►
From YouTube: Debate: Primary 1 Tests - 19 September 2018
Description
www.parliament.scot
_
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party Business: Primary 1 Tests
S5M-13945 Liz Smith: Primary 1 Tests—That the Parliament believes that good-quality pupil
assessment is an essential component of the drive to raise educational standards in Scotland's
schools, but notes the level of concern that has been raised by teachers and other education
professionals regarding the introduction and delivery of new testing arrangements for Primary 1
(P1) pupils; considers that this concern questions whether the new P1 tests are in line with the
play-based learning philosophy of early years provision in the curriculum for excellence, and, in
light of this concern, calls on the Scottish Government to halt the tests in P1 and to reconsider the
evidence and the whole approach to evaluating the progress of P1 pupils.
_
Published by the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body.
www.parliament.scot // We do not facilitate discussions on our YouTube page but encourage you to share and comment on our videos on your own channels. // If you would like to join in our conversations please follow @ScotParl on Twitter or like us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/scottishparliament
A
B
You
presiding
officer,
the
Scottish
Conservatives,
are
very
pleased
to
bring
this
debate
to
Parliament
because
we
believe
it
is
of
crucial
educational
importance
and
I'm
sure
that
that
view
is
shared
by
every
political
party
in
the
chamber.
Indeed,
I
think
we
could
all
be
accused
of
irresponsibility
if
we
did
not
both
acknowledge
and
listen
to
the
arguments
that
are
being
purchased
by
many
in
the
world
of
Education
and
presiding
officer.
B
C
Is
the
member
then
aware
that
currently
29
councils
across
Scotland
Scotland
carry
out
p1
assessments?
Well,
she
did.
He
call
for
those
councils
to
hope
there
was
primarily
one
assessments
or
instead
will
she
stand
accused
of
breathtaking
hypocrisy
and
doing
exactly
what
she
just
talked
about
cheap
political
point-scoring.
B
Let
me
be
crystal
clear,
as
I
say,
about
our
position
and
restate
our
commitment
to
rigorous
standardized
tests
in
p4,
p7
and
s3
as
a
crucial
part
of
improving
educational
attainment
and
measuring
progress
in
our
schools.
Now
I
know
that
some
parties
disagree
with
standard
grade
standardized
assessments
generally,
but
we
support
the
SMPS
arguments
about
why
it's
important
in
educational
terms
and
in
terms
of
accountability.
B
In
terms
of
drawing
his
conclusions,
there
was
undoubtedly
a
very
strong
argument
to
deliver
better
standardized
assessment
and
he
is
I
believe
correct
to
say
that
it
has
been
too
easy
for
some
schools
and
local
authorities
to
be
less
than
holding
accountable
for
their
educational
performance,
and
so
it
was
right
to
introduce
standardization,
which
proves
that
better
accountability
and
let
me
be
unequivocal-
we
said
in
our
manifesto
in
2016,
but
primarily
one
testing
was
part
of
that
and
we
shouldn't
have
argued
otherwise.
But
it
is
also
a
matter.
D
Has
said
that
the
Conservative
Party
has
been
supportive
were
supportive
of
p1
assessments
in
2016
on
the
28th
of
August
2018
Liz
Smith
issued
these
words.
The
Scottish
Conservatives
have
never
been
in
favor
of
formal
standardized
national
tastes
in
primary
one.
Does
she
recognize,
while
some
of
us
feel
the
Conservatives
are
deceiving
us
on
this
issue?.
B
B
Now
let
me
come.
Let
me
come
to
the
evidence,
because
that's
important
and
I
particularly
want
to
speak
about
the
kindergarten
model
which
is
used
in
many
European
countries,
several
of
whom,
incidentally,
do
not
have
children
starting
formal
education
until
age,
seven,
a
model
which
was
established
by
Friedrich
Froebel
and
used
as
the
foundation
of
infant
Teachers
Training
in
Scotland
for
a
long
period
of
time,
a
time
when
Scotland
was
it
the
envy
of
the
world
for
what
it
delivered
in
both
primary
and
secondary
education.
B
But
just
as
importantly,
that
philosophy
is
wholly
in
line
with
the
principles
of
the
early
years
of
the
curriculum
for
excellence.
Just
like
the
curriculum
for
elections.
Fribble
has
a
holistic
view
of
every
child
as
an
individual.
He
believed
that
this
should
be
nurtured
as
part
of
the
family
and
community,
and
that
success
and
education
came
about
with
strong
links
between
home
and
school.
That
infant
classroom
was
based
around
structured
play
on
learning
through
discovering
through
the
gifts
that
he
described
them.
B
He
believed
that
testing
at
that
young
age
could
actually
prove
unhelpful
and,
more
importantly,
that
the
quality
of
the
information
gained
about
the
child's
progressed
to
be
gained
by
more
meaningful
approaches
and
I
went
at
the
moment
if
you
don't
made,
and
when
my
own
teacher
training
years
I,
remember
exactly
this
debate
taking
place
amongst
primary
teachers.
So
in
refining
my
own
thoughts
prior
to
leading
this
debate,
I
looked
very
carefully
at
the
primary
one
test.
B
This
morning
and
I
spoke
to
a
lot
of
people
who
had
done
that
for
a
ball
training
to
ask
if
there
were
concerns
about
the
fact
that
the
absence
of
formal
testing,
perhaps
that
meant
that
too
many
children
with
problems
were
not
being
identified.
Only
a
few
said,
possibly
yes,
but
for
the
majority
they
said
that
their
specialist
training
actually
allowed
them
to
pick
up
problems
more
quickly
and
one
former
teacher
who
had
been
head
of
an
infant
Department
told
me
the
best
way
to
decide.
B
Indeed,
Scotland
had
a
really
strong
set
of
results
and,
irrespective,
incidentally,
of
social
background
and
I
think
at
this
stage
in
today's
debate,
it's
important
to
recognize
that
the
current
concerns
about
the
standardized
tests
are
largely
concentrated
on
the
primary
one
age
group,
although
some
critics
with
whom
I
profoundly
disagree,
will
have
believed
that
the
other
standardized
tests
are
wrong.
It
is
primarily
one
on
which
the
focus
has
fallen,
and
we
should
be
asking
ourselves
about
why
that
is.
B
B
B
It's
not
it's
not
unique
to
Scotland
so
because
I
didn't
officer
can
I
just
share
a
few
thoughts
from
a
primary
teacher
who
wrote
to
me
earlier
this
week,
but
she
told
me
that
she
was
worried
about
this
debate
in
primary
one
test
and
the
fact
that
some
politicians
maybe
misrepresenting
our
position
and
is
inexperienced
as
an
experienced
teacher
of
primary
one
and
primary.
She
asked
me
to
look
at
the
debate
from
the
best
interests
of
the
child.
B
She
said
there
have
been
some
very
good
questions
in
the
new
test,
but
there
are
others
which
have
undoubtedly
created
problems
and
which,
as
a
result,
have
been
the
catalyst
for
the
current
complaints.
In
some
of
the
questions,
the
language
used
is
not
making
use
of
the
phonic
alphabet
with
which
children
are
familiar
and
they
are
using
names
which
are
sometimes
very
hard
to
read.
Some
questions
are
too
long
taking
up
too
much
time
and
there
is
an
overemphasis
on
data
handling
within
each
assessment,
for
which
and
I
quote,
I
can't
really
understand
the
purpose.
B
A
D
B
And
on
that
last
point
it
is
very
clear
to
me
that
many
prime
primary
one
teachers
do
not
currently
feel
at
all
comfortable.
And
that's
why
this
to
be
is
so
important,
because,
when
pressed
on
some
of
the
concerns
about
the
content
of
the
current
p1
test,
John
Swinney
said
in
August
this
year
and
I
quote.
B
If
we
need
to
look
again
and
reflect
on
the
feedback
to
make
sure
that
the
guidance
is
appropriate
for
the
process,
then
we
will
do
that
to
guarantee
that
young
people
have
the
type
of
educational
experience
we
want
them
to
have
now.
I
believe
that
that
was
a
recognition
that
there
were
some
serious
issues
to
be
addressed.
He
knows
I
think
that
that
is
what
many
teachers
want
him
to
do.
B
B
We
are
listening
to
what
is
being
said
by
those
who
are
being
asked
to
deliver
the
test
and
is
why
I
am
proposing
this
motion
which
ask
the
Scottish
Government
to
stop
and
think
hold
the
primacy
on
tests
so
that
we
can
reconsider
the
facts
before
us
and
the
whole
approach
to
evaluating
people
progress
in
primary
one,
and
on
that
point,
deputy
presiding
officer,
I,
move.
The
motion
in
my
name.
A
D
Officer
I
move
the
amendment
in
my
name
and
it
is
important
to
meet
decisions
about
the
future
of
our
children's
education.
We
have
available
to
us
dispassionate
expert
opinion
in
helping
us
to
make
the
correct
choices
and
I
have
to
see
at
the
outset
of
this
debate,
having
listened
with
great
care
to
the
words
that
Liz
Smith
has
shared
with
us
today
and
with
the
degree
of
respect
that
Elizabeth
knows,
I
have
for
her
I
do
not
believe
we
have
had
the
marshalling
of
expert
opinion
in
the
debate
that
we
have
had
so
far.
D
The
Scottish
Government
in
2015
invited
the
OECD
to
review
Scottish
education
in
that
report.
Improving
schools
in
Scotland,
the
OECD
said
this.
The
light
sampling
of
literacy
and
numeracy
at
the
national
level
has
not
provided
sufficient
evidence
for
stakeholders
to
use
in
their
own
evaluative
activities
or
for
national
agencies
to
identify
with
confidence
the
areas
of
strength
they
went
on
to
say
there
needs
to
be
a
more
robust
evidence
base
right
across
the
system,
especially
about
learning
outcomes
and
progress,
crucially
about
progress.
F
A
D
D
In
the
letter
she
authored
with
my
officials
to
directors
of
Education
and
I
caught
a
key
principle
of
Scotland's
education
system
is
that
assessment
is
for
learning
assessment,
allows
teachers
to
understand
children
and
young
people's
progress
and
to
plan
the
next
phase
of
their
learning
and
teaching
assessment
is
therefore
a
key
tool
to
inform
teachers,
professional
judgment
of
the
needs
of
the
children
and
young
people.
They
are
teaching
the
Scottish
Government
and
of
the
Association
of
directors
of
Education
and
I
continue.
D
To
quote,
therefore,
see
the
assessments
as
an
integral
part
of
everyday
learning
for
children
and
young
people
and
P
1
P
4,
P,
7
and
H
3,
delivered
as
part
of
the
education
authorities
duty
to
provide
education,
the
professional
judgement
of
teachers-
and
this
is
a
point
that
loseth
made,
is
at
the
heart
of
the
framework
and
the
standardized
assessments
that
we
have
put
forward.
But
the
the
assessments
provide
a
consistent
tool
to
inform
these
judgments.
Teachers
have
been
using
assessments
for
years
to
confirm
their
judgement
of
children's
progress.
D
G
D
You
say
Quito
and
in
some
cases,
for
example,
East
Renfrewshire
or
a
long-standing
long-established,
a
cess,
Monteux
thority,
and
what
they
want
to
do
and
I
think
this
is
powerful.
A
reasonable
is
to
see
the
consistency
between
the
SNA
C
and
the
historic
model
that
they've
been
using
to
ensure
that
they
have
the
consistency
and
educational
information
and
I
think
that's
a
pair
for
a
reasonable
transition
point
for
a
local
authority
to
take,
but
not
a
long-term
point.
D
So
there's
nothing
new
about
assessments
for
p1
children,
local
authorities
laid
over
the
years
by
the
SNP
labor,
the
Conservatives
and
the
Liberals
have
all
taken
forward.
Such
an
assessment
approach
and
nobody
has
objected,
and
there
are
sound
educational
reasons
for
that,
the
key
one
being
it
is
absolutely
vital
to
get
as
much
information
as
possible
and
children's
achievement
as
early
as
possible.
Professor
sue
Els,
who
was
quoted
by
Liz
Smith,
said
this.
D
B
Cabinet
secretary,
for
giving
we
in
terms
of
raising
standards
across
the
board,
which
is
what
we
all
want
to
do,
what
evidence
has
the
cabinet
secretary
got
when
he
claims
with
international
measurements,
many
of
whom
are
not
starting
their
education
until
seven
years
old?
These
countries
are
doing
exceptionally
well
by
educational
standards
better
than
Scotland.
Does
that
not
prove
a
point
cabinet.
D
Secretary
point
goes
back
to
my
quote
from
the
OECD
at
the
very
beginning
of
my
speech,
but
essentially
we
don't
have
enough
information
about
learning
outcomes
in
progress
and
for
progress
to
be
measured.
We
have
to
have
an
understanding
about
whether
children
are
acquiring
the
skills
that
we
expect
them
to
acquire
at
the
early
level,
because
if
they
are
not
the
at
a
disadvantage
in
progressing
to
the
first
level
and
ultimately
that
will
be
compounded
and
what
that
will
fuel
is
what
we
are
trying
to
erode,
which
is
the
attainment
gap.
D
That's
been
strengthened
by
the
benchmarks
that
I've
put
in
place,
but
what
the
standardized
assessments
do
is
provide
that
consistency
and
compatibility
from
one
Authority
to
another,
so
that
we
can
be
assured.
Whatever
a
child
is
walking
into
a
school
that
the
teaching
profession
is
working
to
the
same
standard
across
the
country,
of
course,
to.
H
D
Cabinet
secretary
I'm,
seeing
nothing
of
the
sort
I'm
seeing
the
individual
teachers
in
working
their
way
through
the
assessments
will
have
greater
clarity
about
the
the
performance
of
a
young
person
against
the
standards
across
the
country,
the
benchmarks,
what
we
expect
of
curriculum
for
excellence,
not
not
the
results
across
the
country,
but
the
levels
that
have
been
achieved
by
young
people
across
the
country.
The
assessments
are
high
quality
and
delivered
as
part
of
everyday
learning.
They
provide
teachers
with
a
detailed
breakdown
against
core
skills
highly
not
on
highlighting.
D
Not
only
will
a
child
may
need
additional
support
to
achieve
the
relevant
standards,
but
with
a
child,
maybe
excelling
and
requiring
additional
challenge.
This
is
in
keeping
with
the
government's
eight
Twinings
of
closing
the
gap
and
raising
standards.
The
assessments
crucially-
and
this
relates
to
one
part
of
list
mass
motion.
The
assessments
are
designed
to
fit
compatibly
with
the
early
level
of
curriculum
for
excellence,
which
is
a
play
based
curriculum.
It
is
therefore
only
appropriate.
D
Without
that
assessment,
we
run
the
risk
that
the
needs
of
children
may
not
be
effectively
served
by
our
education
system
and
progressing
on
to
the
first
level
of
CFE
administered
correctly,
a
child
will
take
part
in
the
assessment
as
part
of
their
normal
classwork,
and
the
assessment
will
not
feel
any
different
to
any
other
task
that
a
child
is
asked
to
do
now
if
they
are
so
far
presiding
officer
with
the
educational
arguments.
Let
me
note
on
to
some
of
the
political
issues
at
stake
here.
D
I
acknowledge
the
long-standing
hostility
of
the
greens
and
the
Liberal
Democrats
on
this
question.
They
are
entitled
to
their
view,
but
I
do
not
share
it.
I
point
out
to
them
that
they
are
hostile
to
all
standardized
assessments
and
they're
being
asked
to
vote
for
that
in
the
conservative
motion
today.
