THERE are two threads in the current news which puzzle me in that there are obvious reasons for them not to be there.
The first, and more ridiculous, is the space being given to Gordon Brown to offer his “expert” judgment on current world finance. This is the same Gordon Brown whose financial finagling landed us with PFI, which turned out to be only a minor preamble to the major crash driven by the reckless market manipulations to which his “light touch” regulation of the City opened the door.
READ MORE: Gordon Brown fears new financial crisis in ‘leaderless’ world
Then his refusal to step aside after the 2010 election precluded a Labour-Liberal coalition, his limitless narcissism thereby landing us with Shiny Dave, Brexit and Theresa May: nice judgment, Gordon.
The puzzle here is, why on earth is anyone besides Mad Magazine giving this eminent serial incompetent so much as an inch of print space, when it’s a given that anything he says will be self-serving balderdash?
No-one of any sense at all would take his word on anything, down to and including what day of the week it is. Listening to Brown on fiscal wisdom is like consulting an arsonist on fire prevention.
READ MORE: Ten years on from the crash that broke the banks – could it happen again?
The second running sore is the dispute over assessments of progress in early-years primary school. Teachers are complaining about the additional burden and parents condemning the adverse effects on their children, while the opposition parties in Holyrood are (of course) seizing on this as another stick with which to beat the government.
Apart from the added workload, teachers are objecting that they already know where their pupils stand: well, yes, up to a point; but they clearly can’t know how their pupils are doing in relation to the broad P1-P2 population, and that can only be ascertained by a universal measurement … and that can only come from the centre, with pre-set, universal materials and evaluations.
However, if anything about these assessments is distressing to pupils, that has to be coming at least mainly from the manner in which the process is being presented to the children.
READ MORE: Swinney stands firm on P1 testing despite criticism from opponents
Any damned fool, and even some who aren’t that dumb, can scare the bejasus out of children of any age up to mid-teens simply by introducing something (the assessment, in this case) as significant, important and definitive: in over 30 years in the classroom, I met numerous children who, on hearing the word “test” or anything similar, would routinely dissolve in hapless, distressed panic.
At the end-of-school national exams, of course there’s a limit to what can be done to downplay the significance of the day – the principal reason I much preferred working in an environment of continuous assessment.
In the early stages, however, it can’t be beyond the wit of the teacher to dissemble, to present this as something new, a game for them to try, rather than a major hurdle that the child must clear to be rated competent.
READ MORE: Letters Special: P1 testing should not be politicised
Every teacher is an actor in the classroom; it’s simply a matter (in this case) of ensuring that one’s words, tone and expressions aren’t going to frighten the audience but reassure them. Not easy – nothing in school is, if it’s being done right – but definitely simple.
And, of course, it’s evident that once the teachers have learned not to wind the children up, the parents’ understandable distress and opposition will be diminished if not entirely removed – and then, in time, some useful and even enlightening information should begin to emerge from the returns.
Colin Stuart
Saline, Fife
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel