The publication of All Learners in Scotland Matter: The National Discussion on Education Final Report yesterday afternoon came after a long process that sought the views of 38,000 people on the state of Scottish education and what should come next.
The 92-page report was led by Professor Carol Campbell (University of Toronto) and Professor Alma Harris (who holds posts at universities in Wales and elsewhere), both members of the Scottish government’s International Council of Education Advisers.
Key findings about education in Scotland
Here are some of their key messages:
1. Much of what the advisers heard was ‘deeply concerning’
The authors regularly heard about experiences that were “deeply concerning and troubling”. Some parents felt their children “had been failed by the Scottish education system”, and many children with additional support needs and disabilities were not getting the help they needed.
“We heard about distressing incidents and inequities, including use of exclusions, experiences of violence, suicidal thoughts and attempts, bullying, harassment, discrimination, anxiety, stress and ill health,” they write. “We listened to people expressing frustration, grief and anger.”
2. Pupils want to feel safer in school
“Safe spaces were identified as important by children and young people,” the report states, after the national discussion involved 26,000 pupils in online assemblies and classes. Last week, of course, education secretary Jenny Gilruth announced a summit on “tackling violence in schools”.
There were “major concerns about the prevalence of harassment, discrimination, bullying and violence in schools across Scotland”, and a feeling “that it was time to revisit and improve the national approach to anti-bullying”. Any national approach had to be “consistently embedded in schools’ local anti-bullying approaches and recording of incidents, including racist incidents, gender-based violence and all forms of harassment”.
3. Curriculum for Excellence must be refreshed - and not on a one-off basis
Many people said that Curriculum for Excellence “would benefit from a continual review process to ensure that it remained relevant, up to date and fit for purpose to meet the needs of learners in a changing world”. There was strong support for a “regular curriculum review process”, which would have the added advantage of ensuring a more coherent approach to teachers’ professional development.
While there was “general support for CfE” and “a consensus that maintaining a broad-based curriculum in the future was important”, the report also reflects people’s doubts over whether “CfE was still a curriculum that was ‘fit for purpose’”.
4. The Scottish government cannot be allowed to forget its promise to reduce teachers’ class-contact time
The policy of cutting teachers’ class-contact time, despite being introduced in clumsy fashion in 2021, was enthusiastically welcomed by the teaching profession, even if there were some concerns about how it would work in practice, particularly among primary school leaders. As the report explains: “The availability of time and space for education professionals and support staff to develop their professional knowledge, expertise and practice [is viewed as] important.”
The Scottish government has gone quiet on the policy of late, but the report authors are clear about the message they got on the promised 90-minute weekly reduction in contact time: “Implementation of the existing government commitment to non-contact time was identified as necessary.”
5. Additional support needs is a big area of concern
“While there was broad support for the importance of diversity and inclusivity, there were mixed views specifically on the presumption of mainstreaming for inclusion of pupils in schools,” the report states.
“Two main strands of responses” are identified: firstly, that approaches to inclusion are “failing” pupils with additional support needs (ASN) because there are “insufficient resources and supports to enable their effective integration in the academic and social life of mainstream schools”; secondly, that they are “failing [pupils] who did not have an ASN as teachers’ time was stretched with meeting the needs of learners with complex needs and there could be disruptive behaviour”.
As the EIS teaching union was keen to highlight in its analysis of the report, there was a ”strong message” about the “imperative and urgency of ‘dedicated and sustainable funding’ to provide adequate staffing and specialist resources” for inclusive education and pupils with ASN.
6. Exams system ‘highly contentious’
Many students “raised the examination system as a highly contentious issue, expressing how stressful and delimiting exams could be”. There were also concerns about “a washback effect to drive all stages of schooling”.
“It was clear from what we heard that many young people do not consider exams to be an ideal assessment and feel strongly that a continuous assessment model, across subjects, would be the preferred, if not fairer, approach,” the report says.
EIS general secretary Andrea Bradley, in her response to the report, similarly called for ”a departure from the narrow focus we have seen on attainment and high-stakes exams, which has stifled creativity and enjoyment across all stages of learning and is impacting on the mental health of young people and sapping the joy out of teaching”.
7. Any reform will be heavily affected by forces far beyond schools
The forces that will affect reforms include the Covid pandemic, “with its continuing impacts on health, wellbeing, equity and learning”, as well as “austerity, a cost-of-living crisis, climate change and environmental concerns, and war in our world” - these “cannot be downplayed”, the report states.
8. Widespread scepticism about whether changes will happen in a way that improves the lives of teachers and pupils
“We heard a pessimism about what was truly possible and a cynicism about whether genuine educational improvement was intended and could be achieved,” write Campbell and Harris. More than a year after the Muir review, they found “frustrations, cynicism and anger, in some cases”, about whether its recommendations for “transformational educational reform” would be achieved.
That was echoed by Mike Corbett, Scotland official for the NASUWT union, in his response to the report: “Many working in the education are sceptical about the ability for positive change to be realised [but] today’s report provides a baseline for which to hold ministers and employers to account.”
9. Despite all of the above, there is optimism
Campbell and Harris encountered “lots of energy, conversations and ideas”. There was “optimism for the future of Scottish education” and no shortage of enthusiasm to take part in whatever emerges from the national discussion, they say.
Change was not about ripping up and starting again but “building upon the many strengths that are already present in Scottish education”.
