Please Support Talking-up Scotland at:
https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/p/support-talking-up-scotland
Click on the above.
Or direct bank transfer at Sort Code 08-91-04 Account - 12266421 Name - JOHN ROBERTSON
All over BBC UK [England] today, this message:
The government says it plans to halve the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers in England by the time children born in this Parliament finish secondary school.
It’s another one of those promises you might like to ask an 11 year-old to answer these questions:
- When will the gap be halved for those born in 2026?
- When might there be no gap for any pupils in England’s schools?
2044 and 2062!?
Meanwhile, from the Scottish Government’s Literacy and numeracy standards reach record high report in December 2024:
The proportion of pupils achieving the expected level in literacy and numeracy across primary and secondary schools has reached a new high, officials figures show.
For numeracy, a record 80.3% of pupils across P1, P4 and P7 reached expected levels, while S3 also reached a new high of 90.3%. For literacy, achievement is also now at a record high in both primary (74%) and secondary (88.3%).
The attainment gap between young people from the most and least deprived areas meeting standards in literacy has also reached a new low, according to the latest Achievement of Curriculum for Excellence levels 2023-24 (ACEL) statistics.
In England, on 9 July 2024 [latest data], for 11 year-olds [P7]:
[Only] 61% of pupils reached the expected standard in all of reading, writing and maths, up from 60% in 2023. This is below 2019 attainment, where 65% of pupils met the standard.
Direct comparison with education in other countries is not always reliable but had this stark contrast [20-30% better] operated in the opposite direction, with England at 80% and Scotland at 61%, you can be sure our media would be all over it.
Also, ignored:
A game-changer in education, the narrowing of the attainment gaps and the increased attainment of the most disadvantaged
To my mind, after nearly 40 years in education, more important than narrowing gaps is increased attainment for the most disadvantaged:
At SCQF level 7, the gap in 2009/10, two years after the SNP first came to power, was 24.1 and by 2021/22 it was still 22.2, though down from 25 in the previous year. If you have limited understating of statistics or cynically only wish to accuse the SNP Government of failure, these statistics hide the true nature of change.
In 2009/10 only 4.7% of those in the most disadvantaged 20% had achieved at this level but by 2021/22, the figure was 10.3%, more than doubling in only 12 years. Remember also, that 20% means nearly 3 000 pupils every year.
In the above I play the closing the gap game because it’s the only game the MSM will play. Here’s what I really think about closing attainment gaps:
In my 50 years researching and thinking, talking with colleagues across school and higher education, I’ve never met anyone who thinks we should be worrying about or trying to do anything about narrowing the class-based gap.
Only in Albania and Maoist China were the gaps narrowed, reversed even, by only allowing the poor to get an education and sending children of the middle classes and the rich to work in the fields and factories.
It’s a kind of madness but opposition parties and their media pals subscribe to it happily
We, IN education, all think that unless you’re going to, like those mad dictatorships, segregate on the basis of class, any enhancement of school education will inevitably and enthusiastically be exploited by ambitious middle class kids and their parents. The disadvantaged WILL do better but so will the more advantaged and the gap will still be largely the same.
What you can and should do is worker harder to improve the attainment within the disadvantaged group and, hey, what do you think has been happening there, these last 10 to 15 years, but totally ignored by critics?
Using data from Summary Statistics for Attainment and Initial Leaver Destinations, No. 5: 2023 Edition published in February 2023 :
In 2009/10 only 27.2% had achieved at Level 6 (Higher and above) and only 4.7% at Level 7 (Advanced Higher), of those in the most disadvantaged 20% had achieved at this level, but by 2021/22, the figures were 46.6% and 10.3%, almost and more than doubling in only 12 years. Remember also, that 20% means nearly 3 000 pupils every year.
Over the same period 28.8% of those in the most advantaged 20% had achieved at level 7 and by 2021/22, the figure was 38.8%, a smaller in percentage but larger in actual numbers, increase.