I
am,
however,
today,
appalled
at
the
conservative
party,
when
the
first
minister
announced
national
standardized
assessment
in
September,
2015
Ruth
Davidson
responded
in
the
chamber
saying
this
I'm
pleased
that
are
repeated
and
sustained
calls
for
standardized
assessments
to
be
introduced
in
schools
have
been
heeded.
D
The
conservative
manifesto
in
2016
said
the
Scottish
government
should
design
the
new
standardized
tests
at
P,
1
P
4
P
7
its
afferent
International
methodologies
and
claimed
credit
for
the
introduction
of
national
assessment.
This
morning,
Liz
Smith
said
the
Conservatives
had
changed
their
mind
on
P
1
assessment.
That
was
not
what
she
said
on
the
28th
of
August.
That
day,
Liz
must
said
this.
The
Scottish
Conservatives
have
never
been
in
favor
of
formal
standardized,
national
tests
and
primary
one.
That
statement
is
untrue.
It
demonstrates
the
deceit
at
the
heart
of
the
conservative
motion
today.
D
Last
week
last
week
last
week
the
Conservatives
were
demanding
more
school
data.
This
week
they
want
lace
in
2016
the
Conservatives
supported
p1
assessment.
Today
they
don't,
there
is
only
one
conclusion
to
draw
the
Conservatives
support
playing
politics
with
the
education
of
our
children
and
we
will
not
play
along
with
them.
A
Can
I
say,
can
I
say
speakers
I've,
given
a
little
extra
telling,
which
also
Miss
Smith
you
could
have
had,
because
we
had
some
time
in
hand,
and
there
was
a
lot
of
intervention.
So
I'm
just
wondering
why
the
time
has
been
like
that,
it's
to
take
account
of
interventions
and
I'll
call
Ian
V,
please
mr.
grey
Thank.
G
You
presiding
officer,
let
me
begin
by
being
clear
that
we,
on
this
side
of
the
chamber
have
no
problem
with
teachers
assessing
pupils
learning.
Indeed,
teachers
assess
pupils
learning
every
day
using
a
whole
variety
of
techniques
and
diagnostic
methodologies,
but
above
all,
by
deploying
their
professional
expertise
to
do
so.
Secondly,
we
have
no
problem
with
the
monitoring
of
literacy
and
numeracy
standards
in
our
schools.
In
fact,
we
encourage
her
and
not
just
nationally
either.
G
G
That's
why
in
government
we
got
rid
of
it
in
2003
and
replaced
it
with
the
literacy
and
numeracy
survey,
which
led
the
job
well
and
a
statistically
rigorous
way
accepted
by
teachers,
educationalists
and
parents
alike,
and
which
the
scottish
government
did
not
improve,
as
the
OECD
suggested,
but
rather
abolished,
know
our
problem
and
so
as
the
Scottish
Government's
national
standardized
tests,
because
they
purport
to
do
both
of
these
things
to
inform
individual
learning.
Antimony
international
standards,
at
the
same
time,
with
the
same
taste
now
James
mics
them
were
in
state
of
politics,
John
Swinney.
D
Agree
forgiving,
wind
and
he
he
says
that
we
essentially
used
the
standardized
assessments
to
judge
performance
across
the
country.
That's
not
the
case.
What
we
use
is
the
information
from
teacher
professional
judgment
about
the
rich,
the
the
the
achievement
of
levels
by
individual
pupils.
That
is
what
was
undertaken
but
witnessed
ugly,
except
from
me
that
these
salaries
that
he
cites
do
not
give
us
an
insight
into
individual
weakness
within
the
system
where,
if
we
want
to
improve
outcomes
for
young
people,
we
need
to
have
that
data
available
to
us.
We.
G
Certainly
well,
the
survey
certainly
isn't
the
diagnostic
learning
tool
and
never
claimed
to
be
it's
a
summative
survey
tool
and
let
me
go
into
a
little
detail
later:
oh
and
obey
exactly
that.
James
Mason
once
said
of
politics,
if
you
can
trade,
two
horses
at
once,
you
shouldn't
be
in
the
circus.
Mr.
Sweeney
has
failed
to
raid
the
two
horses
of
individual
diagnostic
and
national
standards
testing
at
once,
and
that
is
resulted
in
the
current
maze
and
some
farcical
moments.
Frankly,
such
as
mr.
G
Sweeney's
press
release
telling
us
these
tests
are
not
tests
and
we
should
stop
calling
them
tests.
On
the
very
day
his
Department
released
an
evaluation
of
them,
calling
them
tastes
or
telling
parents
who
asked
if
they
were
compulsory,
that
they
are
not
compulsory,
but
that
those
parents
have
no
right
to
refuse
to
allow
their
child
to
do
them.
That
is,
he
riddle,
not
an
answer
or
yesterday's
desperation
of
Scottish
government
officials
quitting
ms
peas
and
journalists
through
a
literacy
and
numeracy
test
for
five-year-olds,
as
if
that
would
prove
anything.
Mr.
G
Sweeney
has
told
Parliament
clearly
that
these
are
diagnosed
and
a
quote
diagnostic
assessments
to
support.
Learning
and
teaching
data
will
not
be
published
or
used
for
accountability,
but
the
first
minister
says
something
different.
He
says
as
a
result
of
the
introduction
of
standard
assessment
and
the
new
way
we're
monitoring
performance.
Instead
of
the
previous
Scottish
survey
of
literacy
and
numeracy
data,
we
will
now
have
data
on
every
people
in
the
country
which
will
allow
us
to
determine
progress
and
reducing
the
attainment
gap.
G
So
the
first
minister
thinks
these
are
statistically
valid
results
to
monitor
progress
nationally.
Well,
the
Deputy
First
Minister
swears
to
us
that
they
are
not.
The
truth
is
that
the
government
has
managed
to
introduce
assessments
which
feel
like
high-stakes
tests
to
teachers
and
pupils,
but
don't
produce
statistically
valid
comparative
measurements
and
diagnostic
tests,
which
teachers
tell
us.
They
do
not
trust
the
diagnose
and
have
not
replaced
those
tests
that
they
were
using.
Those
assessment
story
that
they
were
using
previously.
G
The
Deputy
First
Minister
says
that
these
are
not
summative
assessments
against
benchmarks
with
our
past
peel.
But
what
we
were
shown
yesterday
was
the
teacher
sheet
for
each
pupil,
which
is
he
list
of
curriculum
for
excellence
benchmarks
with
a
tech
or
a
cross
against
each
one
according
to
whether
it
was
passed
or
failed
and
then
was
the
pupil
placed
against
in
national
norm.
We
were
shown
results
being
collected
at
clasp,
school
and
local
authority
level.
That
works
like
summative
norm
reference
testing
to
me,
but
to
be
honest,
what
I
think
of
the
assessments
isn't
important?
D
Swinney
I'm
grateful
to
mr.
gray.
Forgive
me
I
I
acknowledge
that
there
are
many
teachers
that
don't
like
the
standardized
assessments.
There
are
equally
many
other
teachers
that
do,
and
the
issue
is
illustrated
for
me
to
this
morning
as
the
Scottish
learning
festival,
where
I
was
open
to
question
from
a
huge
audience
of
teachers
and
in
the
first
two
equations,
one
teacher
made
the
case
for
and
wanted
to
make
the
case
against.
So
there
are
different
opinions.
G
Mr.
Sweeney,
what
is
important
is
when
an
educational
reform
is
built
in
the
evidence
and
the
consensus
and
support
of
her
is
built
first
before
is
introduced
and
not
after
he
is
who
represent
teachers
only
a
couple
weeks
ago
reaffirmed
their
serious
concerns
over
the
educational
values
of
the
National
standardized
assessments.
They
wrote
to
every
member
of
this
Parliament
to
do
it.
One
teacher
summed
up
to
me
by
saying:
I
cannot
use
the
data
from
these
tests
to
support
my
teaching
in
any
way
and
that
teachers
view
was
repeating
to
mr.
G
Sweeney
this
morning
that
that
very
learning
festival
wasn't
it,
but
so
these
problems
and
floors
apply
to
the
whole
of
the
Scottish
national
standardized
assessments,
but
more
than
any
where
they
apply
in
p1,
and
there
are
a
couple
of
reasons
for
that.
Firstly,
because
there
are
many
stories
of
four
and
five-year-olds
upset
even
to
the
point
of
tears
by
questions
they
find
in
comprehensible
or
confusing
and
computer
skills,
they
are
required
and
find
daunting.
G
Secondly,
this
is
men
there,
and
primarily
one
far
from
these
assessments
been
an
integral
part
of
everyday
teaching.
Teachers
tell
us
they
have
lost
thirty,
forty,
even
fifty
hours
of
valuable
teaching
time
for
each
of
the
literacy
and
numeracy
numeracy
text.
But
thirdly,
and
above
all,
as
verse
must
said,
because
of
the
growing
evidence
that
at
this
early
age,
plea
based
learning
is
the
most
appropriate
and
effective
approach
to
education
in
general
and
closing
the
attainment
gap.
In
particular.
G
So
even
if
the
government
is
system
persisting
with
these
tests
further
up
the
school,
where
we
try
to
sort
out
what
they're
really
supposed
to
be
at
the
very
least
that
very
minimum,
surely
they
must
listen
to
the
teachers
whose
professional
expertise?
Mr.
Sweeney
claims
to
hold
in
high
regard
and
scrap
the
test
and
primary
one.
J
Ruff
career,
Thank,
You
presiding
officer,
I'm
glad
that
we
have
the
opportunity
this
afternoon
to
debate
the
issue
of
standardized
assessments.
After
weeks
of
this
debate
taking
place
between
those
of
us
who
speak
on
education
issues
but
outside
of
the
Parliament,
as
the
Deputy
First
Minister
made
clear,
the
Scottish
Greens
have
long
been
clear
that
we
opposed
this
policy.
Well,
he
wasn't
clear
correct
to
say,
though,
was
the
in
supporting
the
motion
put
down
and
Wes
Smith's
name.
We
support
standardized
assessments.
You
will
not
find
that
phrase
in
the
motion.
J
I'll
read
the
first
phrase
of
it
that
the
Parliament
believes
that
good-quality
pupil
assessment
is
an
essential
component
of
the
drive
to
raise
educational
standards
and
Scotland
schools.
We
agree.
We
do
not
believe
that
that
assessment
should
take
place
through
these
formalized
standard
assessments.
There's
no
contradiction
there
and
I'll
explain
why
as
I
go
through,
this
there's
been
much
talk
of
manifestos
well
in
our
2016
manifesto,
a
finally
that
I'd
recommend
to
the
government.
We
unequivocally
opposed
the
return
of
standardized
assessments
and
not
just
four
four
and
five
year
olds.
J
We
welcome
the
parliamentary
majority,
which
is
now
formed
around
this
position
in
regards
to
the
p1
assessment.
Specifically,
though,
the
Scottish
Government
have
been
keen,
including
this
debate,
to
say
that
the
policy
is
evidence-based,
but
it's
international
best
practice
and
evidence
that
led
the
greens
to
oppose
standardized
testing
in
the
first
place
to
take
off
one
particular
coucher
of
Education
debates.
Finland
is
one
of
the
undisputed
success
stories
of
education
reform,
turning
from
mediocre
at
best
in
the
80s,
it's
a
model
of
excellence
from
the
early
2000s
onwards.
J
Well,
there
are
a
range
of
factors
contributing
to
their
success:
war,
levels
of
inequality
and
poverty
being
the
most
obvious,
they've
supported
that
success
in
education.
Their
approach
to
standardized
tests
are
part
of
that
story
that
success
story.
Finnish
education
was
reformed:
Telo
teachers,
the
freedom
test,
people's
based
on
their
own
best
judgment,
standardized
testing,
was
dropped
and
replaced
with
an
emphasis
on
continuous
informal
assessment
of
the
individual
needs
of
each
pupil.
Our
education
committee
visited
Finland
earlier
this
year
during
that
visit.
J
I
think
we
were
all
struck
by
the
culture
of
trust
within
their
system,
particularly
trust
in
classroom
teachers.
Too,
with
proper
resourcing
support
and
training
come
to
their
own
judgments
about
their
own
pupils,
and
this
is
what
we
need
in
Scotland,
particularly
for
children,
with
additional
support
needs
for
whom
the
tests
cause
even
more
unnecessary
anxiety,
well
trained
teachers
and
well
staffed.
Schools
are
what
we
need
to
ensure
every
additional
need
is
identified
and
supported.
That
means
reversing
the
cuts
which
have
seen
educational
psychologists
and
the
grant
associated
with
studying
that
course
disappear.
J
The
reason
Finland
took
the
approach
they
have
is
that
well,
some
standardized
assessments
may
provide
some
data
that
can
be
useful.
A
criticism
that's
been
levied
against
these
assessments
of
courses.
They
don't
provide
that,
but
the
very
presence
of
the
tests
and
the
impact
they
have
on
people
experienced
in
teaching
is
a
net.
Negative
pupils
often
react
badly
to
the
tests,
some
experience,
anxiety
and
fear,
and
others
that
elicits
boredom,
and
we
knew
this
already,
the
rewarding
from
the
Scottish
Government's
own
international
advisers.
Before
the
policy
was
introduced.
J
Professor
and
the
Hargreaves,
a
member
of
the
government's
International
Council
of
education
experts,
highlighted
the
fear
and
anxiety
the
standardized
tests
caused
for
pupils.
Other
academics.
The
EIS,
the
experience
of
individual
teachers
and
pupils
have
all
confirmed
this
now.
We've
all
heard
the
reports
of
young
children
being
reduced
to
the
point
in
some
cases
of
tears
and
experiencing
huge
anxiety
over
these
tests,
but
teachers
are
also
pressured,
whether
intentionally
or
not,
to
teach
to
the
test.
J
The
focus
becomes
setting
some
predefined
metric,
as
ingredie
explained,
regardless
of
its
suitability
to
the
pupil
that
they
know
and
that
they
know
best
their
own
professional
judgment
of
individual
pupils.
One
of
the
principles
under
planning
curriculum
for
excellence
when
we
all
agree
on
is
undermined
by
this
policy.
The
Deputy
First
Minister
can
give
all
the
assurances
he
likes
on
how
standardized
tests
will
be
used.
But
the
very
presence
of
the
assessment
creates
the
pressure
to
teach
to
that,
rather
than
to
emphasize
the
needs
of
the
individual
pupil
themselves.
J
Teachers
are
concerned
that
the
results
of
assessments,
far
beyond
the
primary
one
level,
will
be
used
by
senior
management
and
others
to
form
judgment
on
their
professional
ability
as
well,
because
the
data
can
be
aggregated
to
a
class
level.
This
is
what
creates
the
pressure
to
teach
to
the
test.
There
are
also
well
grounded
fears
that,
although
there's
no
intention
for
now
to
return
to
eat
tables
that
this
sets
the
groundwork
for
future
week,
tables
and
informal
tables
may
begin
to
emerge.
J
The
presence
of
standardized
tests
pushes
education
to
become
target
driven
level
abstracted
from
the
needs
of
individual
pupils.
Let's
cut
straight
to
the
heart
of
what
we
want
Scottish
education
to
be.
Do
we
want
a
culture
of
repeated
formal
assessments
and
pressure
heaped
on
pupils
throughout
their
entire
school
life,
or
a
culture
of
tailored
support
that
recognizes
the
individual
capability
of
students
and
relies
on
teachers
professional
judgment
to
foster
their
learning
as
curriculum
for
excellence?
Intense?
J
What
I
find
protective
frustrating
about
the
introduction
of
these
standardized
tests
is
all
the
issues
I've
highlighted
we're
already
well
known.
