Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Meeting date: Thursday, December 7, 2023

Official Report 996KB pdf

---

Portfolio Question Time

---

Education and Skills

The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio question time and the portfolio on this occasion is education and skills. As usual, members wishing to ask a supplementary question should press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question.

---

Scottish Qualifications Authority (Discussions)

To ask the Scottish Government what discussions it has had with the SQA in relation to the consistency of national 4 and national 5 prelim examination papers. (S6O-02846)

Although prelims can be valuable preparation for final national 5 exams and a useful guide to pupil progress, they are not compulsory, and the decision on whether to set prelims rests with individual schools and colleges. As they are not a formal part of the process for awarding Scottish Qualifications Authority qualifications, the SQA does not have any role in the delivery of prelim exams.

National 4 qualifications are made up of units, including an added-value unit, with no final external examination. They are internally assessed as pass or fail and are externally quality assured by the SQA. Therefore, prelims are not commonly used at that level.

The quality and consistency of prelim exam papers become important to students who find themselves in need of an appeal, and they are particularly likely to go through that process if they are unable to sit the SQA final exam. That has been the situation for one of my constituents, who got an A in their prelim but, on appeal, got a B. The SQA said that the marking criteria had not been consistently applied and that the level of demand of the assessment that generated the evidence was less than the course assessment.

Would the cabinet secretary consider it to be better for students if they all sat the same prelim exam or one that the SQA agreed was equal to the level of the course assessment?

It is worth reiterating that the SQA does not have any role in the delivery of prelim exams. It is also worth saying that, since the introduction of the national qualifications back in 2013-14, prelims and any alternative evidence have not formed part of the appeals process, apart from during the temporary pandemic arrangements. I am of the view that the appropriate evidence to inform the appeals process is a matter for the new qualifications body and that it should keep that under review.

Of course, the SQA looks at alternative evidence for exceptional circumstances such as pupils who might have been unable to sit their exam or whose performance was impacted due to illness. The SQA gives extensive guidance to centres on what constitutes valid evidence in those circumstances, and that includes prelim evidence. The SQA also gives a range of support to centres on understanding standards, to support teachers in setting assessments and understanding the level for the learner against the national standard.

Fundamentally, a wider programme of education reform is currently under way, and I believe that that will require to consider approaches to assessment in much more detail as part of any changes to the qualifications that might come forward. In the meantime, I encourage Stuart McMillan’s constituent to discuss the matter directly with their school or local authority.

When we look at the role of the SQA in qualifications, we look back at 2022, when a “generous approach” was used for grading. For the exams at the end of the previous academic year, a “sensitive approach” was taken to grading. With change coming to the SQA—this is pertinent to the question that has been asked about appeals—what approach will it take for this academic year?

For this past academic year, for the first time, we reintroduced the qualification requirements that existed prior to the pandemic, and the arrangements around the appeals process mirror those that existed prior to the pandemic. As the member has intimated, the SQA took a range of different measures in relation to being sensitive to the grading approach that it applied. As I understand it, the SQA has returned to the approach that was applied prior to the pandemic, and the arrangements have returned to normal. Although I would be more than happy to write to the member directly on the issue and confirm it directly with the SQA, that is certainly my understanding of the approach that the SQA will take this year.

---

Violence Towards Teachers

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports of increasing violence towards teachers and students in schools. (S6O-02847)

No teacher, member of staff or pupil should have to suffer abuse in our schools. Last week, the final stage in the behaviour summits concluded with a wide range of stakeholders on behaviour in our schools. The behaviour in Scottish schools research—BISSR—which provides the accurate national picture in relation to behaviour in Scotland’s schools, was also published last week.

Although the BISSR set out that the majority of our pupils are well behaved, there has been a marked increase in disruptive behaviour since the research was last carried out in 2016. I have been clear that it is unacceptable and that it will require a co-ordinated response that recognises that schools cannot manage that shift in behaviour on their own.

In my statement to the Parliament last week, I confirmed that a multiyear plan is in development to tackle instances of challenging behaviour, working with local authorities, trade unions and others.

The Scottish National Party is entirely responsible for trashing Scotland’s education system. A key reason for our children being so badly failed is that classroom discipline has collapsed, with teachers and pupils suffering unprecedented levels of violence. However, as with the SNP’s weak justice system, those who are responsible know that there is no punishment and no deterrent. What does the education secretary have to say to teachers, who just want to do their jobs, and to pupils, who just want to learn in safety?

