Scotland's exams will test pupils
Recent years have seen turbulence in Scottish education with concerns over falling standards and a failure to tackle the attainment gap.
Last year Education Secretary Jenny Gilruth said the results were "not good enough".
Last year's marks fell to lower levels than before the Covid pandemic and international testing has suggested a long-term decline in Scottish educational attainment.
In addition to that, the gap between the results achieved by Scotland's richest and poorest school pupils is as wide as it was a decade ago when the government named it as a priority.
To tackle the problem, Ms Gilruth has pledged an increase in teacher numbers, further investment to reduce the time teachers spend in class, an ongoing reform of the curriculum and a focus on tackling poor behaviour in classrooms.
But plans to cut down on the number of exams pupils take have been largely rejected for now.
This year's exam season will be very similar to the past few, with more than two million papers being handed out to pupils in silent school halls over the next month.
The first exams on Friday are computer science and psychology and the final subject will be religious studies on 30 May.
National 5s, mainly taken by S4 pupils aged 15 or 16, are offered in more than 50 subjects from accounting to Urdu.
Highers, often taken by 16 to 18-year-olds in S5 and S6, can be sat in a similar range of subjects while Advanced Highers offer fewer choices.
The Scottish government hopes that when pupils get their results on Tuesday 5 August they will show a marked improvement on last year.
In 2024 the most popular subjects at Higher were English, maths, physical education (PE), history and chemistry.
And the most popular Nat 5s were English, maths, applications of maths, biology and PE.
For Highers and Nat 5s there were more entries by girls than boys last year.
Teaching experts say this will be the first year of "normal" marking since the Covid pandemic.
What that means in reality will not be clear until results day.
During Covid-19, exams were cancelled for two years running and there was controversy when teacher estimates, previous coursework and a school's past performance were used to determine the results.
The results in 2020 saw the pass rate for Highers jump from 75% to 89%, while the percentage of pupils achieving A grades hit a record high the following year.
Since then the marking has been described as "generous".
In a normal year, the pass rate for each grade is adjusted slightly but the average effect is small. In the years since the pandemic the adjustments have been more significant.
Despite the claim of consistent marking by the SQA last year, their approach to awarding grades in 2024 involved more significant adjustments to grade boundaries than usual.
Three years ago, in response to a number of concerns over Scottish education, Prof Louise Hayward was asked by the Scottish government to conduct a review of qualifications and assessment.
Her review recommended an end to S4 exams for students who were due to continue with a subject beyond that year.
It raised concerns about the so-called "two-term dash" with exams for some in the same subjects in S4, S5 and S6.
The review warned this too often results in teaching to the test rather than offering a broad understanding of the subjects.
Gilruth told MSPs she agreed with the Hayward report's recommendation that there should be less reliance on "high stakes final exams" but last year the Scottish government rejected the proposals.
Instead, just a small number of practical subjects such as woodworking and cakemaking will drop exams next year and the rest will continue as they were.
Behind the scenes work is under way on the Curriculum Reform Cycle – with subjects including maths and English already under review.
To some this is considered a back door way of transforming the SNP's landmark Curriculum for Excellence without actually admitting it did not achieve what was intended.
Others have applauded the work under way.
In addition to the exams being sat over the next month, many other pupils will be completing National 1 to National 4 qualifications as well as other courses that are continually assessed throughout the year.
In total, more than 147,000 candidates are expected to get their results on Tuesday 5 August.
There has been controversy over the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) grading of exams in recent years, especially during the pandemic.
This will be the last year that students sit exams under the SQA before it is replaced later this year by a new body called Qualifications Scotland – as long as reforms going through the Scottish Parliament are not further delayed.
However, some have criticised this as a simple re-brand, as most of the staff will remain the same.
For those in exam halls the focus will be on the paper in front of them and nothing should feel any different.
For ministers, policy-makers and those working on reforming the curriculum, and the organisations setting exams and inspecting schools in the run up to an election next year, the challenge will be to bring about significant improvement - or face getting marked down.
