YOU report that “teaching unions ... raise concerns that they [standardised national tests] are being used to assess the quality of teaching rather than helping pupils” (“Fearful teachers threaten boycott of new tests”, The Herald, September 22). I take that to mean teachers and their unions object to being judged on the quality of the work they produce.
Anecdotal evidence (I am an ex-pupil, a parent, uncle and grandfather) leads me to suspect that teachers are, to a degree, unaccountable for their end product and that, all too frequently, the hierarchy in schools is cosy and ineffectual. Surely it’s a grand idea that teachers should be judged along with their pupils?
My background is industrial engineering and I was required to visit plants where the end product and its efficiency had been deemed by the board of directors to be substandard. I would have been giving a rare old-fashioned look if I had simply judged the end product and not those who produced it: the operatives and senior management.
Reputable industries demand high standards of efficiency and quality because the bottom line and their reputation depend upon it; when it is not achieved heads roll. That does not seem to be the case in education where one rarely hears of a dismissal or demotion at any level.
It is the practice in industry not to promote strong performers to senior positions on the same site when this can be avoided but, all too often, teachers in a school are promoted to become deputy heads of department, heads of department, deputy headteachers and, ultimately, heads of school.
There is no distance between the managers and the workers so sentimentality and friendship can preclude sound judgment and, from what I hear, it frequently does. Teaching then becomes a sinecure. Yes, I know the work is hard, the hours long and the pupils stressful but the job is safe and the pension is generous.
A note to the Scottish Government: Please do judge the teachers along with the pupils and act swiftly and courageously when some are found to be ineffectual; all our futures depend upon it.
Ian M Forrest,
Dalveen, Garvock Road,
Laurencekirk.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel