Seòmar agus comataidhean

I have listened carefully to the cabinet secretary, and I will withdraw amendment 341 and focus on my next two amendments.

Amendment 341, by agreement, withdrawn.

Amendment 183 not moved.

Amendment 342 moved—[Pam Duncan-Glancy]—and agreed to.

Amendment 343 not moved.

Section 38, as amended, agreed to.

After section 38

Amendment 344 not moved.

Section 39—Report on performance of the Scottish education system

Amendment 184 not moved.

Amendment 345 moved—[Pam Duncan-Glancy]—and agreed to.

Will the member give way?

Amendments 305, 306 and 310 address the crucial matter of the frequency of school inspections. The amendments that I have lodged in the group all stem from one central belief, which is that every learner in Scotland, regardless of their postcode, has the right to attend a school that is regularly and rigorously inspected. It is a matter of equity, quality assurance and public trust.

Amendment 306 introduces a statutory requirement that every education authority establishment be inspected

“at least once within every 3 years”.

The amendment is straightforward but essential, because it is a response to a long-standing and well-documented concern—the absence of regular, consistent inspections across the system, which we have discussed many times in the chamber and in the committee. Audit Scotland has noted in multiple reports that there is no current statutory duty for cyclical inspections of schools in Scotland and that the current system relies on a risk-based and sampling model that leaves large gaps.

As of recent years, only a small percentage of schools have been inspected in a year. Many schools have gone 10 years or more without an inspection at all, and that is not accountability—that is abdication.

Amendment 304 refers to the complement of staff available to meet needs. An issue that comes up quite frequently—which I know Martin Whitfield will be aware of—is that, in many schools, it is felt that there are not sufficient numbers of classroom assistants. The intention behind that element of my amendment is to give the inspector the independence to be able to look at all those issues, and to put that in statute so that they are looked at very deliberately.

Returning to what I was saying about wellbeing, I do not know whether I need to stress this—I am sure that every member of the committee will already appreciate it—but, if schools are not safe environments for teaching and learning, every other objective of Scottish education will be jeopardised. Improvement, attainment and inclusion all depend on calm, secure and respectful classrooms.

I am not suggesting a return to punitive models of inspection; instead, amendment 304 would insist that inspectors asked the right questions. Are staff safe? Are learners being protected? Is disruption being addressed? Are the causes being tackled systemically? Those are the questions that I believe we should be enshrining in law.

I will move on quickly to talk about curriculum for excellence, which was designed with a focus on the four capacities. I believe that my amendment underpins that approach. The third pillar of amendment 304 is the requirement that inspections evaluate how well the education that is provided meets the needs of learners with additional support needs. That brings us back to Martin Whitfield’s intervention, so let me address the issue again.

This is not some vague generality; it goes to the heart of the national mission for excellence and equity in education. Across Scotland, however, there is mounting concern that that mission is falling short in practice. Audit Scotland’s report, “Improving outcomes for young people through school education”, which was published in 2021, made it clear that there is significant variation in outcomes between schools, councils and demographic groups; indeed, later reports have made the same point repeatedly.

That all points to the need for inspections to look not just at policy implementation or compliance with frameworks but at whether schools are actually meeting the specific and diverse needs of their pupils. Are disadvantaged learners receiving the support that they need? Are looked-after children being prioritised? Are learners with English as an additional language being included meaningfully?

I see the role of the inspector as speaking truth to power. I mentioned Government and Parliament, but any stakeholders, including local authorities and teaching unions, should listen to a voice of authority that reflects the reality that the inspector finds and reports. That is the voice of authority that an independent chief inspector ought to have, hence the consideration of culture, because it is a cultural issue.

There has been a useful debate, and I think that, among the members who are present and who have participated, there is a great degree of unanimity on what the amendments seek to do, which is to reinforce the idea that inspection is not something that is done to schools or to learners; that it should be a collaborative and developmental process; and that, if we are to win trust in the new system from the education workforce and the wider public, engagement and voice must be built in from the start. I therefore press amendment 319.

Amendment 319 agreed to.

Amendment 168 not moved.

Amendment 169 moved—[Miles Briggs]—and agreed to.

Amendment 170 not moved.

The friendly critical voice is quite a well-known concept in mentoring, coaching and supporting people. We all need a friendly critical voice in our lives, and I am proposing that that should be the cultural context in which the inspections take place. It is intended to be a positive culture, rather than the culture that might exist currently here, or in other places, in respect of school inspections. Does the cabinet secretary accept that that is a valuable role that a school inspector could play?

George Adam’s intervention is very helpful, because it adds weight to my concerns about frequency. Even an outstanding school in England is inspected every four to five years.

I am always reassured when I hear ministers say that they are not seeking power to dictate. [Laughter.] I still harbour a concern, but I am willing to go along—

I wish to say some words about why I felt the need to lodge amendment 304 in the first place. I think that many members will sympathise with the reasoning as to why these are salient issues in our education environment.

Amendment 304 states:

“An inspection under subsection (1) must include an assessment of, and any recommendations for improvements relating to ... the implementation and effectiveness of discipline policies ... the quality of the learning environment ... the support provided to persons with additional support needs, including access to appropriate resources and specialist support ... the morale and wellbeing of teachers and staff ... whether the number of teachers and staff in the establishment can meet the needs of the persons undertaking a qualification in that establishment ... the type of employment contract held by teachers and staff in the establishment ... the number”—