I am sorry to say to Mr Findlay that the way in which we approach our education system is very different from the way in which we approach our justice system. In my statement to Parliament last week, I was keen to set out the work that we do with our local authorities on recognising the importance of having a national approach to supporting better behaviour in our classrooms. In last week’s statement, I made it absolutely clear that the changes that we have seen in behaviour since 2016, when the research was last carried out, are unacceptable—they are unacceptable for our teachers and for our young people. Last week, I set out a five-point plan to tackle behaviour in Scotland’s schools.

Therefore, I very much recognise the challenges that exist here, but the point that I was making to Mr Findlay in my initial response was that schools cannot do this on their own. We need to have a co-ordinated response that seeks to engage, for example, our health professionals in speech and language provision—we heard contributions from other members on that point last week—and that helps to support consistency in relation to how behaviour management policies are applied. That is a matter for our teachers, whom I trust to deliver behaviour management policies in our schools.

A number of members want to ask supplementaries. I will try to get them all in.

The “Behaviour in Scottish Schools 2023” report that was published last week highlighted that poverty can have a clear impact on behaviour at secondary level. Does the cabinet secretary share my concern that the extension of the sanctions regime that was announced last week by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the continued commitment of the Westminster parties to austerity could have a knock-on impact on how some of the most vulnerable young people fare at school?

I think that Bill Kidd is absolutely right. Having taught hungry children, I know exactly how poverty interacts with our education system. That is a damning indictment of the way in which the United Kingdom Government has organised its approach to supporting some of our most vulnerable, which is having an impact in our classrooms. We saw that borne out in the programme for international student assessment evidence that was published—[Interruption.] I hear chuntering from Conservative members, but I have to say that the actions of their Government at Westminster are harming the outcomes of the young people in Scotland’s schools today.

The Government is taking the action that it can to protect our young people from poverty. That is why we are investing in the game-changing Scottish child payment as part of a package of measures that means that an estimated 90,000 fewer children will live in poverty in Scotland this year. We also have the most generous free school meals provision in the UK. I wish that other parts of the UK would echo our approach, as that support has been pivotal to the progress that we have seen being made in relation to our young people. Those are the SNP’s values in action. The contrast with the actions of a Tory Government that is driving more and more of our children into poverty could not be starker.

The cabinet secretary mentioned PISA. This week’s results must be a wake-up call. The crisis in behaviour in schools is impacting attainment and causing standards to drop. The issue is no longer only about young people feeling safe; it is about the future of our entire education system.

The Government said that it needed to listen before it acted. Pupils, teachers and parents have spoken, yet the Government’s response is lacking. It has blamed teachers, abandoned pupils and sidelined parents. When does the cabinet secretary intend to get serious about the issue, show the leadership that our education needs and come back to the chamber with specific actions to further address behaviour in schools?

I am somewhat disappointed by Pam Duncan-Glancy’s comments. It will take more than one parliamentary statement to solve the problem. We need parents to be part of the solution, which is exactly why I engaged with the National Parent Forum of Scotland on this very issue only last week. Pam Duncan-Glancy talks about engagement with the profession. I met our trade unions yesterday, and we had a good discussion about some of the collective action that we can take.

The Government cannot do this on its own, but I accept my responsibility, as cabinet secretary, in setting out a national action plan. I very much hope that Pam Duncan-Glancy will work with me on the issue, recognising that there needs to be a co-ordinated response to the challenges that are presented in relation to behaviour. I think that she is right in the point that she made about PISA. We need to have a co-ordinated response that recognises the challenge and does not accept the current situation as the new normal in our education system. [Interruption.]

Can members listen to the questions and, indeed, the answers?

This week, I met a headteacher who has more than 20 years of teaching experience across different areas of Scotland. She told me about the violence and abuse from pupils and parents, and its impact on other pupils and all levels of staffing. She spoke of the enormous workload, budget cuts, low staff morale, being unable to meet children’s needs and feeling helpless in a system that she says is broken. She has now resigned. The Scottish Government’s response is to offer more training for teachers. Does the education secretary really think that a teacher of that experience just needs more training?

I do not know whether Beatrice Wishart was in the chamber last week when I gave my response to the behaviour in Scottish schools research, because that was not at all my response. I point out that we provided additional funding for those who work in learning support because that independent research showed our learning support assistants asking for that additionality.

The issue is not just about staff training; it is about a post-Covid societal shift, and one that is happening not only in our schools. There are challenges playing out in all our communities and constituencies that we are all very well aware of, including antisocial behaviour on some of our buses and some of the challenges that we face in our justice network. It is not just about schools. We should be mindful of societal shifts since the pandemic.