So, despite the major improvement among those from the most deprived 20%, there had also been a significant improvement among the least deprived 20%.
The attainment gap is a largely artificial and mostly political idea with no meaning for those it describes. What really matters is the massive improvement in the life chances of those in the most disadvantaged 20%. It’s not enough, of course, but this fact relates to the real experience of thousands rather than that of the media and opposition party opportunism.
There have been similar improvements in attainment for the other three groups between the most and the least disadvantaged. The gaps between them and the least disadvantaged are narrower and, of course, of no interest to the media.
Please Support Talking-up Scotland at:
https://www.crowdfunder.co.uk/p/support-talking-up-scotland
Click on the above.
Or direct bank transfer at Sort Code 08-91-04 Account - 12266421 Name - JOHN ROBERTSON
Talking-up Scotland 
“Labour Government promises”
Aye don’t they just……..their only problem being that they then fail to deliver.
An SNP investigation has revealed Starmer’s failed Brit card scheme cost the public almost £1 million – despite never being implemented.
That reminds me of this…………
The feasibility study into Boris Johnson’s bridge/tunnel connecting Scotland and Northern Ireland that proved to be , yet (another) flawed vanity project by Johnson , to then be considered as being totally unfeasible……..
As a feasibility study it cost the taxpayers £896,681. It was led by Network Rail chairman Sir Peter Hendy, the 2021 report concluded that the project was “impossible to justify,” with estimated costs of £335bn for a bridge or £209bn for a tunnel.
Also known as a ‘Bridge too far”.
From a financial perspective it puts into perspective the (false) accusations from the Tory & Labour branch offices in Scotland as to how much they say that the SNP, as the Scottish government, supposedly waste in taxpayers money , especially when their respective HQ parties waste far far more on failed and flawed projects , some that do not even get off the ground.
Then of course other projects that do not even get on the ground , if one takes into account the other huge expensive failure that is the Ajax Armoured vehicles, a government project via the former UK Tory government , with initial estimates state costs around £5.5 billion, but reports have cited up to £6.3 billion.
Over £10 million per vehicle.
589 vehicles are ordered.
8 years behind the original schedule.
On 26th November 2025, it was reported in the British media that the Army had halted the use of Ajax vehicles .
It was then reported by the BBC (English HQ) on 20 February 2026 that:
“The (Labour) defence secretary (John Healey) has refused to give a timescale on when all the investigations into the troubled Ajax armoured vehicles programme will conclude”.
“The Ministry of Defence (MOD) paused testing of the ‘machines’ after 35 service personnel across 23 vehicles became ill, with reports of soldiers vomiting and shaking following training last year”
“The Ajax vehicles were originally due to enter service in 2017, with the 589 vehicles ordered” .
“But the £6.3bn programme has been beset by problems and repeated delays”.
You know Douglas Ross was right last week (just not in the sense of who he was accusing, as in the SNP) when he said “ “This comes down to transparency. This stinks”.
Of course Ross is an expert on so many things that were connected to him and also to his party at HQ that lacked “transparency” and also that “Stunk” (too many to list) .
Did some of his own colleagues in the Tory branch office not once say that something “stinks” in the way that he, Ross in the past, had formerly become the ‘leader’ of the Tory branch office when Carlaw was ousted (officially he, Carlaw, pretended that he had resigned)……
As back then the branch office manager position was uncontested so more really a coronation of Douglas Ross as the branch office manager than an actual leadership competition.
Also Ross incurred the wrath of many of his branch office colleagues in 2024 in respect to Ross’s deplorable treatment of one of his Tory colleagues, David Duguid , in the 2024 UK GE. (indeed that lacked “transparency” and it also “stunk” as an action by Ross).
A plot (that backfired for Ross) as it then lost the Tories that seat and also lost Douglas Ross that WM parliamentary seat too #Karma……….
