13/09/2011 Newsnight Scotland

much more part of our future. Tonight on Newsnight Scotland: A

petty, mean-spirited proposal that betrays a lack of trust in teachers.

Is a plan to make teachers work more flexibly deserving of that

sort of response from Scotland's biggest teaching union?

And does the government really want to pick a fight with the

educational establishment? Good evening. It was supposed to be

about how to improve the quality of the teachers and teaching in our

schools. But the McCormac review, which was published today, seems

just to have antagonised the profession. Proposals to change the

career structure and increase flexible working have been blasted

by the largest teachers union. But are these explosive responses just

an opening salvo in the bigger fight to come with the government?

Scotland once had an education system that was the envy of the

world. Let us not be too negative. Scotland still has a high standard

of education. Okay, Fox, the lesson today is all about constructing

strangled. But in recent years, people attainment has flat Clyde.

Whereas in other countries, including England and Wales, they

might have been improvements. The report card for Scotland's Teachers

says: could do better. We think children are well served by the

education system. What we are looking to do is see if there are

ways in which he could be improved, and looking at the curriculum for

excellence, with the there are things that need to be changed that

could improve outcomes. Two things were some -- flexibility within the

teaching profession and quality. Teaching has changed a lot since

this 1955 classroom. But today's report is looking at how teaching

is going to look in the future, and they came up with a number of

proposals. But few of them could be considered too radical. They want

to keep the 35 hour week, but they asking teachers to be a little bit

more flexible, perhaps spending more time in the classroom and less

on preparation if needed. Thirdly, there would be no more taking work

home. They want teachers to spend all of these 35 hours in the

classroom. These proposals seem to have done little more than provoke

anger among the unions. I think this proposal betrays and lack of

trust in the teaching profession. We built this into the 2001

agreement that teachers do what work they need to do at the time

and place that is appropriate to the work being done, and of course

when they are teaching pupils, they will be in school, but other tasks

do not require them to be in school, and teachers are accustomed to

working outside school. I think this is a pity, mean-spirited

proposal, that poisons the atmosphere. Teachers say they are

left feeling demoralised. The local authorities to employ them have

been left disappointed. -- who employ them. They wanted tea -- to

seek teacher spending longer in the classroom. But what about the

pupils? There is a feeling this review does not address some of the

fundamental problems facing education. What I find difficult to

see is how these recommendations will help narrow the inequalities,

if they applied across all teachers, there may be a general improvement,

but I'm not sure those who were badly underperforming will move up

nearer the standards of the average, all the best in Scotland. This

review was limited to looking at how to improve the quality of

teaching and teachers. The government says that his key to

increasing achievement among pupils. Education is about making sure our

young people, so they move forward, get opportunities and life chances,

and progress in the world. That is the decision we have to make all

the time, this report helps us to take boarded the issue of

professionalism in education, but we need to do it by discussion and

negotiation. The review raises important issues, like the problem

of failing teachers, and the need to address social inequality. But

it doesn't offer suggestions on how to deal with them. Policy decisions

will be based on the review, but appears to offer more questions

than answers. We did invite perverse McCormack to

appear, but he was unavailable. -- professor. I'm joined now from

Edinburgh by Lindsay Paterson who is Professor of Educational Policy

at Edinburgh University, and in the studio by the Assistant Secretary

of Scotland's biggest teaching union, the EIS, Drew Morrice and by

Jim Thewliss who is headteacher at Harris Academy in Dundee and also

President of School Leaders Scotland. Thank you are coming in.

Linsey, first of all, a basic finding here is that 11 years on

from the original report, and in the light of a number of recent

report, it is clear that Scotland has not improved his position as a

middle-ranking performer in international student assessments.

Is that true, and if so, why? certainly an accurate

characterisation of recent research. Undoubtedly, that is an accurate

statement. The explanation is very complex indeed, it is certainly not

only to do with the working conditions or the length of the

teacher week, or where they do their work. For the report to claim

that that will lead to a change in that statement position seems

disingenuous. Do you think the report is essentially superficial

in its findings? I think it is. I wouldn't be highly critical of it,

it has some fairly good things, the stuff about working flexibly is

what any profession would want to have, but nevertheless, it does

seem that it does skate across the surface, and is inferior to be much

better report from Graham Dawson that was issued earlier this year.

We will look at actual training in a moment, but if we look at

flexibility, it is saying that if 35 hour working week, contracted

for at the moment, it should be said that several reviews have said

that most teachers work a great deal longer than that, and that is

accepted. But it is saying here that rather than considering class

contact time on a weekly basis, it is considering weekly blocks on a

four week or turn Brock basis. It could be managed more flexibly. Why

is that something you are resistant to? I think the problem is that it

is a theory, and there is a very little practical way that can be

taken forward. For people who have the timetable, it actually will

have a contrary effect of what the review is setting out. It will be

to teachers clock-watching. The big problem teachers face and have

faced is the question of workload. You will not tackle workload by

introducing flexibility. I think teachers need for certainty of

working hours to be set out, and work within that framework. I think

there is some discussion to be had around this, but the McCormack

report gives no shape to how you will deliver that. That is the

fundamental difficulty in trying to break forward that proposal. It is

not rooted in practical reality. But you haven't closed the door on

it definitely? We welcome the cabinet secretary saying that these

discussions have to be taken forward, and when you have to get

in that day's discussions, the first issue is, is their way you

can deliver that in a meaningful way? We would doubt whether you can

give practical effect to the type of flexibility that he is setting

What do you think of that as a head teacher? There is a timetable. If

the will is there to improve outcomes for young people... Do you

think more flexible working practices... Is there a scenario

where it would improve things? is unworthy of exploring it to see

whether it would do. If we look over a term, or a month, I would

like to explore that to see if it could be made to work. Lindsay

Paterson, you spoke about teacher quality. This is highlighted in the

report. Talking about better screening of teachers going into

the profession. Higher qualifications and more demanding

academic standards. This would be more significant than the reduction

in class sizes, according to the report. It says marginal

differences in size should not be pursued rather than raising overall

teaching quality. This was set out in Graham Donaldson's report

earlier this year. We have to demand a better grounding in the

basics, especially in the primary sector. Many teachers do not have a

grasp of how language and numbers are understood by the children. The

report has read Goethe to this, much more challenging -- the report

has referred to this. One of the interesting thing as of today's

report is the idea that teachers in a school can organise their own

professional development. That goes beyond the rigid structures that

exist currently. How could it be that teachers do not have the basic

qualifications? It is appalling that there are teachers who fail to

be competent at grasping basic things are taught in the primary

curriculum. That they do not grasp, especially mathematical standards,

we require of ten-year-olds. This is about the teacher education

establishment. There has to be radical change. Support coming

perhaps by distance learning. Teachers can help each other and

work together in groups with the head teacher and other schools. We

need to be more imaginative. Drew Morrice, do you recognise that

description? The quality of teachers currently in the national

induction scheme has improved the quality of entrants in the teaching

profession. I welcome his view that teachers collaborating, which can

help improve standards, that is a much-needed development. To be fair,

Professor McCormac has recognised this in one level but he ducks away

from it in his recommendations. we accept there are teachers who

are not performing as we would hope, in the section on poor performance,

he says there is a concern that if they can be a negative impact on

education for children while they resolve these things. They say they

believe arrangements can be strengthened through annual reviews.

It is important that we can look at what the professor has said within

the context of other initiatives, particularly the Donaldson report.

It is important to recognise that the MacCormick review has been

rebranded to look at advancing the profession of teaching. It is clear

in the areas of concern that we need to address. If we look at the

flexibility in approach he proposes, and some of the things that Lindsay

Paterson said are interesting in developing that line of thinking.

Advancing the profession. Do you accept there are people who should

not be in the profession? If you go back to the genesis of this report,

from 2001, a lot has been done for the profession of teaching in

Scotland. How do you get rid of these teachers? It is important

when somebody who is not doing the job well, they should not be doing

that job. But if you concentrate on that, it misses the other problem

of skills. There is hard evidence, including teachers rating their own

abilities, that indicates there is a widespread problem that cannot be

solved by sacking a few bad teachers. It is not the fault of

individual teachers. They have not been given adequate training and

development in the first place. There is a suggestion that external

experts could be taken on. More would be the union's attitude to

that? We have seen developments where this was simply a cost-saving

exercise. The introduction of any person coming in, they must work

with teachers, they cannot be a replacement. The EIS would oppose

any idea of people working in classrooms not been registered

teachers. Even if that brings in expertise from outside? Experts

working with teachers is one thing, but coming in to replace teachers

is not acceptable to the EIS. The teaching Council echoed our views.

Do you feel, as a head teacher, you would like flexibility to bring

people in from outside? professor and mentions the notion

of funding. I would be interested in expanding the range of expertise

for young people in schools. But it is not to replace, it is in

addition to bring people into the school. Finally, Lindsay Paterson,

do you think that any politician from any political party actually

has the stomach for a fight with the EIS or any other unions? I hope

they do. We are in a position where we have to have changed in the

system. There is the commitment of most teachers, but the point is

that teachers have been inadequately prepared and been

adequately supported and that needs to change. Thank you.

We can have a look at the newspapers. The Herald is leading

with the story of Britain facing the worst wave of strikes for a

the worst wave of strikes for a generation. The Scotsman newspaper

has a blow for Scottish National Party Policies.