We are trying to work with our local authority partners in relation to the changes that we have seen in our young people and their behaviour. Ms Wishart spoke about violence; I think some of the most shocking parts of the BISS research published last week were those about the challenges caused by some of our youngest children. We know that the transition for some of our youngest pupils from early years into primary school has been extremely traumatic. Those young people were out of formal education during national lockdowns and during industrial action, so their education was disrupted. On Ms Duncan-Glancy’s point, some of the impact of that disruption is now playing out in relation to the PISA results, and we need a holistic response to that.

I am sorry to hear the story that Ms Wishart outlined about the person who has left the teaching profession. We need more people working in Scotland’s schools to support our young people and I commit to coming back to Parliament next week to give a fuller update on our response to the PISA study.

---

Prevention of Violence Against Women and Girls (Education of Boys)

To ask the Scottish Government what work it is doing in schools to educate boys to prevent violence against women and girls. (S6O-02848)

The Scottish Government is clear that harassment or abuse in any form, whether in the workplace, in schools, in the home or in society, is completely reprehensible and must stop. The conduct and behaviour of perpetrators must change if we are to end harassment and abuse.

I am concerned by the findings from the behaviour in Scottish schools research, which are echoed by the results of surveys undertaken by some of our teaching unions about rising misogyny in our schools. This Government will shortly publish a national framework for schools on preventing and responding to gender-based violence. That will help ensure consistent messages on sexual harassment and gender-based violence for everyone working with children and young people and will support our commitment to eliminating all forms of violence against women and girls.

As the cabinet secretary has said, misogyny is unfortunately still rife in our schools, with many young women still reporting alarming levels of sexual harassment at school. Scottish Labour’s consultation on violence against women and girls found that developing educational resources on gender-based violence for all boys and young men in Scotland should be a key priority if we are to effectively tackle such violence. Will the Scottish Government commit to introducing bespoke workshops that will specifically teach boys and young men about healthy relationships and interactions with girls and young women, and will it consider rolling those workshops out across the whole curriculum?

Pauline McNeill makes a really important point. As I intimated in my initial response, we will very shortly be publishing the gender-based violence framework, which will set out our national approach. The proposal that she has brought to the chamber today is interesting and I commit to working with her on it, recognising that front-line support will absolutely be needed in our schools to tackle some of the challenges that we see borne out in the BISS research.

A number of our teaching unions have also carried out really detailed research on the issue, which affects not only female pupils but female members of staff in a teaching population that is majority female. We must be mindful of the trends that are playing out. We have also seen anecdotal evidence about the rise of individuals such as Andrew Tate, some of which is impacting on behaviour in our schools.

We absolutely need a co-ordinated approach, which is what the framework will set out in more detail. I will take Ms McNeill’s idea away from today’s portfolio questions and speak to officials about whether we might be able to support the approach that she has outlined.

There is a lot of interest in supplementary questions. I will try to get them all in but they must be questions—please spare us any preambles. The responses will also have to be relatively brief.

Does the cabinet secretary agree that the work to educate boys in schools is very important, and so, too, are programmes such as “Bold girls ken” in my constituency, which work across campuses to tackle gender-based violence through an understanding of what consent means? Does she also agree that this is an issue for wider society and one that needs society-wide solutions, which must come particularly from men taking responsibility and calling out the male behaviours that lead to violence against women and girls?

I agree with the member and welcome his contribution. It is vital that men call out instances of misogyny and male behaviours that they see and which could lead to violence against women and girls. I talked in my statement last week about our teachers highlighting the toxic impact of certain social media figures who influence young boys and promote intolerance of women. I think that we are all concerned by that. Although education has an essential part to play in teaching our children and young people about gender equality, it cannot, as with behaviour, do that in isolation. We need wider society to play its part in supporting our efforts to eradicate violence against women and girls.

Does the cabinet secretary agree with me and the charity Zero Tolerance that what is required to tackle the issue is not greater bureaucracy, Government directives or national frameworks, but action?

I thank the member for her question. I have seen some of the response from Zero Tolerance to the behaviour in Scottish schools research, and I would be very keen to engage with it directly on the issue. It is important to say that, through the action plan, we are working with various organisations, and I want to work with Zero Tolerance on the matter to ensure that we get this right.

The member has mentioned action. It is worth remembering—indeed, I put this on the record in my statement to Parliament last week—that the Government does not run our schools directly and that there are responsibilities here for our local authorities. We need consistency in responding to the issue, which is why the framework is quite helpful. However, as I said in response to Ms McNeill’s question, we need practical action, so I am more than happy to engage with Education Scotland on how we can deliver that in our schools and make the difference.