SQA publishes new exam timetable after backlash
School exams to play a smaller role in overall grades
Pupils should not sit exams before fifth year - report
Scottish education performance falling, says study
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
4 hours ago
- CNN
A colonial hangover or a linguistic leg-up? India grapples with the enduring appeal of English
When British traders landed on India's shores in the 1600s, they arrived in search of spices and silk but stayed for centuries – leaving behind a legacy that would shape the nation long after their colonial exploitation ended: the English language. Over the centuries, English seeped into the very fabric of Indian life – first as a tool of commerce, then as the language of law and, eventually, a marker of privilege. Now, after more than a decade of Hindu-nationalist rule, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) is mounting perhaps the most significant challenge yet to the language's place in India. 'Those who speak English will soon feel ashamed,' Home Minister Amit Shah said last month, igniting a heated debate about national identity and social mobility in the polyglot nation of 1.4 billion. While Shah did not mention India's former colonial masters, he declared that 'the languages of our country are the jewels of our culture' – and that without them, 'we cease to be truly Indian.' Spoken behind the walls of colonial forts and offices, English in India was at first the language of ledgers and treaties. But as British rule expanded from the ports of Gujarat to the palaces of Delhi, it became the lingua franca of the colonial elite. At independence, India faced a dilemma. With hundreds of languages and dialects spoken across its vast landscape, its newly appointed leaders grappled with the question of which one should represent the new nation. Hindi, the predominant language in the north, was put forward as a candidate for official language. But strong resistance from non-Hindi-speaking regions – especially in the south – meant English would remain only as a temporary link to unite the country. It's a legacy that endures to this day – and still rankles some. 'I subscribe to the view that English is the language of the colonial masters,' Pradeep Bahirwani, a retired corporate executive from the southern city of Bengaluru, said, adding: 'Our national language should be a language which… has got roots in India.' But critics argue that Shah's remarks risk undermining the country's global competitiveness. Equating English with cultural shame, they contend, reflects a narrow perspective that needlessly tries to erase a remnant of the colonial era that keeps India fluent in the language of global commerce. 'It's the aspiration of people to have access to a language which has a lot of prestige internationally,' said Indian linguist Ayesha Kidwai, a professor at New Delhi's Jawaharlal Nehru University. 'I don't think it's the legacy of colonialism anymore.' And pushback to the BJP's recent messaging has been strong. 'English is not a barrier, it's a bridge. English is not shame, it's strength,' wrote leader of the opposition Rahul Gandhi on X, after Shah's remarks last month. 'Every Indian language has a soul, culture, and knowledge. We must cherish them – and at the same time, teach every child English.' CNN has contacted India's Home Ministry for comment. But language tensions are no longer confined to debates in parliament – they're spilling into the streets. Just last week, video of a heated confrontation on a train in India's financial hub Mumbai went viral after a passenger was allegedly harassed for not speaking the regional language Marathi. Clashes erupted elsewhere in the city over the federal government's drive to promote Hindi – a language closely tied to the BJP's northern power base and often seen as central to the party's vision of national unity and Hindu identity. Since India's independence from Britain in 1947, the status of English in India has been deeply political – entwined with questions of identity, power, and national direction. Today, English is one of several official languages in India, spoken by about 10% of the population. Hindi is the first language for around 44% of citizens, according to the 2011 census. But in recent years, Modi's BJP has placed particular emphasis on promoting Hindi and reducing the use of English in public life. The prime minister almost never delivers speeches in English, preferring Hindi for national addresses such as his monthly radio program. His administration has encouraged officials to use Hindi on social media and in government correspondence – though, after criticism from non-Hindi-speaking states, clarified that this was intended mainly for the Hindi belt in the north. When India hosted world leaders for the 2023 G20 summit in New Delhi, invitations were sent out from 'Bharat' – the Sanskrit or Hindi name for the country – instead of 'India,' fueling speculation that the government aims to ultimately phase out the country's English designation altogether. Modi's critics have been quick to note his political motives behind these moves. With its roots in the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a right-wing organization that advocates Hindu hegemony within India, the BJP's language policies resonate with many in a country where nearly 80% of people are Hindu. Analysts say the BJP is seeking to capitalize on this demographic by promoting language policies that strengthen its support base in the north. According to Rita Kothari, an English professor from Ashoka University, the government 