the moment because of budget constraints.

The working group will have to determine whether there is an appetite for the course. One question in a Gaelic survey is not conclusive. How will the college and university sector respond to any new qualifications? Is it development of an area that employers would value? The working group will also have to consider whether any additions to an already busy curriculum would marginalise other subjects that we can ill afford to sideline. We already know the areas that could make a real difference to young people’s employability—for example, modern languages—in which Scotland is particularly poor. We must ask whether, if additional resources are to be allocated or additional time is to be created within the curriculum—it is difficult to see how the proposals could be advanced without those—we are confident that this is the best area to develop to give young people the most advantages.

The proposal is now in a transitional period. If it is to succeed, it needs to move from being an attractive, even emotive, hearts-and-minds policy in a party-political manifesto to a fully developed and robust addition to the curriculum that will add value to the school experience and bring advantage to our young people.

I move amendment S4M-00959.2, to leave out from “welcomes” to end and insert:

“notes the establishment of the Scottish Studies working group and its exploration of Scottish studies as a new subject; acknowledges the excellent practice that is already in place in Scottish schools which is delivering a wide range of Scottish-focused teaching across the curriculum; calls on the working group to audit current practice in primary and secondary schools, including the skills and knowledge of teachers in this area and to determine the way in which a new subject will add to the work that is already being undertaken and to guard against marginalisation of Scottish studies, and looks forward to scrutinising the working group’s recommendations.”

15:14