Building on what the cabinet secretary has said, I ask her whether the Government agrees that, as well as men speaking with boys about gender justice and gender-based violence in school settings and teachers speaking in school settings, we need all men in positions of leadership to engage with boys, whether in youth clubs, in sports clubs or elsewhere, so that we can, together, tackle gender-based violence in Scotland.

The member makes an important point. As I mentioned in my previous answer, we need that societal approach to eradicating violence against women and girls. Public support from men in positions of power—and in positions in public life—is really important. The First Minister has taken a key role in tackling the problem of toxic masculinity, and I hope that every man in the chamber will look to do the same.

I wonder what we are teaching our boys when we see the research from the NASUWT union that says that almost a fifth of female teachers in Scotland’s schools are being assaulted several times a week by pupils. What are we teaching our boys when their behaviour in respect of female teachers meets no sanctions and no consequences? That is not right, is it?

The member makes an important point. In my meeting with the trade unions yesterday, we talked about taking a consistent approach to behaviour that is not acceptable, and I think that we need to set that out at national level.

The member is absolutely correct to talk about consequences. Indeed, it is a key theme in the BISS research. That research also shows that there are various approaches to the implementation of behaviour management policies and a tension between the promotion of positive behaviour and situations where we actually need to see consequences. As a former teacher, I accept that we need a role for responsibilities in our classrooms.

The member is also absolutely correct to highlight the link with misogyny. As I have intimated in previous responses to members, we will set out the framework in that respect in the coming weeks—before the end of the year, I hope.

The challenge is not going away. We need more of a balance in relation to behaviour in our schools. I hope that the member has heard from me my commitment to coming back in relation to the national plan to set out our exact expectations at a national level.

---

Immigration Policy (Impact on Scottish Universities)

To ask the Scottish Government what assessment it has carried out regarding any impact of United Kingdom immigration policies on universities in Scotland. (S6O-02849)

The UK Government’s latest attacks on immigration could have a devastating impact on our universities. They risk the economic, social and cultural contribution that international students make not only to campuses, but to Scotland. We want to attract more people to live, work and study here, not fewer. The simple fact is that, with independence, we could devise a principled approach to migration that would deliver for our economy, our public services and our universities.

Last month, we published plans for a new Scottish connections visa post independence that would allow international students to live and work in Scotland for five years after their studies and could lead to Scottish citizenship. It is an offering that is in line with Scotland’s values and one that would also meet our economic needs.

I thank the minister for his answer. At a recent meeting with the University of Stirling, which is based in my constituency, one of the issues that we discussed was the potential impact of the policy that the UK Government introduced recently that restricts many international students from bringing their dependants with them. There are real concerns that, without the ability to bring their families, many overseas students will choose to go elsewhere.

Does the minister agree that hostile immigration policies have the ability to harm the international standing of our universities and that the UK Government should devolve immigration powers to the Scottish Parliament—notwithstanding the complete silence from MSPs on the Tory benches in this Parliament—to ensure that Scotland remains an open and welcoming destination for international students, whose contribution to the economy and the social and cultural diversity of our country is very much welcomed?

The UK Government’s latest doubling down on the hostile environment means not only that we could see fewer international students studying in Scotland but that it could be harder for our universities to attract international staff. The changes relating to dependants are particularly pernicious. After all, evidence shows that the ability to bring family members to Scotland encourages migrants to stay in the long term, and the additional controls mean that families risk being torn apart by the most restrictive family reunion policy of any high-income country in the world. That approach runs contrary to the one that we should have—that of welcoming people who are making Scotland their home and are choosing to live, work or study here.

In discussing the student make-up of universities, data from the Higher Education Statistics Agency shows that the number of Scottish students studying in England has risen by about 11 per cent. Heriot-Watt University’s figures suggest that retaining those 2,000 students would keep about £19 million in Scotland. What is the Scottish Government doing to review its arbitrary cap on Scottish students attending our universities?

What an act of deflection that was. [Interruption.] Seriously—we are dealing with an issue that is actively impacting on our students through the immigration policies of the UK Government. I will take no lectures from the Tory party on that.