'is certainly interested in homogenizing the country and making Hindi more widespread.' But that policy can also backfire – in part because many regions, such as Marathi-speaking Maharashtra in the west – are staunchly proud of their local language. The violent clashes in the state's megacity Mumbai earlier this month were sparked by the regional government's controversial decision to make Hindi a compulsory third language in public primary schools. Pushback and protest has also been especially strong in the south, where English and regional languages such as Tamil, Telugu, and Kannada are valued as symbols of local identity and autonomy. For 19-year-old Steve E. Selvaraj from Tamil Nadu's capital Chennai, 'the BJP did a great job turning Hindi as their identity.' The college student, whose mother tongue is Tamil, said Hinduism has become a central focus for the ruling establishment – a way to 'get more votes.' 'Day by day, the influence of Hindi is increasing,' Selvaraj said. 'Hindi imposition may be a threat, but it will take a lot of time to disconnect the (local) connection with Tamil.' Kothari, from Ashoka University, said going after English was a convenient way of the BJP promoting Hindi without ruffling regional feathers. The government 'knows that its chances of success in south India for instance are thwarted by linguistic pride and nationalism,' she said. 'Since they can't make this public, English becomes a whipping boy.' India's widespread adoption of English can be traced back to the 19th-century British politician Thomas Macaulay, who advocated for the introduction of the language as the medium of instruction, instead of traditional languages of the elite like Sanskrit, Persian or Arabic. Macaulay's vision was unapologetically elitist. Creating a class of subjects who were 'Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect,' to serve as intermediaries between the colonial administration and the local population, he wrote, would help the British rule more effectively. These views were adopted by the British government, making English the language of Indian administration, higher education and the judiciary. The policy fostered a privileged English-educated elite – lawyers, teachers and writers – including many of India's early reformer nationalists, first Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and father of the nation Mahatma Gandhi. But over time, English became far more than a holdover from colonial rule – turning into a symbol of modernity and opportunity. As India's economy transformed and its middle class expanded, English proficiency became crucial to upward mobility. For Shivam Singh, 23, the first in his family to speak English and to leave home for university, the language opened doors. 'I wanted to get a good job… English gives you an edge. All the internships I cracked was because I could hold conversations in English.' Singh practiced his spoken English on an AI app for hours, getting feedback that helped earn him the internships. India is now home to one of the world's largest English-speaking populations, with more than 130 million people reporting English proficiency in the 2011 census. This linguistic advantage has helped attract billions in foreign investment, enabled global partnerships, and powered sectors from tech support to startups. Yet, the prominence of English has also deepened social divides. Those without language skills find themselves largely excluded from lucrative careers. Wealthier, urban, or higher-caste families are far more likely to be fluent in English and English-medium schools are mainly concentrated in urban areas, leaving rural and lower-caste communities locked out. 'I am not able to find a (well-paying), because they say I do not know English,' said Vaishnavi Gujanan Narote, a housekeeper at a hotel in the capital New Delhi. She added: 'If you know Hindi, then all you can do is stay here and do odd jobs, but not get a good post, because English is a requirement.' Vijay Kumar, a computer teacher at a non-government organization in Delhi, never learned the language at school. 'I feel I did not get the opportunities in my life because I did not know English,' he said. The dominance of English and Hindi, along with rapid urbanization, have marginalized many of the country's indigenous languages – tongues spoken by hundreds of tribal communities now far removed from the mainstream. UNESCO classes nearly 200 Indian languages as endangered, and more than 220 languages in the country have disappeared in the last 50 years, according to the People's Linguistic Survey of India. 'Many languages in India do not get the respect or place they deserve,' said Aloka Kujur, a writer and activist from Jharkhand, whose mother tongue is Kuduk, a tribal language native to the east Indian state. The proliferation of English, Kujur said, cost her community recognition in the country. Kuduk is spoken by just under 2 million people and is in a 'vulnerable' state, according to UNESCO. Kujur said that in Jharkand, indigenous groups 'have an affinity with their language that cannot be broken,' but notices that Kuduk's use in everyday life is slipping away. As India looks toward the future, analysts say the English language's role in the country might not be going anywhere any time soon. 'There is no fear of sidelining English,' Kothari, from Ashoka University, said. 'It is much too strong to be sidelined.' It's a sentiment Singh, the first student, agrees with. 'We cannot afford to not learn English in India,' he said. 'We are a developing country, we need to learn from the world.'
