Search by topic
Keynote: Is the jury out on the McCormac Review?
By Anthony Finn, Chief Executive, GTC Scotland
So, now that the McCormac Review of Teacher Employment in Scotland has been published, should we anticipate significant changes in our schools?
Clearly, the report makes an important contribution to thinking about professional practice. Before we start to dismantle tested systems, however, it seems sensible to support the Government's plan to consult widely on the report's implications and for the Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers to consider which changes might benefit the profession.
There may well be a consensus around some recommendations; others will need very detailed discussion before any agreement and, I suspect, some recommendations may not survive extended analysis.
It was, of course, inevitable that a review team which received more than 3,000 submissions, some very radical and others conservative, would produce a report which would court controversy.
Some people were bound to be disappointed by the outcome, and in the days following publication, the press had little difficulty in finding critics of the review's findings.
Some coverage perceived GTC Scotland's initial response as critical. However, our intention was both to offer broad support for the recommendations placing emphasis on supporting the professionalism of teachers, and also to signal concern about certain others.
Some critics have opposed recommendations to improve Professional Review and Development (PRD), identifying therein a perceived but unstated link to strengthened competence procedures.
However, GTC Scotland believes that teachers have an entitlement to good PRD and related support and we have made it very clear that there will be no change to existing competence procedures as a result of the introduction of a supportive scheme of "professional update". The McCormac report can support this view rather than challenge it.
We are, of course, disappointed that the Chartered Teacher programme is at risk. We believe that recent changes were beginning to show the full potential of Chartered Teachers.
Our own recent work with Scottish and international partners has highlighted the importance of accomplished teaching and it is strongly desirable that opportunities are provided to recognise the skills and contribution of teachers delivering it.
Finally, we have serious difficulty with any proposal which might allow external experts to take responsibility for class teaching.
Although we recognise and value the contribution which can be made by, for example, visiting artists, sports performers, writers and musicians, this successful work is based on a professional partnership with teachers who have detailed knowledge of subject content, of learning and of pedagogy.
We believe it would be professionally inappropriate to give unqualified staff the right to delivery any aspect of the school curriculum.
I have met Professor McCormac several times and found him to be very open, thoughtful and well-intentioned, with the best interests of Scottish education at heart. Nothing in the published report causes me to revise this judgement.
Earlier this year, however, I urged his team to "keep issues of teacher professionalism and pupil learning at the very centre of their deliberations".
The jury is now out on whether they can convince teachers that this has been achieved.