Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee, 02 Sep 2008

Meeting date: Tuesday, September 2, 2008

Official Report 238KB pdf

---

Employment of Probationary Teachers

The eighth and final item on the agenda is an approach paper that the clerks have circulated on the employment of probationary teachers. You will see that the clerks have suggested some work on the issue, which we said last year that we would look at. Are members content with the proposals?

I am happy with them as a beginning. At the end of the brief paper, it is suggested that the committee has two options: to seek further evidence or to hold a formal committee inquiry. I am in favour of the latter approach. We have given the Government a chance to take action over the past year and a half.

Before the summer recess, the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Lifelong Learning agreed—at last—to set up a teacher employment working group. That was most welcome, but the answers that I have received to a series of parliamentary questions on the workings of that group have been unsatisfactory—they have been along the lines of, "The group will report back," and, "No minutes will be published."

The committee has been looking for an issue on which we can add value. All of us in Scotland have been proud of the teacher induction scheme, which I think had cross-party support when it was introduced. The scheme has been successful, but it is in danger of being undermined because of the number of probationers who are either not gaining employment or not gaining a permanent contract. We have to address that, and this committee is in a position to do so by holding an open and public debate that involves all the relevant people. If the Government and the local authorities will not, between them, accept responsibility, we could perhaps ask them why and try to find a way forward. Otherwise, we will be recruiting more and more teachers into the profession but disappointing them when there are no jobs for them. If that happens, we will lose them either to posts abroad or to other professions, and we will have wasted their time and Government money—which is taxpayers' money.

I know that, in 2006, three out of the four probationers at St Cadoc's primary school in Mr Macintosh's constituency went to Australia to work after finishing their probationary year. The issue has been around for a number of years. There might have been a slight improvement over the past year but, if so, it has been marginal.

We should certainly implement the approaches laid out in paragraph 6, paragraph 7 and the first bullet point of paragraph 8 in the paper. I have no objection at all to our holding an inquiry; I do not know whether it is necessary at this point, but I would have no objection to it. However, it might be better if the committee was informed by a programmed evidence session, after which we could decide whether to hold a full-blown inquiry. That evidence session will take place next week.

I would be very much in favour of holding another evidence session with the General Teaching Council for Scotland, because it is one of the best-informed groups on the issue of probationary teachers. We held a short session with the GTC for Scotland, but I think that its representatives have a lot more to say.

I agree with Mr Macintosh that the issue of probationary teachers will dominate the schools agenda, alongside class sizes.

The GTC for Scotland is on our list. I think that it will be coming to the committee next week.

I want to raise a more general issue that might impact on the issue of probationary teachers. I know that the committee was unable to agree on a date for an away day and that we have therefore not had a chance to discuss our forward work programme. Clearly, if we are taking decisions on holding inquiries, we have to do so in the context of knowing what the coming year will hold. Do we have any more ideas on that, convener?

The Scottish Government's legislative programme will be announced tomorrow. The programme might impact on the time that we have available for various inquiries. That is another reason why it would be better to wait until next week before making any decisions. We will be better informed then.

Does this mean that we are going to get lots of legislation, Mr Gibson?

He is not going to tell us, Mrs Mulligan. He is keeping it a secret.

They have not told me.

Mr Salmond keeps Mr Gibson as one of his closest confidants.

Absolutely.

The approach paper was carefully worded so as not to limit the committee in its consideration of probationary teachers, but also so as not to tie the committee or to raise any expectations that we might not be able to fulfil. Next week will offer a helpful opportunity for us to pursue the issues. We will then have a much clearer idea of how much work we want to do and how much detail we want to go into. Whatever we decide on whether to hold an inquiry, it will not mean that we cannot add value or make recommendations. Any inquiry would not have to be lengthy.

I agree with Mary Mulligan's points and, like her, wonder how we will decide on what we will do in the year ahead. We did not have an away day, but will we have a discussion in the coming weeks? What are your plans for our work, because that will inform our choices on what to do and on whether to hold any inquiries?

If you remember, the committee has already agreed to hold a number of evidence sessions. All of that has been agreed and has been published in our forward work programme. We have also agreed to hold an inquiry into prison education, although that is unlikely to take place until the new year. All those ideas have been factored in. Any decisions on the work programme will come back to the committee, to allow members to take the decisions. There will be an opportunity for us to discuss the work programme. It is unfortunate that a number of committee members were unable to attend an away day, making the idea no longer viable.

Before I close the meeting, I understand that Mr Purvis is likely to be leaving the committee. That may or may not mean that our meetings in the future will be slightly shorter.

The Official Report will not show the very disappointed looks on the faces of my committee colleagues.

We are fighting back the tears.

We wish you well for the future, Mr Purvis. I am sure that we will have an interesting replacement for you next week.

I remind members that next week's meeting will be on Wednesday morning—we are returning to our usual slot.

Meeting closed at 15:51.