Poll reveals fears new exam system will affect pupils’ life chances

New poll highlights fears surrounding the new Curriculum for Excellence.

Scots believe the uncertainty surrounding the new exams will affect pupils chances later in life, a new poll has found.

A survey of Sunday Post readers carried out by Your View K has revealed:

Nearly 60% believe the chaos around the National courses will have long-term effects.

Two out of five do not think it wasn’t necessary to change from Standard Grades in the first place.

Nearly 30% believe the implementation of the new National exams has been poorly executed.

Only 6% described the rolling out of the Curriculum for Evidence as “excellent.”

Two key figures in education have offered their views on the debate.

FOR Ken Cunningham of School Leaders Scotland.

“The Curriculum for Excellence has been a long journey that has taken place over 10 years.

We hope to have taken the best elements of the existing system and married it with the best education systems around the world.

No one questions the philosophy that underpins it. Standard Grades before were an OK qualification, but only OK.

To simplify it, the journey of Standard Grade to Nationals has been like the progress of the driving test.

Years ago drivers were barely tested on the theory of the road and it came down to a simple test on the day on whether they passed or not.

Over the years the theory about driving has become a bigger part of the exam and in my opinion, improved people’s driving ability.

That’s what the CfE has aimed to do giving pupils more relevance in their education that prepares them for later life. Of course, it’s not been without it’s practical problems. The new course has involved the biggest consultation ever and that’s led to stress for teachers and pupils alike.

It’s rightly under the microscope now because it’s the first time we will see pupils undergoing it face exams. But that’s not a bad thing.

Ultimately it comes down to a confidence issue and the only way we can gain confidence is by pushing ahead. And that means no let-up next year either as we drive this policy on.”

AGAINST Bill is a west coast English teacher who has voiced concerns about CfE to The Sunday Post for over a year. He wishes to remain anonymous.

“It’s been the Easter olidays but for a lot of teachers you wouldn’t know it. They’ve been running extra classes, even on a Saturday morning, to finish courses.

Some of CfE is rigorous, but the problem is it’s been impossible to complete the whole of the course.

Some schools will be doing only five National 5s. That could be seen as an advantage because in my school we’re doing seven and we get four periods a week to teach English. The course requires five periods over two years and we’ve got four periods over one year to complete it. How does that add up?

I think the whole concept behind CfE was flawed and it should have been dumped.

Why not revise the Highers and Standard Grades? To throw everything out and come in with new courses that I believe haven’t been properly funded was madness.

There are bits of the new course that I actually quite like. But some of it is just superfluous rubbish. That’s not just National 5, that’s the new Highers as well.

Everyone is hoping that everything will come out in the wash and be OK. But my real worry is next year. This year, there’s a chance they might massage the figures, lower the pass mark.

Kids who have been given a C in National 5 might get to sit the Higher. And I just don’t see how any child with a C will be able to pass a Higher.

The skills they’re trying to engender for industry will come from the same kids they always have those with Highers and good degrees. Those in poor schools will suffer as usual. Those in affluent areas will be fine. At the end of the day money talks.

If you look back at what CfE means, it’s so woolly and tied up in abstract platitudes. Teachers have tried to make it work. Whether it does or not remains to be seen.”