LIKE many Scots, I viewed the establishment of the Scottish Parliament in 1999 with some optimism, thinking that perhaps we might avoid the interminable, vacuous and self-interested bickering epitomised by Westminster. I regret that, following the behaviour of our home-grown politicians in recent weeks, the last feeble flicker of that optimism has now been well and truly extinguished.

I refer to the issue of the testing of Primary 1 pupils ("The real reason Sturgeon is taking on primary test critics", The Herald, September 1). I do not intend to make any comment on the wisdom or otherwise of John Swinney’s policy in this matter, but it is clear to me that any one of the parties could have come up with a more-or-less identical approach, and that the fundamental objection of those opposed is entirely down to the simple fact that it was not their party which did so.

We have had utterly spurious and gratuitous criticism from the Tories, excruciating, phoney outrage from Labour, and even been treated to the unedifying spectacle of Willie Rennie holding onto their coat-tails shouting “Me too, me too”, and ensuring his place in the ongoing press coverage by coming up with the most absurd and outlandish counter-proposal. The much-touted "shambles" and "chaos" are only what these opposition parties have managed to foment and incite. Blatantly hypocritical sucking-up to parents, intended presumably to garner future voters, is also rife. The Greens, meanwhile, strut smugly around, sporting their finest kingmaker outfits while trying to look wise and benign.

The collective opportunity to give the SNP Government a "bloody nose" is just too tempting, and common-sense, balance or reason must not be allowed to get in the way. (I should add that, although a supporter of Scottish independence, I do not delude myself into thinking for one moment that SNP members would act any more creditably were the boot to be on the other foot.)

The real tragedy in all this, of course, is that the actual interests and educational welfare of a generation of young Scots have been entirely lost from sight. If ever there was a matter which cried out for a proportionate, consensual approach to be taken by all members of any representative assembly, then this one is surely a prime example.

In Northern Ireland, where the devolved assembly is, following similarly reprehensible conduct by its members, currently adrift somewhere in the Twilight Zone, a "We Deserve Better" campaign is under way amongst the populace. Well, we deserve better, too, and it’s a pretty close-run thing when it comes to which of our countries is the worse-off.

Neil Sinclair,

51 Ballater Drive, Paisley.

DISCUSSING Primary 1 testing, Iain Macwhirter says that "the more you look at this raging controversy, the less you understand it". This could be because most Scottish adults (including the First Minister) have little knowledge about the intricacies of early child development.

The UN defines "early childhood" as 0-8 years and very few countries worldwide send their children to school at age four or five. After 150 years of state education, we in Scotland take this early start on formal

schooling for granted but there is now a great deal of international evidence that, for the under-sevens, the most beneficial education ethos (in terms of both future academic success and long-term health and well-being) is a relationship-centred, play-based "kindergarten" approach.

This is why the educational charity Upstart Scotland is opposed to testing of specific literacy and numeracy skills at Primary 1. Although the "Early Level" of Curriculum for Excellence (for three to six-year-olds)

supports play-based pedagogical principles, the P1 tests are pulling schools in the opposite – more traditional – direction. Teachers feel obliged to "teach to the tests" because they are linked to demanding

benchmarks for reading and writing. We hope anyone who doesn’t understand this raging controversy will look at the evidence-based arguments in Upstart’s document Play Not Tests in P1, which can be

found on www.upstart.scot.

Sue Palmer,

Chair, Upstart Scotland, 43/5 Thistle Street, Edinburgh.

IT is not difficult to understand why the Government and some groups of the population think it is appropriate to "test" whole cohorts of our youngest children, when a journalist of Iain Macwhirter’s standing refers to Early Level play pedagogy as "playschool" in his opinion piece.

As a retired nursery teacher, I am disappointed that he has misunderstood how skilled an Early Years team are as they support the children in their care to reach their potential. Many schools have used their Pupil Equity Fund money to employ an Early Years practitioner in the roll-out of play across the country in P1 and 2. The Curriculum for Excellence supports a play pedagogy for the Early Level with several documents and in recent HMIE reports, schools are being encouraged to link the learning across this age group.

Until we value the learning that occurs through play and treat this group of practitioners and children with respect, we will not be able to value the skills and capacities they are developing while assessment will, as it has in other countries, lead to a narrowing and formalisation of the curriculum for our fourto five-year-olds.

Kate Johnston,

22 Greenbank Terrace, Edinburgh.