However looking on the bright side he, Ross, is now not standing this May for our Scottish parliament……..so he will be one of those MSP’s ‘not missed’ by opposition MSP’s, but also , I am sure , not missed by many within his own party in the Tory branch office either (especially Jackson Carlaw).
What’s next for Douglas Ross ?
I mean we all know which rogue pretend party is the perfect fit for him…..so why is he taking him so long to finally take the plunge.
As to the other branch office manager, Sarwar, well in September 2025 at the Labour party conference he claimed that the Scottish government was “failing to deliver” , well if that is meant to be a negative then he should look at what his own HQ party have “failed to deliver” since coming to power in July 2024………
That would be mainly the “Change” that both he, Sarwar, and they, Labour HQ , promised us all that we would see and so experience if Labour won the 2024 UK GE.
Tory and Labour branch offices assume that they can both critique the SNP , while they and also their own respective HQ’s have a track record in opposition and in government(s) that should silence both of them as branch offices forever (via sheer embarrassment and an abundance of shame).
Best way for us all to communicate our displeasure at them would be to not to vote for any of them , indeed do not vote for any pro UK party in the Scottish elections this May.
Liz s
LikeLiked by 1 person
Well, being the eternal pessimist, I don’t think the Labour party will be in power in 2062, in fact I’d be surprised if the young school kids will not have been replaced by robots so they won’t need school, just shackles, they’ll be in closed camps attending to the rich oligarchs, the ones that survive.
I know see told you, pessimist. Though another scenario is there will be no liveable areas left on Earth and the mega rich will have all scooted off to the Moon or Mars by then having built their colonies there. Just a shame they don’t go there now, though I’d say drilling and occupying the moon might not be good idea.
LikeLike
Boris Johnson was on Laura Kuenssberg’s Sunday morning programme today.
Why ?
Apparently he condemned reports that the (Labour) UK government will not allow the US to use airbases for any potential attack on Iran…..he called it a “a historic mistake”.
Funnily enough so was he, Boris Johnson, a “historic mistake” as a former Tory UK PM.
Then in respect to the Monarchy and the scandal that has now grown arms and legs….he said that the Monarchy “will recover” from scandal around Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, and he said that the current situation will “blow over”.
Well he would know , based on all of the (too) many Tory political scandals that all seemed to “blow over” , especially when he was formerly one of the (too) many previous Tory PM’s……as the Tory mantra was always “Move on, nothing to see here”………when the opposite was the case !
Their client media helped them to do that of course….as in try to encourage (manipulate) us all to “move on” and so then that helped to ensure that both Johnson’s many scandals and also the Tory party’s many scandal did indeed eventually “blow over”.
Fortunately it is not up to him to decide what will and will not “blow over” regarding the Monarchy or indeed what is and what is not “historic mistakes”.……..that is, he who has no sense of self awareness , nor indeed does he have any awareness on how much the public cares not what he thinks, nor what he feels and of course nor do we care what he has to say upon anything or anyone.
His political career is over………a blimp in UK politics (also one of many).
It does make you wonder though why LK, via the BBC HQ , is once again giving such a useless lump a media platform , when instead he should be consigned to (bad) political history………”blow over” even.
Liz S
LikeLike
You have debunked the mendacious concept of ‘closing the gap’ very well.
We HAVE class segregated education in the United Kingdom and have always had – that is what fee-paying education is.
Before we had comprehensive secondary schools we had senior secondaries and junior secondaries and children sat the ‘Qualifying Examination’ [QUALY]. (11+ elsewhere in the UK). The purpose of these examinations was to segregate those who did not attend fee-paying schools, even further. Only 35% of the population was permitted to ‘pass’ the Qualy. When the papers were marked all the pupils were ranked from the highest score downwards and the ‘pass mark’ was at the score where the 35% quota was reached. It was arbitrary. And, of course the children of the middle classes, tended to be more highly represented in the ‘top’ 35%, because of the absence of material poverty, especially in their early years. So, the Qualy was an instrument of class segregation.