As
mentioned,
members
of
the
government's
known
international
Council
of
experts
have
been
at
the
forefront
of
some
of
these
criticisms
and
I
appreciate
that
there
are
some
experts,
including
on
the
government's
claim,
so
who
do
support
approaches
of
standardized
assessments.
The
government's
already
drawn
attention
to
a
number
of
them.
J
I
respect
their
views
and
I,
don't
doubt
for
a
second
their
expertise
in
this
field,
but
the
question
must
be
asked:
why
is
the
government
ignoring
the
other
assembled
experts?
Why
is
it
ignoring
the
voices
of
teachers
of
pupils?
Why
is
it
ignoring
those
in
Scottish
education
who
are
saying
there
is
a
problem?
Just
this
morning
our
Education
Committee
heard
from
Professor
James
Carr
over
Mandela's,
or
they
mentioned
that
he
said
that
he'd
not
seen
sufficient
evidence
that
these
assessments
are
beneficial.
We
also
heard
from
dr.
J
Allan
Breton,
who
said
that
he's
not
seen
evidence
of
consultation
and
consensus
building
on
this
policy.
That's
a
polite
understatement.
If
I've
ever
heard
one
teachers,
parents,
education,
charities,
they've
all
raised
concerns
and
called
for
the
P
1
test
to
be
scrapped
after
today's
debate,
a
majority
of
this
Parliament
can
be
added
to
that
ever-growing
list
of
those
callin
for
a
rethink.
Well,
many
of
us
have
concerns
far
beyond
primary
one
assessments.
This
is
what
the
debate
is
focused
on
and
I'd
urged
the
Deputy
First
Minister
to
walk
back.
J
His
previously
stated
intentions
to
ignore
the
well
of
this
Parliament.
After
the
shambles
of
his
education,
bow,
which
you
now
attempt
to
force
through
the
majority
of
without
parliamentary
mandate,
mr.
Slaney
is
developing
a
reputation
for
casting
aside
the
views
of
elected
as
well
as
those
of
experts,
teachers,
parents
and
pupils.
That's
no
way
to
build
a
successful
system
of
Education.
It's
certainly
not
building
a
consensus.
It
will
result
in
the
opposite
of
Finland's
culture
of
trust.
J
K
Off
so
can
I
thank
Liz
Smith
for
bringing
forward
this
debate
today.
Indeed,
if
the
Scottish
government
had
been
so
sure
of
its
grounds,
it
could
have
brought
forward
this
debate
in
at
any
point
in
the
last
number
of
weeks
and
then
in
fairness.
Mr.
Sweeney
wouldn't
have
had
to
miss
the
learning
festival
this
afternoon.
They
may
want
to
reflect
on
the
benefits
of
actually
leading
the
debate
where
they're
so.
K
Of
the
arguments
they
want
to
make
a
retired
Enver
teacher
I
know
now
provides
support
to
local
schools.
Here
in
the
capital
paid
for
through
the
government's
education
fund,
a
teaming
fund
in
the
last
year.
She
has
spent
more
time
helping
five-year-old
girls
and
boys
sit
their
primary
one
test
than
on
the
jobs.
She
was
employed
by
the
City
Council
to
do
on
Monday
I
sat
down
with
local
primary
one
teachers
at
horn,
and
they
showed
me
the
reality
of
these
tests
for
five-year-olds
I
completely.
K
Four
primary
1
testing
nor
they
pointed
out,
had
the
government
followed
a
reasonable
principle
and
piloted
such
an
initiative
to
judge
its
effectiveness.
Now
the
principal
I
share
with
most
teachers
and
parents
is
that
four
and
five
year
old
girls
and
boys
should
encounter
a
play-based
approach
to
the
start
of
school
curriculum
for
excellence,
early
level
for
three
to
six
year
olds,
stresses
exploration
and
yet
teachers
explain
that
climber,
e1
tests,
skew
learning
away
from
play
and
I,
therefore
don't
recognize
or
agree
with
Deputy
First
Minister
interpretation
of
that
in
his
remarks
earlier
on.
K
There
is
a
wider
debate
about
why
Scotland
persists
with
the
age
of
five
beings,
the
formal
start
to
education.
Many
countries
around
the
world
88%,
indeed
structure
a
play
based
nursery
or
preschool
curriculum
through
to
six
years
old.
Some
countries
start
formal
education
at
seven.
So
yes
course
John.
L
I
K
Mr.
Mason
would
do
well
to
read
the
curriculum
for
excellence
guidelines
in
the
three
to
six
year
old
program,
and
he
would
understand
the
answer
that
question
before
he
needs
to
ask
it.
Teachers
assess
nursery
teachers,
assess
all
the
time.
That
is
the
point
of
this
and
I.
Don't
understand,
frankly,
why?
Members,
on
those
benches,
don't
get
that
point?
K
What
is
the
reality
of
testing
rather
than
a
civil
service
tutorial
yesterday,
I
have
listened
but
I'm
sure
I'm,
not
the
only
opposition
member
I
have
listened,
not
just
in
this
past
week,
but
for
weeks
and
weeks
/
months,
two
primary
want
teachers
and
school
management
teams
about
the
reality
of
testing.
There
is
a
balance
to
the
argument.
The
former
standardized
assessment
was
for
some
teachers,
a
genuine
diagnosis,
but
teachers
have
graphically
explained
that
what
went
before
is
quite
different
from
the
new
national
standardized
tests
now
in
classrooms
and
to
suggest
otherwise
is
simply
misleading.
K
The
parents
group
up
star
also
contends
that
local
authority
baseline
testing
is
partly
responsible
for
the
lack
of
play
based
teaching
in
many
schools.
The
structure
of
these
tests
assume
five
year
old
girls
and
boys.
Can
read,
use
a
mouse
have
an
attention
span
that
will
last
the
length
of
the
test
and
will
not
simply
guess
the
answer
wrong
on
all
counts,
as
many
teachers
observe
the
Scottish
government
have
repeatedly
claimed.
Indeed,
the
Deputy
First
Minister
did
so
again
today
that
the
test
takes
less
than
an
hour
per
pupil.
K
Indeed,
I
heard
the
guy
heard
the
first
ministers
names
an
average
of
20
minutes.
I
can
find
new
teacher
who
confirms
that
fact
in
a
class
of
twenty
one,
primary
one
pupils
of
varying
abilities,
the
average
time
I
understand
is
an
hour
per
pupil,
not
thirty
minutes,
not
under
an
hour,
but
an
hour
yeah.
D
Mr.
Scott
was
quite
right
to
place
on
evidence
and
the
government
has
and
either
has
answered
or
is
about
to
answer
a
FOIA
request,
which
demonstrates
the
data
that
is
available,
which
shows
the
average
time
for
ap1
assessment,
and
numeracy
is
twenty
two
minutes
and
in
literacy,
it's
twenty
seven
minutes
and
that's
across
an
in
excess
of
a
hundred
thousand
individual
assessments
and
that
information
is
in
the
public
domain.
Travis.
K
Average
I
think
was
the
word
used,
but
will
will
be
very
happy,
will
be
very
hard
to
look
at
the
look
at
the
evidence
on
that.
But
all
I'm
saying
was
the
Sweeney
is
I,
have
plenty
of
teachers,
not
just
in
cheffing
but
all
over
the
country
who,
time
and
time
tell
me
again
that
the
it
takes
more
than
an
hour
per
pupil
and
here's
the
point.
It's
not
just
the
time
it
takes
for
the
pupil.
K
It's
the
time
the
teacher
takes
out
of
the
classroom
when
he
or
she
could
be
teaching
the
other
pupils
in
her
class
and
I.
Think
that's
the
important
point
that
the
minister
gave
no
recognition
for
in
his
remarks
earlier
today
time
that
the
teacher
could
be
spending
with
21
other
pupils,
as
opposed
to
taking
the
individual
pupil
bit
by
bit
through
that
test.
Twenty
two
minutes,
twenty
seven
minutes
or
an
hour
come
with
what
it
is.
That
is
time
not
spent
in
the
classroom.
K
It
is
wrong,
therefore,
to
underestimate
and
I
believe
disparage
the
evidence
of
class
teachers
everywhere
that
the
time
T
Khan
primary
one
tests
is
time
lost
to
teaching
and
therefore
to
the
educational
advancement
of
those
five-year-olds
testing.
Five
rules
also
is
particularly
demanding
on
teachers
in
composit
classes.
Many
in
many
parts
of
Scotland
the
fact
that
simply
hasn't
been
recognized
as
yet
by
the
government.
So
there
are
sensible
educational
arguments
why
this
p1
testing
regime
is
not
appropriate
and
should
be
stopped.
K
The
principle
of
the
argument
does
not
support
testing
five-year-olds
anyway,
but
the
practical
case
against
testing
five
rules
is
overwhelming.
I
had
a
loss
to
understand
why
the
government
are
deaf
to
the
practical
observations
or
teachers
and
parents.
The
language
ministers
have
use
to
to
suggest
that
anyone
who
even
considers
that
p1
testing
is
wrong
has
been
extraordinarily
aggressive.
Many
teachers
have
asked
me:
why
is
that
the
case?
There
are
sensible
educational
turreted
that
help
primary
one
teacher
judgment
in
a
constant
evaluation
of
their
class.
K
Why,
for
example,
don't
ministers
instead
listen
carefully
to
teachers
using
the
Northern
Alliance
literacy
program?
It
is
constructive
and
it
is
helpful.
It
helps
teachers
with
their
pupils,
as
one
teacher
put
it
to
me
the
other
day.
Why
doesn't
the
government
embrace
and
support
the
things
that
work
and
help
us,
rather
than
imposing
tests
on
us
that
don't
tell
us
anything
about
our
class
that
we
don't
already
know?
What
is
the
government's
case
for
testing
five
adult
girls
and
boys?
Is
it
about
the
data
they
want?
One
of
mr.
K
Swedes
officials
has
helpfully
explained
today
that
how
school
league
tables
could
be
calculated
using
the
data
from
these
tests.
Mr.
Sweeny
made
much
of
that
today,
it
looks
to
me
like
the
remorseless
direction
of
travel
tests
are
not
appropriate
for
primary
one
girls
and
boys.
The
government
should
accept
that
and
should
accept
the
will
of
this
Parliament.
I
M
You,
deputy
presiding
officer,
I'm
Griffith
the
opportunity
to
contribute
to
this
debate
on
p1
testing.
Now
they
do
that
from
the
perspective
of
someone
who
is
two
children
in
primary
school
today
and
something
he's
also
married
to
a
primary
school
teacher.
So
what
happens
in
our
primary
schools
is,
if
keen
personal
interest
to
me,
it's
all,
obviously
being
of
wider
political
importance
and
their
starting
point
for
this
debate.
It's
make
it
clear
that
we
on
this
side
of
the
chamber
to
support
standardized
assessments
as
master
principals,
Liz,
Smith,
Sato
and
I
know.
M
There
are
other
parties
here
who
take
a
different
view.
We've
really
cared
from
them
this
afternoon,
but
our
position
is
that
there's
great
value
in
standard
assessments
further
up
the
school.
These
assessments
can
be
a
value
to
individual
teachers.
They
can
help
parents
and
understanding
what
stage
their
children
are
at
and,
equally
importantly,
they
can
give
an
overall
picture
of
performance
across
the
whole
country.
Now
we've
heard
the
cabinet
secretary
say
type.
Why
he
believes
standardized
assessment
is
important.
M
I
have
sympathy
for
his
argument
and
deed
agreed
with
a
lot
of
the
points
he
made,
but
this
does
fly
in
the
face
of
decisions
which
were
taken
by
him
and
his
predecessors
in
office
in
order
to
reduce
the
amount
of
information
that
was
available.
The
scottish
survey
of
literacy
and
numeracy
was
scrapped.
Scotland
was
removed
by
mr.
Sweeney's
predecessor
in
office
from
the
international
Tim
study.
That's
trains
in
international,
mathematics
and
science
study
and
pearls
progress,
an
international
reading
literacy
study,
which
provided
an
important
comparison
with
other
countries.
M
M
Well,
this
debate
is
not
about
standard
assessments
in
themselves
as
its
focus
instead
entirely
on
this
one
question,
our
standard
assessments
appropriate
at
primary
one
level
and
here's
where
we
depart
from
the
cabinet
secretary,
because
the
evidence
we've
heard
from
those
involved
in
education
and
particularly
from
teachers
in
the
front
line,
is
that
there
are
real
issues
with
standard
assessments
for
primary
one
as
they
exist.
We
know
that
the
is
opposes
these
tests.
M
Her
concerns
within
appropriateness
of
this
form
of
testing
at
p1
level
and
I
cannot
see
why
testing
like
this
is
necessary,
because
any
primary
one
teacher
worth
their
salt
will
within
a
few
weeks,
if
not
indeed
days
of
new
people
starting
in
school,
have
a
very
strong
grasp
on
their
individual
abilities.
It
is
precisely
because
we
have
well
trained
and
committed
primary
one
teachers
that
we
should
have
confidence.
They
are
picking
up
those
children
who
are
doing
well,
those
children
who
are
struggling
and
those
who
will
need
additional
support
and
it's
very
difficult
to
see.
M
There's
not
a
large
majority
of
parents
and
pupils
participating.
So
the
policy
objective
is
defeated,
because
parents
vote
with
their
feet.
In
approaching
this
issue,
the
Scottish
conservatives
believe
we
should
listen
to
the
evidence.
My
colleague
Liz
Smith
said
earlier.
We
did
say
in
2016.
We
would
support
p1
tests.
I
mean
I,
accept
that
was
wrong.
We've
listened
to
the
evidence
and
we've
changed
our
minds.
We
realize
we
got
that
wrong.
M
So
what
the
cabinet's
actually
seems
to
be
telling
to
us
is
it's
all
right
for
him
to
change
his
mind
about
the
way
forward,
but
when
other
parties
change
their
mind,
they're
not
permitted
to
do
so.
That
seems
an
extraordinary
set
of
double
standards.
Even
for
this
government
and
the
cabinet
secretary
went
further
because
he
used
extraordinary
language
this
afternoon
he
accused
the
Conservatives
of
deceit,
because
we
changed
our
mind.
He
should
be
apologize
for
that
remark.
D
Didn't
accuse
the
conservatives
of
the
seat
for
changing
their
mind.
I
accused
the
consensus
deceit
because
listeth
said
on
the
20th
of
August.
The
Scottish
Conservatives
had
never
been
in
favor
of
formal
standardized
national
tastes
and
model
freezer
in
his
hysterical
speech
has
just
confirmed,
has
just
confirmed
that
very
hot.
M
Just
do
this
much
and
the
SM
please
approach
to
education.
We
support
many
of
their
ideas
about
improving
school
autonomy,
empowering
head
teachers
or
putting
a
renewed
focus
on
literacy,
numeracy
ideas,
we've
championed
for
years,
so
now
reports
for
education.
We
can
hardly
be
accused
of
putting
politics
before
the
interests
of
young
people,
because
our
track
record
speaks
for
itself.
So
this
vote
today
is
not
a
vote
about
party
politics,
as
the
cabinet
secretary
claimed.
O
You
presiding
officer,
I've,
listened
with
them
chased
across
the
chamber
this
afternoon.
Hoping
I
would
get
some
enlightenment
as
to
the
positions
of
the
parties
regarding
national
testing
anama
feet
an
amine
as
confused
as
I
was
before.
I
came
to
the
chamber
this
afternoon
and
about
reflection
of
my
own
expense.
O
My
son
went
through
five
to
14
M
curriculum
I
was
provided
with
report
cards
for
him
every
year
and
it
would
stay
that
he
was
working
towards
a
particular
level
5
to
14,
including
at
preschool
when
he's
working
towards
level
B,
and
what
that
told
me
was
that
he
was
working
at
the
appropriate
level,
but
also
that
he
had
been
assessed
by
the
teacher
formally
as
part
of
that
process.
For
that,
and
that
was
happening
from
plainly
one
eye.
They
discovered
that
there
were
other
testings
going
on
of
pupils
across
North
Management
at
that
time.
O
I
had
never
heard
of
them
before
the
cat
testing
and
my
son
was
undergoing
and
might
rephrase
I
talked
about
kids
importing
with
her
feet.
I
wish
I
had
that
option,
because
actually
I
knew
nothing
about
that.
It
was
hidden
to
parents.
We
weren't
given
any
information,
but
when
this
was
happening,
we
weren't
given
any
information
about
the
results
of
that
testing.
O
It
was
completely
a
black
box
in
education
and
having
done
research
on
it,
I
decided
as
a
parent
that
I
thought
I
listened
to
the
arguments
for
the
assessments
and
realized
that
they
were
probably
to
my
son's
benefit
and
I
made
that
decision,
but
that
was
not
apparent
to
most
parents.
What
we
have
now
is
a
system
that
parents
know
exactly
what
is
happening
in
English
schools.
O
They
can
get
the
results
and
they
can
see
an
assessment
of
how
their
child
is
doing,
and
that
is
much
much
more
transparent
than
what
was
happening
before
it
now.
I'm.
Sorry,
mr.
key
I
I
don't
have
enough
time
and
the
the
other
thing
that
concerned
me
as
a
peon
was
the
cost
of
these
tests,
and-
and
it's
been
mentioned
today,
somehow,
uniquely
the
tests
have
been
brought
forward
by
this
government
cause
extreme
stress,
an
extra
time
and
extra
and
resources
for
the
classrooms,
and
it's
too
and
up
all
this
time.
O
But
actually-
and
you
know,
there's
been
no
assessment
of
what
happened
before
with
other
testing
that
was
going
on
I'm
in
the
dark,
but
there's
no,
no
I
won't
be
taking
an
intervention.
Thank
you.
So,
when
looking
at
this
I
I
remembered
in
a
that
I'm,
there
had
been
some
work
done
on
the
cost
of
national
testing
and
in
a
June
2005
the
test
times,
Educational
Supplement
Scotland
had
done
a
survey
of
local
authorities
and
32
local
authorities
had
found.
O
The
standardized
testing
was
costing
councils
over
a
million
pounds
a
year
and
the
truth
courses
Scottish
brush
was
likely
to
be
higher
because
indeed
and
priest
Galloway
client
management,
sterling
hadn't
responded
to
those
FOI
requests.
Other
local
authorities,
including
Glasgow
and
pare
thinking
Ross,
didn't
disclose
the
cause
because
they
carried
out
testing
on
a
school
by
school
basis.
So
did
that
commit
the
school
budget
to
commit
the
education
partner
of
the
local
authority
I'm.
None.
O
The
wiser
tests
also
showed
it
was
on
an
increased
north
asia
had
been
looking
and
for
a
thority
weighted
thought
in
order
that
they
could
inform
the
assessment
of
how
their
learning
and
teaching
was
happening
in
that
a
local
authority.
Of
course,
that
was
a
labourer,
controlled
local
authority
and
they
would
be
carrying
assessments
in
P,
1,
P,
P,
P,
7,
P,
7,
P,
5,
P,
7,
an
ant
a
stew,
so
a
labor
come
to
all
authority,
but
they
would
come
today
and
see
that
they
don't
agree
was
play
me.
O
What
the
survey
children
test
was
that
testing
was
not
alien
to
the
culture
of
Scottish
teaching
or
the
Scottish
teaching
profession,
but
instead
of
buying
in
the
from
the
lakes
of
Durham
University,
to
make
some
organizations
and
tests
without
benchmarking,
across
local
sororities
or
across
Scotland.
We
now
have
a
standardized
test
that
can
be
used
by
by
everyone
and
across
Scotland
as
a
whole,
but
Li.
You
can
just
point
to
some
of
the
councils
that
were
doing
they
said
no,
as
I
said,
Libre
and
correlation
claiming
one
testing.
O
Westlaw
diem
was
spending
a
hundred
thousand
pounds
a
year
again,
claiming
he
wasn't:
testing
Libre
Lake
later
council
Aberdeenshire
spending
90
thousand
pounds
a
year.
A
conservative,
unlimited
coalition,
aberdeen
city
was
using
ninety
five
thousand
pounds
and
tastes
again
elaborate
labour
and
conservative
coalition.
Yet
the
Conservatives
are
coming
here
today
and
saying
they
don't
believe
in
plainly
one
tasting
either
the
opposition
parties
are
completely
unaware
of
what
the
road
administration's
and
local
authorities
are
doing
in
their
classrooms,
or
they
have
come
here
only
to
have
what
the
first.
O
Must
the
First
Minister
just
described
as
political
opportunism
I,
don't
find
either
of
these
positions,
particularly
edifying
presiding
officer
I.
Don't
think
it
seriously
young
people
of
Scotland
to
be
having
this
debate
and
this
cordon
takes
when
this
has
been
a
standard
practice.
If
there
are
improvements
to
be
made,
let's
meet
them,
but
have
a
fundamental
position
against
primary.
When
teaching.
P
P
So
I
would
like
to
begin
with
a
note
of
consensus,
because
the
exhausting
still
mates
of
political
debate
surrounding
Scottish
education
meatza
because
our
teachers
deserve
it
and
because
what
our
pupils
it
is
imperative
that
every
political
party
focuses
on
the
practicalities
of
closing
the
poverty-related
attainment
gap,
but
perhaps
professor
Lindsey
Patterson
could
at
best
last
week
when
he
said
the
simple
fact
as
unpalatable
as
that
might
be.
For
many
politicians
and
teaching
unions
is
that
education
can't
do
without
tests.
P
Only
reliable
data
from
scientifically
standardized
tests
can
enable
us
to
learn
from
both
the
failures
and
the
successes.
Assessments
call
it
what
you
will
are
not
new
in
the
senior
phase
of
our
curriculum.
We
expect
people
to
be
ready
to
sit
final
examinations
at
national
five,
higher
and
advanced
higher
level
respectively.
Assessment
I'd
like
to
make
some
progress
assessment,
is
a
golden
thread
running
through
our
education
system
as
a
child
progresses
their
educate.
Their
teacher
assesses
their
progress
and
our
teachers
have
always
been
entrusted
to
do
that
in
Fife.
P
This
has
been
completed
in
our
primary
schools.
Historically,
through
assessment
is
for
excellence
developed
by
Durham
University,
but
across
the
country.
As
my
colleague
Bruce
crawford
alluded
to,
29-32
local
authorities
use
some
form
of
standardized
assessment
to
benchmark
people
progress.
So
we
know
this
is
not
something
new
under
assessment
under
curriculum
for
excellence.
P
However,
a
change
in
its
very
nature
on
what
might
have
been
an
end
of
unit
test
and
s4
became
an
outcome
and
assessment
standard
which
pupils
had
to
overcome
in
order
to
gain
unit
passes
and
therefore
to
be
presented
for
the
final
examination.
If
a
pupil
did
not
pass
these
units
and
an
added
value
unit
or
an
unnatural
four
or
an
assignment
in
national
fight,
then
they
could
not
gain
fill
course
award
and
in
some
circumstances
they
would
not
be
permitted
to
sit
the
final
examination.
P
The
education
secretary
was
therefore
right
through
remove
this
unnecessary
administrative
burden,
which
meant
faculty.
Heads
like
me,
was
responsibility
for
a
number
of
different
subject.
Areas
would
be
sitting
in
school
until
late
into
the
evenings
simply
to
input
data
for
the
sqe
benefit.
This,
for
me,
is
the
issue
with
today's
debate,
because
it
has
taken
primarily
one
assessment
as
an
arrow
indicator
as
something
which
can
be
detached
from
a
child's
wider
educational
journey.
P
Indeed,
on
the
Education
Committee
I'm
glad
to
be
in
the
company
of
two
former
teachers
and
across
the
chamber,
I
can't
at
least
five
others
in
total,
but
I
think
I
am
corrected.
A
certain
I'm,
the
only
former
teacher,
with
experience
of
actually
delivered
in
curriculum
for
excellence
and
the
many
challenges
and
opportunities
that
system
can
present.
Now
what
existed
prior
to
standardized
assessments
was,
of
course,
the
much
lauded
by
the
opposition.
Scottish
survey
of
literacy
and
numeracy
as
a
faculty
head,
this
data
was
never
shared
with
me
as
a
classroom.
P
Teacher
I
had
random
groups
of
pupils
removed
from
my
classes
and
then
returned
during
the
course
of
a
lesson,
but
as
a
secondi
education
Scotland,
however,
I
learned
the
most
about
what
s
SLN
meant
administration
running
about
providing
data
to
the
government
of
the
day.
This
has
to
be
the
key
difference
with
standardized
assessments.
At
yesterday's
briefing
with
Scottish
government
officials,
it
was
explained
to
all
members
who
actually
attended
that
data
generated
by
these
assessments
is
then
divided
to
the
teacher
to
track
people
progress
accordingly,
this
data
is
going
to
mean
something
to
teachers.
P
I'd
like
to
make
progress
notwithstanding.
I
do
think
that
there
have
been
legitimate
concerns
raised
regarding
how
you
standardized
assessments
will
be
administered.
I
have
consistently
raised
print
ICT
provision
in
our
schools.
As
an
issue
from
my
own
experience,
a
primary
teacher
I
know
told
me
of
having
to
set
one-to-one
with
one
of
her
peoples
to
administer
these
assessments.
Why?
Because
there
was
no
Wi-Fi
connectivity.
Yesterday
my
surface
decided
to
give
up
the
ghost
Wells
preparing
my
speech.
For
today.
P
In
minutes,
the
member
of
the
promotes
IT
team
was
in
my
office
more
than
the
era
I
had
a
new
one
that
doesn't
happen
in
our
schools.
Wi-Fi
is
often
desperate
technology
provision
of
patchy.
We
must
therefore
support
our
teachers
in
making
these
assessments
work,
and
that
means
local
authorities
need
to
ensure
the
resource,
our
schools,
on
an
equal
basis,
presiding
officer
last
Thursday
I
watched
a
class
of
school
church
that
children
look
on
as
leader
of
the
opposition
party,
but
ated
the
educational
system
in
which
they
are
currently
learning.
P
We
know
they
themselves
back
standardized
assessments
in
2016,
but
today's
motion,
pivots
player,
based
learning
and
really
I,
have
to
wonder
if
any
of
them
have
actually
been
in
a
primary
school
recently
or
are
they
seriously
suggesting
we
allow
pupils
to
up
until
the
end
or
are
they
seriously
suggesting?
We
allow
people's
open
to
the
end
of
SD
to
play
in
some
pits
and
peace
pictures
with
their
hands,
presiding
officer.
To
conclude,
I
hope
every
member
will
reflect
upon
the
purpose
of
assessment.
P
H
Thank
you
very
much
deputy
presiding
officer
and
can
I
welcome
the
opportunity
to
participate
in
this
debate.
Alors
didn't
feel
particularly,
is
a
debate
at
this
stage
and
I
hope.
At
later
stage,
people
will
be
willing
to
take
interventions
in
opening.
Can
I
express
my
concern
at
the
way
in
which
those
defending
the
scottish
government
position
have
dismissed
the
issue
by
suggesting
that
it's
all
go
taught
by
those
who
are
motivated
by
opposition
to
the
SNP?
H
H
In
doing
this,
members
have
shown
great
disrespect
for
those
parents,
teachers,
educational
channels
and
others
who
have
had
the
temerity
to
suggest
that
the
scottish
government
approach
a
flawed
and
I,
do
suspect
that
many
of
these
people,
including
primary
school
teachers,
have
been
in
a
primary
school
in
the
last
week
or
so
and
can
I
say
to
John.
Swinney
is
the
artist
of
attacks
I've
heard
him
meet
there.
His
criticism
of
the
Tories
is
that
they're
simply
not
being
Tory
enough.
H
May
I
also
expressed
concern
at
the
attempt
to
characterize
the
debate
as
between
those
who
care
and
who
want
to
bring
the
rater
through
the
regret,
standardized
testing
and
a
teaching
profession
that
does
not
care
and
simply
resist
change
whatever
that
change
may
be.
All
my
teaching
career
I
was
driven
by
a
passion
and
desire
to
see
rigor
in
the
system,
a
regular
that
ensured
that
children,
wherever
they
were
born
and
whatever
the
circumstances
could
achieve
their
potential
I
always
believed.
H
The
education
system
should
raise
ambition
and
expectation,
not
shrugged
a
child's
life
chances
away
on
the
basis
of
where
they
were
born,
and
that
is
a
test.
I
apply
to
this
policy
will
improve
those
chances.
I
do
not
believe
it
will,
and
I
say
this
to
the
cabinet
secretary
teachers
who
opposed
this
testing
do
so
not
because
they
don't
care,
but
precisely
because
they
do
hear
teachers,
one
real
change
in
the
lives
of
young
people,
not
something
that
creates
a
business
in
a
system
but
with
no
evident
benefits
so
to
the
test
themselves.
H
I
attended
the
demonstration
mostly
called
yesterday,
and
that
raised
a
whole
series
of
questions.
For
me
they
are
certified
to
be
taken
at
any
time
over
primary
one,
so
children
could
be
taking
the
test
anytime
between
the
age
of
four
and
a
half,
and
over
six
there
was
no
clarity
on
the
level
of
support.
A
child
could
get
to
complete
the
assessment.
A
teacher
might
help
them.
Additional
support.
Teacher
might
help
them.
Indeed,
a
buddy
from
primary
seven
might
help
them,
but
there
was
going
to
be
no
consistency.
It
suggested
in
that
regard.
H
Pupils
were
to
get
Lords
of
practice
ahead
of
the
assessment,
so
they
understood
what
the
questions
might
involve.
So
it
was
clear,
despite
claims
to
the
contrary,
that
the
assessment
is
not
consistent,
cannot
be
used
as
a
survey
of
national
trends
in
what
to
say,
and
numeracy-
and
it's
not
just
part
of
the
normal
learning
expedia
is
interest.
It
disrupts
their
experience,
but,
as
Ingrid
said,
Irish
short
experience
of
a
rather
shambolic
lunchtime.
Presentation
is
not
what
is
relevant.
What
to
teach
us
what
your
families
tell
us.
H
Teachers
tell
us
that
it
takes
up
teacher
time
and
takes
time
away
from
learning.
There
is
taking
classroom
support
from
empty
from
individual
pupils
who
need
it
to
manage
a
class
while
the
tests
are
being
run.
Does
the
information
the
test
provides,
is
less
useful
to
them
than
the
assessments
they
themselves
make.
There
is
huge
effort,
but
too
little
or
no
purpose.
H
It's
no
wonder
that
those
who
are
in
the
frontline
of
supporting
our
young
people
are
so
frustrated
at
the
approach
of
the
Scottish
Government,
and
it's
how
it
just
says
the
opportunity
costs
of
this
focus.
Not
only
does
it
not
support
learning,
it
compounds
the
pleasure
already
on
teachers
and
support
staff,
and
even
if
the
assessment
produces
a
diagnosis,
a
diagnosis
that
most
teachers
will
already
been
able
to
make
for
themselves.
