Q&A - Ronnie Smith

The general secretary of the Educational Institute of Scotland on reports that universities are objecting to a plan to allow students to study for their Highers over two years.

Why are Scottish universities commenting on the current system of qualifications in Scotland?

This is part of a review of Scottish qualifications that has been going on for some time. The proposition being discussed would make it more feasible than it is at the moment for pupils to study for Higher qualifications over a longer period.

What view do the universities have of the proposed changes?

They seem to be taking a strange view of learning. They are concentrating on the length of time taken to study, rather than on the qualification gained – and saying that Highers earned over two years would be worth less.

Under the proposals, would every pupil study Highers over two years?

I don't think everybody would study Highers over two years, and some students might complete some courses over two years and others over one year. It is not that everybody would be taking two years to do Highers.

What do you think of the argument that Highers which took two years should be worth less?

It seems a very strange view to take. They seem less interested in the level of learning than in the speed with which the knowledge has been acquired. Education and learning should not be regarded as a race against time.

What do you think teachers think about the proposals?

I think most teachers want a system of qualifications that is a fair reflection of pupils' learning. These new Scottish qualifications are being developed in a framework which is developing across Europe. Qualifications are relevant to many other people, including employers, and not just to universities. I don't think universities should be making these decisions – it's like the tail wagging the dog.