---

Teacher Induction Scheme

To ask the Scottish Government what its response is to reports of Aberdeenshire secondary school parent councils calling for changes to the teacher induction scheme. (S6O-02850)

We recognise that there is a challenge around the recruitment of teachers in certain areas of Scotland and in certain subjects. The Government is considering what immediate improvements can be made to the allocation of probationers on the teacher induction scheme who will take up placements in August 2024, particularly those who have opted for the preference waiver scheme. The strategic board for teacher education is also undertaking work to ensure that we have the right number of teachers in the right places and with the right expertise. With regard to the north-east, in particular, yesterday I met councillors and the director of education for Aberdeenshire to discuss their concerns about recruitment and probationer allocation in the north-east.

I am glad that the cabinet secretary found the time to meet Aberdeenshire Council yesterday. It looks forward to her returning in the new year to further explore solutions and meet some of the parents who wrote on the matter. Aberdeenshire received only 12 of the 66 secondary probationary teachers that it requested, and it remains chronically short of them. Local authorities are now worried about the teacher census and that they will be unfairly penalised for staff shortages. Will the cabinet secretary answer the question that she would not answer yesterday? Will she confirm that local authorities will not be punished for her poor performance?

The member suggested that Aberdeenshire had been allocated 12 probationers. As I understand it, the figure was 18. However, I will check that with my officials. [Interruption.]

A number of key areas came from yesterday’s meeting, which I found extremely helpful in relation to the challenges that Aberdeenshire, in particular, is facing. The member will accept that some probationers are not ticking the box to choose Aberdeenshire Council as a local authority. Part of the challenge that we face following the Covid pandemic is that probationer teachers are now less likely to move to rural parts of Scotland than they were before it.

We will take a number of short-term actions on the back of yesterday’s meeting, which include reviewing the TIS approach in a short-term exercise that will consider how we can introduce measures to ensure that more people who tick the preference waiver box are sent to more rural locations such as Aberdeenshire. We will also engage directly with the General Teaching Council for Scotland, which administers the TIS. To that end—[Interruption.] I can hear the member chuntering, but he should respect the fact that I am trying to answer his question.

No, you are—

Minister, could you resume your seat?

Mr Burnett, you have asked the question. You are going to listen to the response and not heckle all the way through it.

You will have to conclude your response, though, cabinet secretary.

Thank you, Presiding Officer. I am sure that the Conservatives will want to support good behaviour in the chamber, given their views on that matter.

The Scottish Government will look to work with the GTCS. That is why, at my meeting with Aberdeenshire Council, I told the elected members and the director of education that I will visit Aberdeenshire in the new year, along with the chief executive of the GTCS, to work with them on that challenge.

---

Student Mental Health and Wellbeing

To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to support student mental health and wellbeing. (S6O-02851)

Over the four academic years from 2019-20 to 2022-23, following a commitment in our programme for government, we invested almost £16 million in supporting institutions to introduce more than 80 additional counsellors to help their students. That commitment was successfully delivered and concluded.

For this academic year, the Scottish Government has confirmed a further stand-alone investment of £3.21 million to support the important and necessary transition to a future position whereby student mental health and wellbeing are fully embedded as part of a shared commitment between institutions, the Scottish Government, NHS Scotland and other partners that meets student needs and integrates with local services.

Talking about aspirations and money might be a fine thing, but research from the Mental Health Foundation found that

“64% of college students in Scotland had low mental wellbeing”.

Despite that, the Government has moved the goalposts on its student mental health plan time and time again.

The working group last met in December, and the plan was to be published in the spring. It was, however, still being developed in May. It was delayed again in June, and it was then to be published at some point after the mental health strategy delivery plans, but there is still no sign of it.

Does the Scottish Government still plan to deliver a student mental health plan? If so, when?

We will consult with members of the student mental health and wellbeing working group on the student mental health plan very shortly.

There is a brief supplementary from Roz McCall.

In a recent Mental Health Foundation survey of college students in Scotland,

“54% reported having moderate, moderately severe, or severe symptoms of depression”.

Another survey found that 92 per cent of students experienced loneliness at some point during their time at Scottish universities.

With more than half of Scottish students reported to have experienced depression, and with more than nine in 10 experiencing loneliness, does the minister accept that the steps that the Scottish Government is taking to support student mental health and wellbeing are failing?

I do not accept that at all, and I think that it is a misrepresentation of the situation. There is a societal problem in this space; it cannot be characterised simply as something that affects universities and colleges. We are, and have been, working closely with institutions to develop that plan, and we will consult on it very shortly. It is important that, when students present with significant issues, there are clear pathways to allow them to access centralised mental health services, and that is what we are working towards.

Question 7 was not lodged and question 8 has been withdrawn, so that concludes portfolio questions on education and skills.