It
will
not
bring
with
it
the
help.
H
The
diagnosis
identifies
identifies
so
you
fund
a
test,
but
it
will
not
bring
extra
learning
support
to
help
a
child
catch
up.
It
will
not
bring
the
educational
psychologist
to
assess
more
complex
these.
It
will
not
bring
a
home
links
teacher
for
the
Restall,
whose
family
circumstances
of
denying
the
child
peace
to
learn.
It
won't
bring
the
additional
support
for
those
with
additional
support
needs,
who
needs
help
to
sustain
a
full
day
or
a
full
week
in
school
and
are
currently
on
part-time
tables.
It
won't
reduce
what
Plaut
it
will
disrupt
it
further.
H
While
you
want
to
do
modern
on
testing
mr.
Sweeney,
you
are
reducing
this
report
that
staff
and
teachers
have
in
the
classroom
every
day,
and
this
is
the
nub
of
it.
Standardized
assessment:
it's
not
a
policy
developed
over
time
and
building
consensus
around
it's
worth.
It
started
as
a
lion
to
take
when
government
was
under
pressure
on
its
record
and
education,
and
the
problem
for
the
cabinet
secretary
is
that
in
sitting
to
answer
the
question
on
how
to
improve
Scottish
education,
he
does
not
follow
basic
good
practice
sort
of
years
in
education
system
itself.
H
Work
at
the
quest
study,
the
evidence,
draw
conclusions
and
then
outline
action,
don't
start
at
the
conclusion
and
then
work
to
be
back
to
find
a
way
of
justifying
it.
That
is
pure
practice
in
education
and
it's
even
pure
practice
when
his
consequences
are
so
significant
for
the
education
of
our
children.
It's
time
for
the
cabinet
secretary
to
stop
the
defense.
Q
You
for
taking
off
son,
if
you
want
to
get
it
right
for
every
K.
All
Damon
must
ensure
that
we
catch
each
individual
least
by
the
time
that
it's
the
first
moments
of
Education.
As
a
constituency,
MSP
I
deal
with
many
inquiries
about
education,
prevention
and
outcomes.
Often
parents
tell
me
stories
about
their
children's
abilities
and
trialed
when,
evidently,
the
difficulty
is
the
child's
ability
to
learn.
They
frequently
tell
me
that
they
were
been
packed
up
earlier.
Q
An
order
for
that
child
to
have
received
the
support
necessary
to
enable
them
to
reach
their
own
unique
potential
and
I'm.
A
parent
who's
complained
about
never
met
a
parent
who's
complained
about
any
early
intervention
when
it
comes
to
supporting
a
child's
educational
needs.
He's
he
presiding
officer,
films
recognize
that
the
earlier
a
problem,
or
indeed
the
talent,
has
identified
the
more
support
and
educational,
not
something
that
young
person
can
receive.
Education
doesn't
just
start
in
primary
seven
or
not
five
level,
or
even
when
the
young
people
are
certain
higher.
Q
As
a
good
education
starts
with
a
firm
foundation
from
the
daily
very
day,
our
children
cross
a
school
door
and
before
the
standardized
testing,
is
not
a
mark
of
the
educational
destination
that
a
child
or
driver
in
the
future.
It's
merely
a
process
in
which
education
providers
can
gather
the
appropriate
information
and
data
to
ensure
that
no
child
is
Musto.
Q
A
Left
Behind
teachers
need
a
benchmark
to
gauge
their
abilities
and
attributes
each
child
dies
or
needs
in
order
to
succeed,
and
it
really
as
important
to
acknowledge
that
these
assessments
form
only
part
of
the
picture
when
it
comes
to
the
progress
of
a
child's
development.
Yes,
of
course,
of
all
all
of.
F
Mandel
Thank
You
deputy
flight
officer
I'm
interested
to
know
whether
the
member
thinks
that
these
tests
actually
sure
what
he's
saying
they
do,
because
many
teachers
feel
that
they
give
a
benchmark
that
they
can
judge
themselves.
But
it
doesn't
tell
them
anything
about
the
individuals
potential
James.
Q
Dornan
well,
I
I
start
the
test
today
and
protis
either
passed
Foss
team.
A
thank
you
thank
you.
Thank
you
hey,
but
I've
seen
it
and
we've
got
a
four-year-old
and
a
host
regularly
and
those
lights
for
the
questions
there.
That
I
think
it
started
out
process
that
that
four-year-old
he's
not
fully
a
sport
very
soon
that
that
food
would
have
been
able
to
do
and
it's
an
adaptive
test,
and
if
that
was
the
lemma
of
how
that
child
could
have
the
hold
on
hold
on
life
insurance.
Q
On
your
question
and
if
that's
the
limit
of
what
that
child
could
have
achieved,
that's
real
the
test
with
a
beam
and
that's
what
they
would
have
known.
But
if
the
child
is
doing
well,
then
you
can.
You
can
get
hard
on
harder
questions
until
you
find
the
label
what
the
child
as
a
it's,
an
adaptive
and
and
it's
no
way
a
pressure
test-
I
mean
I,
hear
a
bit.
Children
crying
and
attorneys
test
children
of
always
crying
school
primary
school
I,
remember
item
it
will
hold
on
a
second
I.
Q
Remember
the
day
I
started
primary
school.
One
guru
start
decline
in
the
corridor
and
the
next
thing
that
was
a
corridor
already
eaten
winds,
because
you're
young
and
anything
can
set
you
off.
So
please
don't
make
don't
make
the
two
together
with
the
tears
of
a
chair,
will
been
about
a
test.
No
no
I
really
as
important
here.
Nor
is
that
needs
assessments
for
morning,
part
picture
of
the
assessment.
There's
no
results
and
is
used
alongside
many
other
teaching
tools
to
provide
a
more
accurate
and
complete
picture
of
developmental
progress.
Q
The
government's
always
made
it
very
clear
that
these
assessment
are
a
gate
to
create
a
tailored
and
specific
education
for
each
and
every
child
and
that
in
no
way
shape
or
form
a
negative
two
and
just
like
I
mentioned
earlier.
This
should
be
used
to
identify
any
early
intervention
necessary
that
a
the
Brogan
article
in
The
Herald,
which
argued
that
we
take
the
politics.
So
it
has
to
be
an
highly
way.
Q
It's
so
important
to
look
at
us
to
be
rationally
without
engaging
in
a
scare
mongering
which
can
be
so
damaging
when
parents
are
already
faced
with
so
many
difficult
choices
when
it
comes
to
raising
children.
The
discussion
that
I,
what's
best
for
our
child,
should
fundamentally
be
with
their
best
interests
at
heart
and
not
use
the
some
sort
of
political
football
and,
to
be
quite
honest,
that
seems
like
just
another
Tory
and
labour
stunt.
The
Conservative
Party
are
known
for
many
things,
not
Manning
I'm
positive,
that
that's
more
insane.
Q
Q
However,
I
am
shocked
their
willingness
to
take
something
as
important
as
I
chose
education
and
use
it
to
save
their
own
personal
agenda
when
I
was
convener
of
Education
I
worked
where
all
that
smart
and
I
have
the
highest
regard
for
her
and
I
know
that
she's
a
genuine
interest
in
the
future
of
children
and
all
our
young
people,
and
for
that
reason,
I'm
incredibly
surprised
by
her.
Putting
on
the
MLS
motion
I
would
strongly
object
a
reconsider
for
possession
or
not.
Q
Q
I
was
on
the
television
just
before
I
came
in
here
and
I
was
born
with
a
conservative
and
I
love
damn
and
if
both
of
them
are
saying,
these
tests
for
the
worst
thing
in
the
world
and
they're
going
to
be
the
ruination
of
every
child,
and
yet
for
councils
have
got
love,
dams
and
conservative
coalition's
and
the
four
of
them
are
using
standardized
testing.
All
of
them
were
using
it
beforehand
and
forever
using
it.
Q
Now
we
have
the
Labour
Party
over
here
who
use
it
everywhere
everywhere
that
in
peril
the
Labour
Party
use
standardized
testing.
It's
not
a
test.
The
assessments,
you
don't
wait,
it's
not
that
it's
not
even
a
standardization
over
that's
the
SNP,
but
at
the
end
of
it
that
you
don't
like
and
not
as
the
terrible
thing
about
that's
debate
today,
because
this
is
not
about
child's
education.
That's
not
about
the
assessments.
This
is
about
trying
to
get
one.
That's
about
people
smelling.
What
thinking
in.
I
R
R
However,
the
contributions
from
my
colleagues
that
they've
actually
made
so
far
have
actually
made
it
especially
clear
why
we
must
support
the
motion
calling
for
a
halt
to
p1
testing.
They
have
highlighted
the
significant
educational
evidence
that
underpins
the
need
to
halt
these
assessments
at
the
primary
1
level.
What
has
been
introduced
for
primary
1
children?
So
it's
very
uneasily
with
the
play
based
philosophy
of
early
years,
provision
set
out
in
the
curriculum
for
excellence.
R
My
colleagues
have
also
demonstrated
that
this
debate
is
of
such
importance,
not
for
political
reasons,
as
we've
heard
more
than
once
today,
but
because
this
debate
will
impact
in
the
lives
of
four
and
five-year-old
children,
the
youngest
and
potentially
the
most
vulnerable
children
in
our
education
system.
However,
it
is
not
only
those
young
people
who
have
been
impacted
by
the
botched
implementation
of
standardized
assessment
at
the
primary
one
level.
Their
parents
have
also
been
affected,
and
that
is
whom
I
will
focus
on
today.
R
Parents
should
not
have
to
fight
for
accurate
and
transparent
information
about
their
children
when
they
request
information
from
the
Scottish
Government
about
the
assessments
their
children
are
undertaking.
The
response
should
be
clear
and
correct.
At
the
very
least,
if
you
just,
let
me
continue
for
a
minute,
please
looking
at
the
timeline
of
Scottish
government
interventions
in
this
prolonged
conversation
on
primary
1
testing,
it
obvious
that
this
has
not
been
the
case.
R
Firstly,
Scottish
government
documents
did
not
make
it
clear
if
parents
could
withdraw
children
from
these
assessments,
then
emails
released
under
Freedom
of
Information
legislation
reviewed
the
Scottish
government
civil
servant
said
and
I
quote,
children
can
be
withdrawn.
Weeks
later,
a
Scottish
government
spokesperson
said
there
is
no
statutory
right
for
parents
to
withdraw
their
children
from
any
aspect
of
schooling
other
front
than
from
some
parts
of
religious
education.
R
Finally,
a
civil
servant,
misquoted
advice
from
solar,
the
Society
of
local
authority
lawyers
in
Scotland.
This
organisation
publicly
refuted
the
government's
statement.
Looking
at
this
series
of
messages,
who
can
blame
parents
were
being
confused
when
this
SNP
government
contradicts
itself
on
a
weekly
basis,
Alistair.
L
Allan
I
think
thank
the
member
for
giving
we
she's
mentioned
quite
rightly
about
how
parents
deserve
information.
Can
I
ask
her
how
she
squares
the
need
to
give
parents
information
about
how
their
children
are
doing
with
her
preferred
option
of
stopping
assessments
which
have
been
in
place
for
a
number
of
years.
Alison
Harris.
R
Hard-Working
parents
do
not
have
time
to
decipher
muddled
messaging
from
the
Scottish
government
and
on
a
topic
as
paramount
as
their
children's
education.
They
simply
should
not
have
to
do
so.
Parents
should
not
encounter
political
spend
when
they
ask
about
their
children.
It
is
little
wonder
the
opinion
of
school
local
schools
was
at
record
lows
and
the
Scotland's
people's
annual
report.
A
Scottish
government
publication
released
two
weeks
ago
in
2011
eighty-five
percent
of
people,
but
very
or
fairly
satisfied
with
the
quality
of
local
schools.
R
This
has
now
dropped
to
just
70
percent
in
2017
under
the
snps
parents,
confidence
in
schools
is
plummeting,
and
yet
only
this
week
the
cabinet
secretary
appeared
on
the
pasanda
politics
to
see
that
he
may
not
respect
the
view
of
Parliament
on
today's
Scottish
conservative
notion.
Well,
I
sincerely
hope
that
that
will
not
be
the
case
and
I
shall
remain
hopeful
until
proven,
otherwise,
because
parents,
teachers
and
organisations
from
up
start
to
the
Scottish
child
minder
Association
to
the
EIS
are
giving
the
cabinet
secretary
a
clear
message.
R
It
should
be
play
based
learning,
not
tests
for
primary
one
children
not
test
for
Scottish
children
at
an
early
age.
When
many
European
countries
they
would
be
Volvo,
they
wouldn't
start
for
up
to
two
years.
Those
formal
education,
whilst
five-year-olds
and
Frankfurt
and
Florence
are
happily
enjoying
the
play
based
learning
of
kindergarten.
We
have
five
year
olds
in
folkert
having
to
face
the
pressure,
stress
and
anxiety
of
standardized
testing.
The
clear
message
that
parents
and
education
professionals
are
sent
in
the
government
is
shared
by
those
on
this
side
of
the
chamber.
R
It
is
also
shared
in
the
principals
of
the
Scottish
Government's
curriculum
for
excellence.
By
continuing
with
these
assessments,
the
SNP
are
disregarding
the
guidelines
within
that
documents.
That
can
only
add
to
the
confusion
for
parents
and
teachers
who
are
already
struggling
to
cope
with
the
excessive
bureaucracy
and
workload
that
has
been
foisted
on
them
by
the
SNP
s,
handling
of
the
implementation
of
the
curriculum
for
excellence.
It
is
time
the
cabinet.
Second,
you
listened.
He
is
aware
that
we
in
this
party
are
behind
him
on
the
principle
of
standardized
assessment
in
general,
but
going
forward.
R
There
are
two
things
that
have
become
his
hands
just
closing.
Firstly,
these
assessments
cannot
further
continue
for
children
as
young
as
four
and
secondly,
quite
simply,
pianist
must
be
treated
better.
In
conclusion,
I
would
like
to
quote
the
words
of
the
executive
director
of
Connect
Island
plier,
who
said
whether
they
are
called
national
tests
or
national
assessments,
whether
the
Scottish
Government
said
they
are
tests
or
they
aren't
it's
time
to
scrap
them
for
p1
children,
Thank
You,.
S
You
presiding
officer
for
affording
me
the
opportunity
to
speak
in
this
debate,
which
was
clear,
Adamson
said
from
some
contributions,
has
been
more
heat
than
light.
It
is
the
fact
that
nearly
everybody
feels
qualified
to
speak
in
education,
because
they've
obviously
been
through
the
education
system
themselves
and
may
have
children
or
even
grandchildren.
S
More
recently
in
our
education
system,
my
own
interest
in
education
stems
from
my
mother
teaching
primary
one
or
the
reception
class
for
many
years.
Having
worked
myself
in
the
sector,
both
at
secondary
and
college
level,
having
chaired
my
children's
primary
school
Parent
Council,
but
most
importantly,
and
relevant,
having
driven
forward
the
implementation
of
curriculum
for
excellence
as
Minister
for
schools
and
skills
from
2007
to
2009,
an
education
system
which
we
should
not
forget,
is
world
leading
and
which
many
educationalists
across
the
world
are
watching
with
interest
under
envy
and
adopting
elsewhere.
S
Not
at
the
moment,
as
we've
heard
already,
primary,
one
testing
is
not
new.
29
of
the
32
local
authorities
carried
out
this
testing
prior
to
the
introduction
of
no
assessment
as
Lindsey
Patterson,
professor
of
education
policy
at
Edinburgh
University,
a
not
infrequent
critic
of
government
policy
said.