Those who ‘failed’ the Qualy went to Junior Secondary where the curriculum was narrower and where subjects like modern languages, chemistry, biology, physics were omitted.
Comprehensive secondary schools entitled ALL children to the same broad curriculum. However, there was further class based segregation, by the use of systems like ‘streaming’ and ‘setting’ which meant that although children deemed ‘less able’ had the same curriculum, it tended not to go to the same high levels as those children in the ‘top streams’ This excluded them from sitting Higher Grades.
When streaming and setting were replaced by ‘mixed ability’ classes, all children for the first two years had the same breadth, depth and balance of the curriculum. At the end of second year pupils chose subjects that they would take to ‘O’ Grade, (later Standard Grade, later ‘National 5’). These exams were sat at the end of Fourth Year, but, until, 1970, children could leave school at the end of third year (aged 15) and large numbers did, mainly because they were financially poorer and their families needed them to work, earn a wage and contribute to family finances.
In 1970 the leaving age was raised to 16 years, I.e. the end of Fourth Year, so many more children began sitting and ‘PASSING’ ‘O’ Grades despite it, theoretically, only permitting a 35% quota to ‘pass’. The quota had to be abolished because so many children were clustered around the 35% cut off that it was impossible to distinguish amongst them. This showed that there was a far greater amount of ability in the general population and the segregators had to admit that.
‘O’Grades were replaced by Standard Grades, which were based on criterion referenced assessment – if a child could demonstrate he or she could meet the criteria he or she ‘passed’. Very soon, 90% of the pupil body was ‘passing’, and, increasing numbers of children opted to remain in school to sit Higher Grades and over a relatively short period the numbers attaining Higher Grades increased, and more children were achieving the qualifications to enter Higher Education.
In addition, the quality of final university degrees attained by children from comprehensive schools were significantly better than those who had attended fee paying schools and had attained similar Higher Grades.
This made the wealthy pure bealin because the weans of council estate ‘scum’ were now able to enter the kinds of high paying careers that the fee-payers had until then seen as their right.
Of course, the affluent continue to put obstacles in the way of children from less affluent homes – by introducing gradings A, B, C, etc into criterion referenced exams in a bid to. ‘squeeze out’ the hoi polloi who cannot afford private tutors. And, increasing numbers England university fees and loans were introduced which are a serious disincentive to less affluent families.
Scotland, admirably, has taken a different route – no higher education fees, and other additional supports to maximise educational opportunity for all.
Many in Scotland who do not attain sufficient school qualifications go into Further Education and can, eventually attain university degrees. This is one of the reasons that there are fewer school leavers in Scotland who are ‘not in Employment, Education or Training (NEETs).
The Scottish Candidate Number, (SCN) which is assigned to all children in schools in Scotland, including the fee paying sector, at the end of the second year of secondary school, is used by all education and trading bodies in Scotland, so, the lifelong attainment of all can be tracked throughout their lives. This number is associated with the secondary school attended by the child and so, it enables the attainments of the alumni and alumnae of every school to be tracked. This is showing evidence that the ‘attainment gap’ between schools serving the lowest socioeconomic quintile and those of the highest narrows much more sharply than the measure made at the of end of school attainment. (I know of a compressive school in the west of Scotland whose cohort of girls for a year at the start of this century is the highest cumulative attainment in Scotland, including the fee paying sector.)
As Prof Robertson demonstrated, the ‘gap’ at the end of secondary school is a red herring. It is overall gains in attainment that ought to be focused on. However, the lifetime narrowing of the ‘gap’ is not one the media or the wealthy mention.
Far be it from me to praise a Labour politician, but, I think Bridget Phillipson has a sound grasp of this and I hope for the good of ‘the plain people of England’ her Schools Bill becomes law. She faces opposition and hatred not just from the usual right wing sources and JK Rowling, but also from within the Labour Party. Even with the departure of McSweeney, expect the briefings against her to continue.
LikeLike