Chicago Tribune
5 hours ago
- Chicago Tribune
Guest column: Gary students deserve more than virtual replacements
As the president of the Gary Teachers Union, I have the privilege of representing the hardworking educators who are the backbone of our community. So it's with deep concern that I must address the recent decision by the Gary Community School Corporation to contract with Proximity, a virtual education provider. This is a move that will replace up to 45 local educators with a teacher-on-a-screen. The misleadingly named Proximity promises a 'licensed teacher in every classroom,' but let's be clear — the deal will only leave students more isolated. This online platform is no silver bullet for the challenges we face in education. It is a shortcut that sacrifices the real, tangible, in-person connections that are essential to student success. I know firsthand how deeply our educators care about our students. We do more than just teach: we mentor, we support, and we understand the unique challenges that each student faces. We know the names of their parents and siblings and can recite their struggles, and their triumphs. We sit through late-night meetings and community events, not because it's part of the job, but because we are part of this community. Our students' success is our success, and their failures weigh heavily on our hearts. This partnership with Proximity is not just a decision to 'go digital' — it is a decision to replace the soul of education with something far more distant. And it's a decision being made with no union collaboration, no teacher buy-in. As the exclusive bargaining representative for our teachers, I wasn't even consulted. Proximity may promise technology that works for some, but a 'virtual teacher' will never attend a school concert, offer a shoulder to cry on, or help a struggling student after school. They will not build the trust and the personal relationships our students need to succeed. The claim that Proximity guarantees a 'licensed' teacher is not an assurance of quality. Licensing is important, but teaching is more than having a piece of paper. It's about understanding the nuances of each student's individual learning journey, responding to their needs, and building a rapport that encourages growth — things that cannot be replicated through an algorithm or a screen. Did we not learn this during COVID? Our public school teachers are not just 'licensed' — they are deeply committed professionals who live, work, and raise families in Gary. They are part of our community. Replacing them with a virtual talking head is an insult to their dedication and to the families that depend on them. Let's not forget the financial implications of this decision. This may not even be cost effective for the school district! Everything we've seen says we'll still need a 'classroom facilitator' to be physically present. How much more will this cost? To the administration of the Gary School Corporation: I urge you to reconsider this decision. This is not just about saving money or adopting the latest technological trend. This is about the future of our children, the integrity of our schools, and the livelihoods of the teachers who are committed to making Gary a better city for everyone. We deserve more than virtual replacements. Our teachers and this community have built a school system that puts children first. We need to fight for our teachers and paraprofessionals — the people who have dedicated their lives to this work and to this city. Our teachers deserve better. Our students deserve better. And the community of Gary deserves better than to be sold short by a for-profit virtual platform.