The
simple
fact
is
as
unpalatable
as
it
is
for
many
politicians
and
teaching
unions
is
that
education
cannot
do
without
tests.
Only
reliable
data
from
scientifically
standardized
tests
can
enable
us
to
learn
from
both
the
failures
and
successors,
professors,
Patterson's
words,
presiding
officer,
not
mine,
Joanne,.
H
Lament
issue
about
the
29
local
authorities,
who
do
test
and
I
vow.
It
shall
be
involved
in
his
testing.
There
be
no
comparison
to
what's
been
described.
No,
but
with
then
an
option
B
for
there
to
be
discussions
through
the
HMI
able
to
see
authorities
that
don't
have
these
kinds
of
assessments
and
that
they
could
have
say
what
can
you
assess
would
be
and
whether
it's
appropriate
or
not
the
way
it
was
done.
S
Maureen,
what
while
I,
was
just
going
on
to
see
presiding
officer,
but
and
if
we
didn't
have
nationalized
standardized
testing,
it
would
of
course
be
left
to
local
authorities
to
do
their
own,
and
then
the
opposition
parties
would
be
complaining
about
a
lack
of
consistency
and
lack
of
standardization
and
a
postcode
lottery.
The
opposition
parties
are
keen
to
try
and
find
evidence
on
early
years
testing.
The
truth
is
presiding
officer,
I,
don't
think,
there's
much
of
that
out.
S
There
I
did
find
one
relating
to
kindergarten
in
the
US,
where
it
begins
by
saying
that
there
is
a
long
history
of
cleaning
children
in
kindergarten
for
sensory,
language
and
cognitive
abilities
in
order
to
refer
children
with
disabilities
for
early
treatment.
It
goes
on
to
say,
students
who
do
not
perform
as
expected
on
the
assessments
can
be
classified
at
risk
and
teachers
can
alter
their
instruction.
There
might
be
good
if
you
just
listened
to
as
to
to
up
to
a
paper
on
this
particular
issue.
I
S
That
teachers
can
alter
their
instruction
to
help
ensure
that
students
are
learning
to
read
and
not
falling
through
the
Clark.
The
cracks
early
detection
can
deter
later
reading
problems.
It
says,
with
intensive
intervention
student
ages,
eight
to
ten
could
increase
their
accuracy
in
reading,
but
could
not
catch
up
in
their
fluency
rate.
So
eight
to
ten
is
already
too
late
in
the
u.s..
S
Kindergarten
are
encouraged
to
court
use
assessment
to
inform
instruction
with
the
end
goal
of
increasing
student
achievement
so
cabinet
secretary
I've
not
had
one
single
constituent
contact
me
on
the
issue
of
p1
testing.
But
what
on
earth
do
I
see
to
the
constituents
who
come
to
me
to
say
that
their
chairs
possible
autism
has
not
been
picked
up
and
addressed
or
their
EHD
or
their
hearing
difficulty
or
their
sight
difficulty
or
their
dyslexia
or
any
other
conditions,
because
the
opportunity
in
p1
tests
has
been
scrapped
because
of
a
blatant
politicking
by
the
opposition
parties.
S
This
has
nothing
to
do
with
our
children
and
their
future
and
getting
it
right
for
every
child
and
having
individualized
learning
plans
and
raising
attainment
and
giving
every
child
an
equal
start
in
life,
but
everything
to
do
with
the
kind
of
negative,
even
destructive
opposition
of
the
Conservatives.
In
this
current
Parliament
today,
they've
been
called
out
not
only
as
being
interested
being
uninterested
in
the
well
being
an
education
of
our
children.
S
Only
those
who
are
growing
up
in
loving
nurturing
surroundings
are
fit
and
healthy
and
thriving,
and
not
at
all
interested
in
identifying
those
children
who
are
struggling,
struggling
because
they've
not
had
they're,
not
that
nurturing
environment
or
are
hungry
because
of
the
Tories
disgraceful
welfare
policies
or
of
experience
too
many
aces
in
their
lives,
which
is
in
inhibiting
their
concentration
and
ability
to
learn.
Today
we
see
the
Conservatives
are
all
over
their
place
all
over
the
place,
as
their
hypocrisy
is
called
out.
Previously
they
were
all
in
favor
of
tests.
S
Last
week
it
was
press
scrapped.
The
test
this
week
is
suspending,
or
the
test
is
too
difficult,
or
it's
not
telling,
and
it's
enough,
which
is
it,
and
only
five
or
six
members
took
the
time
to
go
and
find
out
about
the
tests
for
themselves
cabinets
sexy.
These
tests
have
not
even
had
a
year's
run.
Of
course
they
should
be
referred,
reviewed
and
refined
if
necessary,
but
do
not
couch
out
to
these
disgraceful
chart.
Chancellors
that
surround
us
in
this
chamber.
T
Thank
you
now
I'm
going
to
take
a
bit
of
a
deep
breath.
This
was
not
the
way
I
was
planning
to
start
these
remarks,
but
I
think
there
has
to
be
a
correction
and
some
of
the
statements
we
have
just
heard.
It
is
simply
a
mistake,
a
mistake
to
confuse
assessments
of
neurodevelopmental
disorders
with
testing.
They
are
completely
and
utterly
different
things.
We
need
to
be
building
understanding
on
neurodevelopmental
disorders,
not
not
blurring
the
boundaries
between
the
different
categories,
cuz.
T
That
is
not
going
to
help
those
arguments
not
going
to
help
those
debates
not
going
to
help
the
understanding
that
people
with
dyslexia
with
the
ESD
with
ADHD,
meet
and
toilet
in
terms
of
getting
to
help
you
do
it,
and
I
would
argue
that
these
tests
are
a
barrier
to
those
things
not
helping.
Now,
if
I
could
identify
one
question
alone,
one
of
the
questions
in
these
tests
is
what
sounds
like
this
dot-dot-dot.
T
With
a
picture
of
a
feather
now
I
would
argue
if
you're
a
child
with
a
test,
expectrum
disorder
or
with
dyslexia,
perhaps
the
ADHD.
You
would
find
that
question
in
particular
hugely
stressful,
difficult
to
answer.
You'd
be
left,
confronted
and
confused
with
what
you
were
meant
to
ask,
and
don't
tell
me
it's
all,
because
it's
a
multiple-choice
question
these
are
five-year-olds
who've,
never
had
to
sit
a
multiple
test
choice
at
multiple
choice
tests
in
their
lives.
Before
so,
don't
tell
me
it's
straightforward
and
let's
not
confuse
diagnostic
tests
with
academic
tests
of
literacy
and
numeracy.
T
Now
what
I
was
wanting
to
say
in
my
remarks
is
that
I
think
it
is
important
that
we
look
at
the
merits
of
these
tests,
what
they
are
aimed
to
do
and
how
they
do
that
within
the
context
of
the
education
system
that
we
all
want
now.
That's
not
party
political
that
should
be
about
having
a
dispassionate
debate,
an
objective
debate
about
what
rule
these
tests
have
in
general,
but,
more
importantly,
I
think
this
is
important
in
terms
of
this
debate.
T
Specifically,
what
role
can
we
possibly
play
for
five-year-olds
in
p1,
because
I
think
that's
what's
at
the
heart
has
didn't
mean
too
much
blurring
also
of
the
general
to
the
particular
the
arguments
around
the
generalities
of
testing
having
to
make
sure
that
children
do
get
used
to
testing
and
then
the
specifics
of
p1
testing
I
would
argue
that
the
two
are
very
different.
But
I
speak
all
in
this
debate.
T
From
that
perspective,
not
as
a
politician
but
as
a
parent
and
I
had
to
learn
them
a
bit
of
my
own
lesson
the
other
day
when-
and
this
was
a
fantastic
opportunity,
one
of
pride
when
my
daughter
who's
six
just
gone
into
p2,
who
did
sit
the
test
last
year
and
by
the
way
we
didn't
find
out
about
them
in
advance.
But
when
she
for
the
first
time
read
her
own
bedtime
story,
I
didn't
read
her
the
bed
times,
Russia
read
me
it
and
she
did
it
with
passion
and
with
joy.
T
T
It's
not
about
the
precision
with
which
she
reads
it,
with
the
the
passion
that
she
reached
the
enjoyment
that
she
and
the
fact
that
she
finds
it
useful
for
her
own
life.
That's
what
for
a
five-year-old
should
be
reaching
in
primary
on
not
arbitrary
academic
standards,
which
is
first
up
something
much
later
down
the
line
in
terms
of
their
academic
careers.
T
But
it
strikes
me
that
testing
at
this
point
is
counterproductive
and
far
more
fundamental
waste,
because
if
we
believe
in
curriculum
for
excellence,
if
we
believe
in
the
philosophy
was
meant
to
enshrine
it's
about
trusting
teachers
allowing
them
to
design
the
curriculum,
that's
relevant
to
their
communities
and
their
children.
This
doesn't
do
that.
This
is
putting
arbitrary,
centralized
tests,
which
ultimately,
teachers
are
always
going
to
test
to
teach,
and
we
do
not
want
teaching
to
the
test,
but
least
of
which,
in
the
early
years
when
we
ought
to
be
encouraging.
T
Learning
through
Play
and
I
fail
to
see
how
testing
for
literacy
and
numeracy
using
multiple
choice
tests
is
compatible
with
learning
through
Play
in
any
conceivable
way.
But
what's
more
I
think
it
stifles
innovation
and
I
know
the
Deputy
First
Minister
is
passionate
about
ensuring
that
we
in
gender,
a
culture
of
innovation
in
our
education
system
and
I,
agree
with
him
on
that.
And
indeed
again,
one
of
my
personal
lessons
is
seeing
the
value
of
that
innovation,
which
we've
seen
in
my
daughter's
school,
where
they
have
combined
the
nursery
and
primary
one.
T
They
don't
have
fixed
classrooms
or
fixed
teachers
through
the
day
they
have
embraced,
play
through
learning
and
they
have
combined
the
approach
of
the
nursery
and
primary
one.
I
fear
that
if
you
impose
tests
such
as
this
that
ultimately
it
will
make
teachers
fearful
of
innovating
like
that,
because
they
know
that
they
are
going
to
be
tested
and
they
will
be
fearful
whether
or
not
those
innovations
are
simply
not
worth
the
risk.
But
ultimately
we
do
need
to
learn
the
lessons
from
elsewhere
in
the
world
and
I.
T
Think
Ross
Greer
set
out
the
case
and
the
lessons
from
Finland
very
very
well,
and
it
is
clear
that
high
performing
education
systems
trust
their
teachers.
They
pursue
a
less
centralized,
less
prescriptive
method
and
the
the
the
trust,
the
professional
judgments
rather
than
testing
in
order
to
assess
children
briefly,
I'm
right
at
the
end.
T
So
this
is
the
the
direction
that
the
debate
should
have
been
taking.
They
seem
not
about
what
party
said:
what
and
when
or
whether
or
not
you
could
find
a
press
release
or
a
speech
saying
something
rather
it's
whether
or
not
tests
are
helpful
for
our
five-year-old
children
or
not.
That
is
the
substance
that
is
what's
at
stake.
This
often
that's
what
we
should
be
discussing.
E
You
very
much
presiding
officer,
I'm,
afraid
I
bring
probably
the
least
experienced
and
relevant
life
to
this
debate
of
anyone.
So
far,
three
years
late
chilling
to
postgraduate
students
doesn't
qualify
me
as
a
teacher.
That's
for
sure
I'm,
not
a
dad,
so
I
have
nothing
where,
from
the
other
hand,
to
have
named
great
nephews
and
nieces,
a
goddaughter
and
seven
nephews
and
nieces,
so
I've
got
some
exposure
to
it
and
just
picking
up
on
Daniel
Johnson
saying
you
know
a
multiple-choice
test
to
be
stressful.
E
Well,
believe
me,
I've
found
it
quite
stressful
standing
beside
my
my
goddaughter
when
she
was
not
yet
three
with
a
port
saw
a
ice
cream
shop,
gift
voucher
in
her
hand,
and
we
were
experiencing
the
multiple
choice
between
the
thirty
two
brands
of
ice
cream
that
they
were
there
as
we
went
through
and
made
choices.
Actually
that
illustrates
I
think
a
general
point
that
developing
skills
starts
very
early
and
by
the
time
you
get
a
five
I
think
every
child
has
gone
through
many
multiple-choice
examinations.
They
just
aren't
in
the
academic
sector.
E
There's
nothing
under
unfamiliar
about
being
presented
with
choices.
No
I
just
give
that
as
an
illustration
of
how
we
may
all
be
guilty
of
over
playing
at
some
of
the
issues
that
there
are
here
I,
also
in
early
stage,
the
debate,
but
it's
been
remedied
later,
in
particular
by
Allison
hi.
The
early
speakers
made
comparatively
little
mention
of
the
children
and
I
think
we
should
put
the
children
at
the
center
of
the
debate,
rather
than
perhaps
filling
with
teachers
at
the
center
of
the
debate.
E
But
clearly
the
teachers
are
not
unimportant
and
neither
are
the
pins
that
were
absolutely
sure
but
presiding
officer.
The
real
thing
that
there
is
in
this
debate
is
the
Conservatives
to
change
the
mind
and
they
are
entitled
so
to
do.
I
have
occasionally
changed
my
mind
and
my
political
colleagues
have
occasionally
changed.
They
are
mine
as
well.
There
is
nothing
wrong
with
that.
E
If
new
information
comes
along,
the
new
conclusions
can
reasonably
be
reached,
but
the
real
question
is:
what
is
the
Tory
position
about
testing
over
all,
and
that
takes
me
back
to
my
intervention
on
Elizabeth
at
the
very
first
contribution
to
this
debate,
because
south
of
the
border,
they
are
moving
in
a
very
different
direction.
At
the
Tories,
the
new
reception
baseline
assessment
will
be
statutory
for
all
pupils
in
England
through
September
2020,
and
that
is
for
the
reception
class
no,
but
at
kindergarten
before
you
get
to
primary
school.
E
But
it's
also
coupled
with
testing
in
the
first
year
of
primary
school
and
testing
in
the
second
year
of
primary
school
at
south
of
the
border.
Now
the
National
Foundation
for
educational
research
has
said
our
experience
in
producing
a
reception
baseline,
demonstrated
it's
possible
to
undertake
a
robust
assessment
of
children's
language
literacy
and
numerous
numerous
ease
skills
at
this
age,
in
other
words,
four
five
or
six
and
I
think
we
should
hold
on
to
that
expert
advice.
E
Indeed,
they
go
and
say
it's
vitally
important
to
the
lasting
and
significant
change
that
parents
and
teachers
be
provided
with
transplant
and
consistent
information,
and
that's
what
the
Tories
are
introducing
in
England
they've
Brunt
lee
tried
to
disconnect
the
Tories
in
Scotland
from
and
take
a
different
position,
but
it
is
one
Tory
party,
so
I'm,
not
at
all
clear
on
what
basis
we
should
properly
look.
Yes,.
B
E
V
V
E
I'm
rarely
accused
of
getting
it
wrong
and
never
admit,
no
that
that,
of
course,
is
not
true.
I
will
always
look
at
the
evidence,
but
the
evidence
here
is
that
light
more
in
what
I
have
not
had
a
single
constituent
contact
me
on
this
subject.
This
is
not
the
talk
of
this
see
me
among
those
for
whom
this
matters
the
pupils
and
the
parents.
It
simply
isn't
so.
