Search

In the Spring of 2002, The SCRE Centre at the University of Glasgow was commissioned to conduct focus group research on behalf of the the Education, Culture, and Sport Committee at the Scottish Parliament. The study, which was conducted over a 3 month period, was intended to inform the Committee's inquiry into the purposes of education. Inquiries of this type are a common feature of the working practices of the Scottish Parliament. The aim of this particular one was to promote 'an in-depth discussion on key issues on the future direction of education'. The main theme of this paper is the dissonance between those who framed the inquiry and those who participated in the focus group study. The meanings of that dissonance are explored—as, briefly, are the conditions under which the research was conducted. The factors that contribute to mismatch in intention or meaning are also discussed. This study also comments on the continuing dominance of academic education in Scotland, and the consequences for those who see themselves as failures while subscribing to the centrality of education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The attainment gap associated with socio-economic status is an international problem that is highly resistant to change. This conceptual paper critiques the drive by the Scottish Government to address the attainment gap through the Scottish Attainment Challenge and the National Improvement Framework. It draws upon a range of theoretical perspectives but principally examines the problem through the lens of Steiner-Khamsi’s concepts of ‘reception’ and ‘translation’ of policy and through examination of the international and national (Scottish) policy contexts. The paper argues that, rather than focussing narrowly upon attainment outcomes, an holistic approach should be adopted which takes account of the economic, social and relational constraints which impact upon families in poverty, calling for a systems-level approach. ‘Schools cannot go it alone’: there is a need to focus upon a wide range of public policy to redress inequalities in society. Whilst the Scottish Government has looked to the London/City/National Challenge as a potential solution to the problem, the complexities and limitations of policy borrowing need to be understood. Higher Education Institutions, government agencies, local authorities and schools need to work in partnership to develop research informed practice which will impact upon learning outcomes forallchildren and young people. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The 'exam results debacle' of August 2000 provoked a crisis of confidence in Scottish education and appeared to reveal widespread discontent with the current Higher Still reform of post-16 education. For a time the political future of the reform seemed to hang in the balance. This is surprising because the reform incorporated the views of the consensus that emerged from the Howie debates of the early 1990s, and its development involved consultation on a wide scale. Subsequent debates blamed the leadership style of those, especially the Inspectorate, who steered the reform process; some commentators invoked Humes' (1986) analysis of the 'leadership class' of Scottish education. This paper argues that a full explanation must take account of Higher Still's character as a flexible, unified system. Compared with other types of reform, the introduction of a flexible unified system tends to involve more conflict between educational interests, and a policy process that is relatively centralized, 'top-down' and linear. An analysis of this process must take account of horizontal as well as vertical lines of conflict in education, and of the political weaknesses which prevented the leadership from articulating clear principles and priorities as a basis for conflict resolution. The paper concludes that Humes' analysis should be complemented by McPherson and Raab's (1988) account of Scottish educational policy-making as the interplay of pluralist and corporatist forces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper questions the current importance given in the post-compulsory literature to curriculum planning models. In particular, the writer draws attention to how curriculum discourses promote an overly rational and simplistic view of systemic education change processes. The research is based on an analysis of post-16 secondary data sources in Scotland and a case study of a local school and college in Fife. The implementation of 'Higher Still' provides the policy backdrop to the research. Finally, a case is made for conceptualizing curriculum reform within a wider multi-levelled and culturally-driven education model. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]