Los Angeles Times
6 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump voters wanted relief from Medical bills. For millions, the bills are about to get bigger
President Trump rode to reelection last fall on voter concerns about prices. But as his administration pares back federal rules and programs designed to protect patients from the high cost of health care, Trump risks pushing more Americans into debt, further straining family budgets already stressed by medical bills. Millions of people are expected to lose health insurance in the coming years as a result of the tax cut legislation Trump signed this month, leaving them with fewer protections from large bills if they get sick or suffer an accident. At the same time, significant increases in health plan premiums on state insurance marketplaces next year will likely push more Americans to either drop coverage or switch to higher-deductible plans that will require them to pay more out-of-pocket before their insurance kicks in. Smaller changes to federal rules are poised to bump up patients' bills, as well. New federal guidelines for COVID -19 vaccines, for example, will allow health insurers to stop covering the shots for millions, so if patients want the protection, some may have to pay out-of-pocket. The new tax cut legislation will also raise the cost of certain doctor visits, requiring copays of up to $35 for some Medicaid enrollees. And for those who do end up in debt, there will be fewer protections. This month, the Trump administration secured permission from a federal court to roll back regulations that would have removed medical debt from consumer credit reports. That puts Americans who cannot pay their medical bills at risk of lower credit scores, hindering their ability to get a loan or forcing them to pay higher interest rates. 'For tens of millions of Americans, balancing the budget is like walking a tightrope,' said Chi Chi Wu, a staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center. 'The Trump administration is just throwing them off.' White House spokesperson Kush Desai did not respond to questions about how the administration's health care policies will affect Americans' medical bills. The president and his Republican congressional allies have brushed off the health care cuts, including hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicaid retrenchment in the mammoth tax law. 'You won't even notice it,' Trump said at the White House after the bill signing July 4. 'Just waste, fraud, and abuse.' But consumer and patient advocates around the country warn that the erosion of federal health care protections since Trump took office in January threatens to significantly undermine Americans' financial security. 'These changes will hit our communities hard,' said Arika Sánchez, who oversees health care policy at the nonprofit New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty. Sánchez predicted many more people the center works with will end up with medical debt. 'When families get stuck with medical debt, it hurts their credit scores, makes it harder to get a car, a home, or even a job,' she said. 'Medical debt wrecks people's lives.' For Americans with serious illnesses such as cancer, weakened federal protections from medical debt pose yet one more risk, said Elizabeth Darnall, senior director of federal advocacy at the American Cancer Society's Cancer Action Network. 'People will not seek out the treatment they need,' she said. Trump promised a rosier future while campaigning last year, pledging to 'make America affordable again' and 'expand access to new Affordable Healthcare.' Polls suggest voters were looking for relief. About 6 in 10 adults — Democrats and Republicans — say they are worried about being able to afford health care, according to one recent survey, outpacing concerns about the cost of food or housing. And medical debt remains a widespread problem: As many as 100 million adults in the U.S. are burdened by some kind of health care debt. Despite this, key tools that have helped prevent even more Americans from sinking into debt are now on the chopping block. Medicaid and other government health insurance programs, in particular, have proved to be a powerful economic backstop for low-income patients and their families, said Kyle Caswell, an economist at the Urban Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C. Caswell and other researchers found, for example, that Medicaid expansion made possible by the 2010 Affordable Care Act led to measurable declines in medical debt and improvements in consumers' credit scores in states that implemented the expansion. 'We've seen that these programs have a meaningful impact on people's financial well-being,' Caswell said. Trump's tax law — which will slash more than $1 trillion in federal health spending over the next decade, mostly through Medicaid cuts — is expected to leave 10 million more people without health coverage by 2034, according to the latest estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The tax cuts, which primarily benefit wealthy Americans, will add $3.4 trillion to U.S. deficits over a decade, the office calculated. The number of uninsured could spike further if Trump and his congressional allies don't renew additional federal subsidies for low- and moderate-income Americans who buy health coverage on state insurance marketplaces. This aid — enacted under former President Joe Biden — lowers insurance premiums and reduces medical bills enrollees face when they go to the doctor or the hospital. But unless congressional Republicans act, those subsidies will expire later this year, leaving many with bigger bills. Federal debt regulations developed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under the Biden administration would have protected these people and others if they couldn't pay their medical bills. The agency issued rules in January that would have removed medical debts from consumer credit reports. That would have helped an estimated 15 million people. But the Trump administration chose not to defend the new regulations when they were challenged in court by debt collectors and the credit bureaus, who argued the federal agency had exceeded its authority in issuing the rules. A federal judge in Texas appointed by Trump ruled that the regulation should be scrapped. Levey writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism.