E
That's
the
kind
of
evidence
that
I
have
to
say
is
is
is
driving
me
I
have
to
say
some
of
the
debate
is
said
that
children
at
the
age
of
four
or
five
six
shouldn't
be
exposed
to
computers.
Well,
I,
have
to
say
I
spent
30
years
working
in
computers,
but
I
find
most
six-year-olds
are
more
adept
at
working
loved
tablet
than
I
am
so
I,
don't
think.
E
That's
a
particularly
credible
argument
in
conclusion,
presiding
officer,
just
one
or
two
things,
even
in
Denmark
local
government
wants
to
introduce
statutory
testing
for
three-year-olds
in
kindergarten,
but
I'm
any
different
ways
of
looking
at
this
problem
and
I'm
very
happy
to
support
the
Scottish
Government's
approach.
Finally,
testings
important:
would
you
like
a
driver
in
the
road
with
a
driver's
test.
W
You
presiding
officer,
well,
this
this
gets
more
and
more
interesting
as
it
goes
on
and
likely
Smith
and
my
colleagues
I
do
believe.
That
assessment
is
a
key
part
of
learning
in
education,
not
least
of
all
so
that
we
can
ensure
progress
and
understand
where
a
child
has
got
to,
but
also
so
that
we
have
some
degree
of
accountability
in
terms
of
our
education
system
as
a
whole.
But
today
isn't
about
that.
It's
not
about
whether
we
should
formally
assess
our
children
during
their
education.
It's
about
the
value
and
appropriateness
of
doing
so
in
p1.
W
So
the
earlier
years
of
education
are
about
building
the
foundations
of
literacy,
and
numeracy
and
children
need
to
develop
that
confidence
in
using
language
and
whilst
I'm
not
always
a
cheerleader
for
curriculum
for
excellence.
Its
early
years
positioning
is
about
the
holistic
development
of
the
child
based
on
structured
play.
So
this
enables
the
individual
child
to
broaden
a
vocabulary,
develop
more
complex
sentence,
structures,
recognize
patterns
and
ensure
that
no
matter
what
their
starting
point,
they
will
be
equipped
to
cope
with
the
rigors
of
formal
learning
and
assessment
as
they
go
through
the
system.
W
So
we
know
that
children
don't
all
develop
their
readiness
for
formal
learning
at
the
same
age
and
structured
play
has
a
huge
role
in
contributing
not
only
to
that
readiness,
but
also
to
the
way
in
which
the
individual
child
will
engage
in
literacy
and
numeracy
later,
on
the
very
things
that
Daniel
Johnson
was
referring
to
being
able
to
access
and
understand
information
effectively.
It's
critical
to
our
children's
life,
chances
and
well-being.
W
Now
most
of
us
in
this
chamber,
aren't
experts
in
education
and
therefore
it
is
incumbent
on
us
to
pay
heed
to
both
educationists
and
teachers
and,
whilst
I
would
acknowledge
that
difference
of
opinions
exists,
there
is
increasing
evidence
and
clarity
from
all
sides
that
formal
standardized
tests
in
p1
cuts
across
the
suppose
of
a
play-based
curriculum.
Now
I
was
one
of
the
people
that
took
the
time
yesterday
to
attend
the
event
the
cabinet
secretary
arranged
to
try
out
the
p1
assessment
and
also
to
discuss
with
the
project
team.
W
The
intentions
behind
it
and
I
do
want
to
thank
mr.
Sweeny
for
that
opportunity
because,
although
I
might
have
seen
it
in
in
schools,
it
was
really
good
to
talk
to
the
team
that
were
developing
it.
However,
and
here's
the
big.
However,
you
may
be
a
bit
disappointed
here
that
it
only
really
served
to
confirm
my
view
that
the
administration
of
the
assessment
in
p1
does
have
little
or
no
real
value.
W
First
of
all,
the
use
of
the
term
standardized
I
found
really
quite
confusing
by
the
end
of
the
the
meeting,
because
each
child
maybe
give
the
assessment
in
a
different
way.
They
could
be
given
it
alone
in
a
group
with
a
p7
buddy
with
a
teacher,
it
could
be
at
the
beginning
of
piece
p1,
the
end
of
p1
in
the
middle
of
p1
and,
of
course,
you've
already
got
a
potential
years
age
difference
in
the
children's
in
p1.
W
They
could
do
it
by
reading
what's
on
the
screen
or
they
could
listen
to
what
the
the
screen
told
them
by
pressing
the
button
or
it
could
be
read
out
by
the
person
with
them
and
not
every
child
would
complete
the
whole
assessment
depending
on
how
difficult
they
found
it
and
whilst
I
can
accept
that
they
are
the
argument.
The
argument
that
the
assessment
shouldn't
cause
the
child
undue
stress
if
it
is
administered
appropriately.
W
Clearly
there
were
considerable
and
our
considerable
resources
challenges
both
in
terms
of
the
time
that
it
takes
to
set
it
up,
to
administer
it
and
to
wind
up
afterwards
and
the
facilities
needed,
because
many
teachers
have
been
telling
me
that
they
don't
have
the
computers
in
their
classrooms.
The
children
have
to
leave
the
classroom
to
actually
undertake
the
assessment
for
the
first
time,
and
there
is
a
pressure
if
you
can't
actually
do
all
that
in
a
very
supportive
way.
W
There
is
a
pressure
on
the
child
when
they're
doing
it
an
assessment
for
the
first
time
and,
unlike
most
the
the
design
of
most
learning
and
development
tools.
For
that
age
group
there
was
no
positive
feedback
or
encouragement
built
into
the
process,
and
there
was
confusion
about
exactly
how
there
is
would
be
used.
W
We
asked
the
questions
and
initially
we
were
told
they
were
just
for
the
teacher
and
maybe
the
head
teacher
and
then
later
in
the
discussion
we
were
told
it
could
create
performance
tables
and
we've
heard
all
of
this
said
earlier,
but
we
were
also
told
that
it
enabled
the
protis
of
the
child
to
be
tracked,
and
yet
it
was
made
quite
clear
that
the
test
can
only
be
delivered
once
and
actually
the
system
blocks
you
out
after
that.
So
it
can't
be
readmitted
so
there's
no
way
of
seeing
if
the
child
has
actually
improved.
W
So
therefore,
I
asked
was
it
there
for
a
baseline
of
the
child's
ability
and
I
was
told?
No,
it
wasn't
that
either
we
were
told
that
the
assessment
would
allow
the
teacher
and
head
teacher
to
understand
where
the
child
was
in
comparison
to
others
and
identified
their
strengths
and
weaknesses
in
their
knowledge
and
understanding.
W
But
when
asked,
if
a
competent
teacher
could
do
this
without
the
standardized
test
in
p1,
we
were
told
yes,
but
they
might
not
have
that
had
the
time
to
get
to
know
the
child
in
that
level
of
detail
and
the
tests
would
speed
things
up.
I
can't
say:
I
found
that
terribly
edifying,
because
I
do
hope.
My
primary
one
teacher
will
know
my
child
on
my,
hopefully
my
grandchildren
in
time
to
come
and
I.
But
the
thing
is
I.
W
And
in
a
recent
BBC
interview,
you
said
you
remained
open
to
ways
in
which
you
could
reduce
the
workload
for
teachers.
So,
and
you
said,
my
door
is
very
much
open
on
this
question
to
reduce
the
amount
of
bureaucratic
burden
that
teachers
feel
they're
facing
I
would
put
to
you
today
is
an
opportunity
to
do
just
that.
By
supporting
this
motion.
Can.
X
Very
much
presiding
officer,
this
debate
should
have
been
about
making
sure
that
teachers
have
access
to
good
quality
information
to
help
them
to
inform
their
judgement
about
people
performance.
It
should
have
been
about
making
sure
that
parents
have
access
to
information
at
the
the
performance
of
their
children
and
the
skills
that
they're
learning
it
should
have
been
about
making
sure
the
right
people
have
access
to
the
right
information
about
our
young
people,
an
order
to
ensure
that
progress
can
be
made
to
raise
attainment.
X
Instead,
what
I've
witnessed
as
political
parties
woefully
rewriting
history,
a
history
where
labor
the
Lib
Dems
and
they
can
serve
the
parties,
have
supported
assessments
and
primary
one
that
is
blatant
political
opportunism
and
that
they're
prepared
to
do
this
at
the
expense
of
kids
education
as
an
utter
disgrace,
ignoring
the
political,
ignoring
the
political
point-scoring,
that's
been
good
on.
Let
me
move
on
and
actually
talk
about.
What's
going
on
in
our
skills
just
know
attending
no.
Thank
you
attending
the
information
event.
X
Yesterday,
I
and
a
number
of
SNP
colleagues
have
that
these
assessments
are
only
taken
by
children
once
the
skill
once
during
the
school
year,
and
there
is
no
set
timetable.
The
assessments
do
not
have
to
take
place
at
a
set
time
of
year,
but
when
teachers
and
Skills
to
say
the
pupils
are
ready,
the
assessments
consist
of
around
30
questions
on
an
average
take
27
minutes,
but
there
is
no
time
limit.
The
answers
are
multiple
choice
and
get
progressively
the
or
easier,
depending
on
each
individual
people's
ability.
X
They
are
completed
online
and
are
marked
automatically
saving
the
teacher
time
and
allowing
them
to
focus
on
teaching
teachers
get
instant
feedback
from
the
assessments,
so
they
can
provide
the
support
needed
for
each
child's
numeracy
and
literacy
development.
Of
course,
no
new
system
of
assessment
will
be
perfect.
That's
why
the
Scottish
Government
published
the
user
review
report
and
the
20th
of
August
on
the
first
year
of
the
assessments
and
I've
already
made
changes.
X
A
local
teacher
I
spoke
to
highlighted
that
their
skill
has
a
computer
suite,
and
this
is
meant
that
the
pupils
have
to
go
to
a
separate,
unfamiliar
room
for
the
assessment
that
should
be
addressed.
Ideally,
children
should
be
able
to
take
assessment,
a
familiar
environment,
but
to
call
for
a
ban
on
standardized.
National
assessment
is
not
the
answer.
X
No
thank
you.
The
report
then
continues
by
highlighting
that
results
of
these
assessments
are
used
in
many
ways
by
skills
and
unless
it
benefits,
including
to
contribute
to
the
identification
of
pupils
who
may
require
additional
support
and
to
support
the
process
of
monitoring
pupils
progress.
One
thing
I
forgot
to
mention
was
that,
let's,
the
extract
is
from
the
attainment
report
for
the
education,
Children
and
Families
Committee
for
Edinburgh
City
Council
published
in
March
2009
regarding
the
2008
academic
year.
X
The
report
highlights
that
standardized
assessments
have
been
used
in
Edinburgh
schools
since
June
1998,
and
they
can
turn
you
up
until
the
present
day.
Political
parties
in
Edinburgh
saw
a
post
three
standardized
assessments
that,
during
the
eight
years,
labor
control
the
council.
They
made
no
attempts
to
reverse
their
policy.
X
But
that's
hypocrisy
by
those
political
parties,
no
opposed
to
p1
testing
that
not
just
happen
in
our
capital
city
of
30
to
local
authorities.
29
councils
already
carried
out
annual
p1
assessments
councils,
where
labor
Liberal,
Democrats
and
conserve
the
parties
for
administration,
not
only
that
these
councils
already
carry
out
p1
assessments,
but
many
of
them
had
to
p1
assessments,
one
at
the
start
and
also
at
the
end
of
p1.
X
So
why
there
was
no
issue
when
their
own
councils
were
carrying
out
p1
assessments,
but
that,
as
now,
the
only
difference
I
can
see
presiding
officer
as
an
SNP,
Scottish
government,
administrative
EMA,
and
it
saves
castles
nine
million
pounds
a
year
to
suddenly
claim
that
there
is
an
issue
with
p1
assessments.
When
an
SNP
government
adopts
a
policy
nationally
as
insincere,
and
they
should
be
ashamed
of
themselves.
X
They
have
saw
the
chance
to
attack
the
SNP
and
have
had
no
problem
doing
a
hundred
eighty
degree
tongue
and
our
own
manifesto
promises
and
that
policies
that
our
own
councils
have
implemented
as
disgraceful,
but
that
matter
mamillus
marathons,
but
a
fact
that
a
matter
as
presiding
officer
when
it
comes
to
educating
our
young
people,
no
party
should
be
exploiting
these
issues
for
political
gain.
Nobody
should
be
standing
in
a
way
of
driving
up
standards
and
our
skills
just
for
the
sake
of
some
headline-grabbing,
political,
Kakha,
boo
but
unfortunately
presiding
officer.
U
Y
In
causing
for
Scottish
Labour
can
I
begin
by
thanking
the
Conservatives
for
bringing
the
steuby
to
the
chamber
today.
I
will
be
voting
in
favor
of
the
motion
to
stop
testing
training
on
children
in
our
schools
and
I
do
so
at
the
behest
of
parents
and
teachers
from
across
West
Scotland.
Who
have
contacted
me
in
the
last
week
and
in
the
last
few
months,
and
let
me
repeat
what
ingry
said
in
opening
the
debate
today
for
labour.
Y
We
on
this
side
of
the
chamber
have
no
problem
with
teachers
assessing
pupils
teachers
assess
pupils
learning
every
day,
using
a
whole
variety
of
techniques
and
diagnostic
methodologies,
and
deploy
their
professional
expertise
to
do
so.
Nor
do
we
have
a
problem
with
the
testing
of
Westerosi
and
numeracy.
Y
However,
the
idea
that
children
as
young
as
four
and
a
half
years
old
are
being
assessed
in
our
schools
is,
quite
frankly
absorbed
for
the
Scottish
government.
To
pretend
that
this
is
a
very
assessing
and
tackling
attainment
is
nonsense
and
the
range
of
evidence,
an
opinion
on
this
shows
how
out
of
touch
the
SNP
are
with
teachers
and
with
parents.
A
child
born
in
late
February
2014
we'd
be
setting
the
same
test
as
a
child
born
in
April
2013.
Y
Now
the
age
gap
is
nothing
new
in
our
education
system,
however,
the
development
of
four
and
five
year
olds
can
be
staggeringly
different,
more
so
advantage
that,
at
any
other
age
of
primary
or
secondary
to
children
in
primary
one
should
learn
in
a
stress-free
and
welcoming
environment,
with
constant
support
from
teachers
and
from
support
workers
every
hour.
The
teacher
spends
on
carrying
these
tests
is
an
hour
that
could
have
been
better
spent
developing
and
supporting
basic
educational
and
emotional
skills
of
our
children
and
presiding
officer.
Y
Y
Y
These
are
the
sincere
beliefs
and
experiences
of
a
teacher
dealing
with
young
children
every
single
day
and
at
the
heart
of
this
to
be.
Why
is
a
serious
question?
Why
does
the
cabinet
secretary
think
he
knows
better
than
teachers
with
decades
of
experience
and
better
than
parents
who
best
know
the
well-being
of
their
children?
Y
It
has
the
blanket
view
of
the
cabinet
secretary,
that's
causing
this
unnecessary
damage
in
our
schools
and
instead
of
teachers
teaching
we
waste
resources
that
are
already
stretched
and
carrying
a
useless
test
of
four
and
five
year
olds,
I'm
just
leading
officer.
Another
teacher,
the
strain
Germans
are
quite
contracted
me
to
see
four
and
five-year-olds
that
expected
to
set
our
computer
for
up
to
under
many
cases
more
than
an
hour
for
each
of
three
assessments.
Y
This
needs
adult
supervision,
often
taking
classroom
assessments,
not
your
teachers,
learning
support
teachers
and,
in
many
cases,
management
teams
away
from
their
normal
duties,
thus
then
impacts
on
the
rest
of
the
school
and
on
the
workloads
of
that
staff
and
for
what
for
a
bureaucratic
nightmare,
another
teacher
from
Renfrewshire
rates
as
a
teacher
and
an
EIS
member
I,
am
contacting
you
to
ask
you
to
back
scrapping
these
tests.
In
my
own
school.
They,
of
course
stress
an
upset
both
to
children
and
to
start
testing.
Young
children
is
not
necessary.
Y
The
data
gathered
is
not
useful
and
these
tests
set
children
up
for
a
lifetime
of
heating
tests.
If
Scott
Letitia
teachers
are
truly
going
to
get
it
right
for
every
child,
then
scrap
in
these
tests
was
some
way
to
doing
that.
I'm
presiding
officer.
These
are
staff
on
the
front
line
of
teaching
not
setting
an
essential
government
office.
They
know
better
than
any
member
of
the
cabinet
and
I
would
ask
the
Scottish
Government
to
listen
to
these
voices
and
Kani.
Just
presiding
officer,
I've
got
six
minutes
or
seven
I'm,
very
sorry,
mr.
Y
Dorn
and
then
I
wouldn't
be
able
to
take
you're.
An
intervention
I
would
like
to
pack
up
I
wanted
to
make
some
progress,
and
some
of
the
comments
that
I
wanted
to
make
I
would
like
to.
However,
in
the
very
few
seconds,
I've
got
left
and
pick
up
an
hour.
A
comment.
Mr.
Thormann
amazing
his
contribution
when
he
said
that
children
cry
all
the
time
Eunice
could
often
to
do
with
taste.
So
when
we're.
Y
A
parent
says
that
the
tests
made
their
child
feel
sick
and
cry,
and
their
child
was
crying
because
they
were
made
to
go
on
a
computer
and
they
couldn't
use
it
to
do
the
test.
That's
not
the
supportive
and
not
chilling
environment
that
I
want
any
of
our
children
to
be
anything,
and
if
that's
Parliament
votes
today
to
halt
this
the
assessments
for
primary
one
children,
then
that's
what
the
Scottish
Government
must
do
and
the
cabinet
secretary
must
listen
to
the
voice
of
Parliament
conclusions.
U
D
The
evidence
that
the
government
followed
was
the
evidence
that
we
commissioned
from
the
OECD
frame
in
response
to
the
information
that
became
a
pardon
about
the
fallen
standards
identified
by
the
Scottish
survey
of
literacy
and
numeracy
that
we
invited
the
OECD
to
review
Scottish
education
and
they
said,
as
I,
set
out
in
my
ll
remarks
that
there
needs
to
be
a
more
robust
evidence
base
right
across
the
system,
especially
about
learning
outcomes
and
progress.
And
it's
on
the
basis
of
that
evidence
and
advice
that
we
acted
to
address
these
issues.
Why
did
we
address
the?
D
Why
was
a
response
in
relation
to
standardized
assessment
and
the
response
was
because
we
already
had
2930
to
local
authorities
undertaking
some
form
of
standardized
assessment,
obeah
of
different
character
around
the
country
and
indeed
a
30th
local
authority.
Salonika
were
considering
embarking
upon
a
form
of
standardized
assessment,
but
when
they
heard
the
government
was
prepared
to
address
this
issue,
they
held
back
until
the
government
was
able
to
put
its
approach
in
place.
D
The
mini
fee
has
just
raised
a
concern
about
from
a
teacher,
an
invert
clayed
about
the
application
of
the
computer-based
Scottish
national
standardized
assessment,
and
she
reached
that
comment
from
n'ver
client
well
in
inver
claim,
the
local
authority
has
been
using
an
on-screen
computer-based,
non
adaptive,
standardized
assessment
for
many
years.
The
difference
between
it
and
what
I've
put
in
place
is
the
invert
clay
that
counsel
have
been
applying
that
twice
during
primary
one.
D
So
the
idea,
the
Scottish
national
standardized
assessments
have
somehow
had
been
applied
in
a
way
that
has
fundamentally
changed
the
way
in
which
young
people
are
assessed
at
local
level.
Given
that
evidence,
I've
just
cited
about
infer
quite,
is
I'm
afraid,
erroneous
suggestions
to
be
made,
of
course
wrong
on
me.
H
I'll
go
back
to
the
point
I
made
earlier
about
including
the
motives
of
people
who
raise
concerns.
Do
you
have
an
idea
why
school
teachers,
parents
and
carers
are
expressing
concern
if
this
is
something
that's
been
happening
routinely
all
along?
Why
our
school
teachers
highlight
in
these
concerns?
But
these
proposals
we.
D
I'm
not
impugning
anyone.
It's
not
mine.
Well
I'm
grateful
to
mr.
Scott
for
his
enthusiastic
support
for
that
remark.
I,
don't
impugn
people's
motives.
I've
got
I
faced
a
challenge
here
where
Parliament
is
holding
us
to
account,
but
the
need
to
improve
standards
in
our
schools
and
when
the
Scottish
survey
of
literacy
and
numeracy
came
out
in
2015,
we
were
not
able
to
identify.
D
We
are
the
weaknesses
and
performance
where
around
the
country,
because
there
was
no
consistent
data,
which
is
exactly
what
the
OECD
highlighted,
which
is
why
we
gravitated
from
2930
to
local
authorities,
undertaking
different
forms
of
assessment
into
a
standardized
assessment
great
across
the
country
and
I.
Think
that's
a
pretty
logical.
D
No
gentleman
asked
me
about
teachers
and
lots
of
teachers
have
been
quoted.
Let
me
quote
a
teacher
from
the
EIA
solving
data
is
incredibly
detailed
and
personalized
feedback
will
be
very
useful
in
looking
for
next
steps.
Some
of
our
data
showed
areas
of
weakness
we
hadn't
expected
and
some
showed
strength,
especially
in
p1
that
we
hadn't
expected.
So,
yes,
we
can
all
see
the
feedback
from
teachers,
but,
of
course
it
varies
around
the
country
as
to
what
people
will
see.
D
U
T
D
Disability
that
your
teacher
judgment
comes
in
here,
because
100
percent
of
eligible
young
people
did
not
take
part
in
the
assessments.
It
was
94
percent,
that
is
the
teaching
profession
exercise
and
the
type
of
professional
judgment
that
I
would
ask
them
to
do
to
see.
It's
not
appropriate
for
a
young
particular
child
to
take
that.
For
now,
mr.
Johnson
reached
the
issues
of
the
connection
and
compatibility
with
Polly
and
I
understand
the
model
of
age.
D
He
talks
about
in
his
in
his
child's
school
and
Edmund
are
very
familiar
with
it
and
that's
what
the
curriculum
for
excellence
is
designed
to
do,
but
I
remind
mr.
Johnson.
It
is
plea
for
learning
and
at
some
stage
we
have
to
assess
the
learning
that
young
people
aren't
taking
to
satisfy
ourselves
that
they
have
reached
the
early
level,
which
will
then
give
us
the
foundation
and
the
platform
for
them
to
move
on
to
first
level.
D
The
last
comment
I
want
to
make
presiding
officer
is
this
is
in
relation
to
the
some
of
the
comments
that
have
been
made
about
the
International
advice
and
evidence
party
Sawbuck
who's,
an
eminent,
a
global
educationalist
who
originates
from
Finland,
a
man
for
whom
I
have
huge
respect
and
whose
writings
I
follow
assiduously
saved
us
this
morning.
P
one
assessment
in
Scotland
is
not
a
standardized
test.
It
is
a
diagnostic
tool
to
support
teachers,
professional
decisions
and
judgment.
We
were
critical
of
high-stakes
standardized
testing
in
the
International
Council,
not
this
one.
D
That
is
the
interim
afraid.
Mr.
Greeble
after
he
knows
that
I'm
generous
with
my
interventions
but
I'm
as
rich
the
the
maximum
time
I
can
speak.
That
is
information
from
eminent
educators
that
demonstrate
the
government
has
taken
the
considered
states
to
support
professional
judgment
and
I
ask
Parliament
to
support
those
measures
today.
F
You
presiding
officer,
I,
didn't
think
after
this
morning's
Education
Committee
meeting
that
I
could
be
any
more
depressed
about
this
government's
attitude
towards
education.
That
I've
failed
through
this
afternoon
and
I
think
is
pretty
disingenuous
actually
for
the
cabinet
secretary
to
get
up
at
the
11th
hour
and
give
a
very
gentle
measured
talk
through
some
of
the
points
in
the
debate
when
he
spent
the
last
week
trying
to
shout
down
opposition
and
every
single
one
of
his
back
benches
has
adopted
the
same
approach.
U
F
Mandel
I
remember
the
member
taking
the
first
intervention,
not
answering
the
specific
point,
I
raised
and
refusing
to
continue
the
debate
and
address
some
of
the
further
issues
that
are
emerged
around
these
tests.
I
think
it's
very
disappointing
that
we
were
promised
a
fact-based
debate
and
instead
we
spent
most
of
the
time
politicking
as
usual.
I
am
very
I'm
very
proud,
I'm,
very
proud
to
say
that
on
these
benches
we
are
willing
to
listen,
evaluate
the
evidence
and
change
our
mind.
We're
not
in
we're
not
in
we're
not
embarrassed.
F
We
are
not
embarrassed
to
listen
to
the
evidence,
to
listen
to
the
many
voices
in
Scottish
education
and
take
a
measured,
an
appropriate
view,
we're
not
saying
scrap
all
standardized
assessments.
What
we
are
saying
is
that
primary
one
is
not
the
appropriate
point
to
start.
It
I
think
that
the
cabinet's
actually
would
do
well
to
listen
to
that.
Just
as
we've
offered
our
support
when
it
comes
to
reforming
education.
That
for
us,
is
not
some
political,
a
move
or
some
calculated
agenda
is
because
we
think
that
educational
reform
is
important.
D
Mendell
understand
the
the
degree
of
doubt
that
we
would
have
in
our
minds
about
his
commitment
to
educational
reform.
When
last
week
his
leader
was
asking
for
more
information
about
schools,
and
today
the
Conservatives
are
advancing
the
argument
for
less
information
about
schools.
Doesn't
he
see
the
natural
inconsistency
in
the
arguments
the
Conservative
Party
have
been
deployed
and
why?
Many
of
us
here
believe
that
the
Conservatives
are
just
doing
this
for
a
political
hit
on
the
government,
all
of
em
in
jail.
F
F
And
that's
what
we've
had
prepared
questions
this
morning
and
I
would
to
be
much
more
impressed.
I
know:
Michele
Valentine
was
impressed
ayuh
to
to
see
their
assessments,
but
I
would
have
to
be
much
more
impressed
if
the
cabinet
secretary
ahead
of
this
to
be
had
made
available
to
us,
their
robust
evidence
exists
to
prove
that
these
assessments
work.
Then
they
tell
us
something
useful,
because
what
I'm
hearing
from
teachers
is
that
there
are
a
number
of
fundamental
flaws
in
the
system.
That's
been
brought
forward.
F
Smart
children
are
clicking
on
random
options
in
order
to
speed
up
the
process
of
getting
through
the
tests.
People
like
myself,
who
suffer
from
dyspraxia
and
dyslexia,
are
finding
that
the
tests
I
don't
work
for
them
that
don't
assess
their
potential
or
their
capacity
and
I
think
it
was
quite
offensive
and
disingenuous
to
parents
to
hear
some
of
the
comments
from
Maureen
war,
which
I
don't
think,
have
any
evidence
based
and
as
far
as
I'm
aware.
U
AA
F
U
Thank
you
very
much.
That
concludes
our
debate
on
primary
1
test.
We'll
move
on
to
the
next
item
of
business,
which
is
consideration
of
a
business
motion.
1
3,
9,
7
5
in
the
name
of
cream
d
on
behalf
of
the
parliamentary
bureau,
is
setting
out
a
business
program
and
I
would
remind
members
that,
under
a
new
procedure,
any
member
can
comment
on
these
business
motions
which
we've
asked
to
do
so
by
notifying
the
chair
by
3
o'clock.
That
day
can
I
call
on
cream
D
to
move
the
motion
moved.
U
U
U
So
I
have
to
call
a
Grimm
day
to
move
the
motions
first
before
I
call
the
moved
for
saving
office.
Thank
you
very
much
mr.
day,
assuming
that
no
one
else
silhouetted
against
emotions.
The
question
is
that
motions
one
three,
nine,
seven,
seven
and
one
three
nine
seven
eight
be
agreed.
Are
we
all
agreed?
Thank
you.
U
The
next
item
of
business
is
consideration
of
parliamentary
beauty
motion
one
three,
nine,
seven,
six
on
designation
of
a
lead
committee
and
could
ask
remedy
to
move
the
motion
move.
Thank
you
very
much.
We
turn
now
to
decision
time
and
there
are
three
questions
today.
The
first
question
is
that
amendment
139
for
5.1,
in
the
name
of
john
swinney,
who
seeks
to
amend,
motion
one
three,
nine
four:
five
in
the
name
of
Liz
Smith
on
primary
one
tests
be
agreed.
U
The
result
of
the
vote
on
amendment
number
one,
three,
nine
four
five
point,
one
in
the
name
of
John
Swinney
is
yes,
sixty-one,
no
63
there
were
no
abstentions.
The
amendment
is
therefore
not
agreed.
The
next
question
is
that
motion
one
three,
nine,
four,
five
in
the
name
of
Liz
Smith
on
primary
one
test
be
agreed.
Are
we
agreed
we're
not
agreed?
We'll
move
to
vote?
No
must
be
cast
our
votes
now.
U
U
AB
Rise
to
make
a
point
of
order
under
Rule
817
of
Standing
Orders
teachers
told
this
government
that
these
tests
were
useless
and
ministers
ignored
them.
Parents
told
this
government
that
they
did
not
trust
these
tests
and
ministers
ignored
them.
The
Scottish
Parliament
has
now
voted
to
scrap
these
tests.
Horribly
sisters
must
not
now
ignore
the
will
of
Parliament
the
government.
AB
U
Thank
you
very
much.
Mr.
Leonard
Department
has
passed
a
motion.
That
is
the
resolution.
Therefore,
it's
the
will
of
the
Parliament.
There
is
an
expectation
that
the
government
will
respond
seriously
to
that
resolution
and
will
respond
appropriately
in
due
course,
further
point
of
order.
Johanne
lament
I.
H
Wonder
in
discussions
with
the
government,
will
you
reflect
on
the
recommendation
from
the
Commission
for
parliamentary
reform
that
was
explicit
in
seeing
when
the
government
lost
a
vote?
They
should
take
it
seriously
and
report
when
they
will
come
back
to
the
Parliament
to
see
how
they're
going
to
respond
to
that
decision,
which,
as
Marie
Todd
mentioned
earlier,
is
important
well
of
the
Parliament.
U
Can
I
thank
miss
Lyman
for
that
point,
as
it
happens,
that
particular
recommendation
of
the
Commission
and
primary
form
is
under
active
consideration
by
the
parliamentary
Bureau
at
the
moment
it
is
also
it
is
the
primary
tribunal,
which
is
the
body
through
which
the
Parliament
as
a
whole
decides
when
issue
should
be
brought
before
the
Parliament
decides
parliamentary
business,
so
it
will
be
for
the
primary
tribunal
to
decide
when
this
issue
should
be
brought
back.
Are
there
any
other
four
points
of
order?
Thank
you.
That
concludes
decision
time.