Scottish Union for Education – Newsletter No20
Newsletter Themes: university ‘anti-racism’ threatens academic freedom, a sex-realist leaflet for parents and schools, and the truth about pupil attendance
SUE is organising a mass meeting in Glasgow to discuss how to challenge the indoctrination taking place in schools.
Speakers include:
Malcolm Clark Emmy-nominated TV producer and co-founder of LGB Alliance
Stuart Baird a secondary school teacher who promotes the idea of the need for teachers to become subject specialists
Peigi Piper a GP and parent of two primary school children whose eyes have been opened to the activism and sexualising nature of primary school education
Dr Stuart Waiton academic and Chairperson of the Scottish Union for Education
Tron Church, Bath Street, Thursday 15 June, 6.30 p.m.
We will be launching our pamphlet, Transgender Ideology in Scottish Schools: What’s wrong with government guidance? at this event. A free printed copy will be given to all attendees. A digital version is available here.
Tickets are free to SUE substack paid subscribers.
Academic freedom is racist – so says the Scottish Funding Council
Stuart Waiton is Chairperson of SUE.
We have noted before how schools are being re-racialised through the extremist ideology of critical race theory. This is an ideology that describes liberal or colourblind anti-racism as a form of racism. Now we find that the people funding Scottish universities believe that academic freedom is itself a form of ‘white indifference’, and that the UK agency responsible for standards in the academy want students to be educated that maths is also racist!
The founder of the Scottish Family Party, Richard Lucas, has many critics, not least of all because of his anti-abortion stance, a stance that I personally oppose. However, love or hate the man, Lucas has been an important source of information over the past few years when it comes to unpicking the details of Scottish government policy.
I mention this because it was in one of his recent videos that Lucas pointed out some of the curious and bizarre dimensions of the ‘anti-racist’ dogma being pushed by the Scottish Funding Council (SFC) and being adopted by universities across Scotland.
Look a little further into the SFC Call it racism campaign and the extreme nature of this ‘anti-racist’ initiative becomes clear.
It is worth noting that the SFC is the organisation responsible for distributing billions of pounds to universities and colleges – public money that allows these institutions to exist and to operate. The 25 universities and colleges who have signed up to the Call it racism campaign are listed here and include Glasgow, Edinburgh and St Andrews University.
Rather than believing in the importance of education and the pursuit of knowledge as a vital thing in itself, today we find universities are desperate to demonstrate that they are promoting social justice. For example, universities now compete with one another, through the SFC’s Race Equality Charter, to achieve the Bronze, Silver or Gold Awards to prove their ‘anti-racist’ credentials.
One of the SFC’s most interesting and extreme documents that make up part of their ‘anti-racist’ approach is the ‘race statement’. Scrolling down to the penultimate page, we come across a table that explains the different levels of ‘anti-racist’ awareness that stretch from white supremacy, to white indifference, to white awareness, and top of the class, white allyship.
According to this table, an example that demonstrates your white supremacy is that you hold the ‘Belief that we live in a meritocracy’.
Those of us with white indifference, the category that is one step away from white supremacy, so still pretty racist, include ‘Passionate defender[s] of western universalism, academic freedom and the right to offend’.
Moving on to the white awareness column, where you are starting to be on the ‘right side of history’, we find this statement about a correct understanding of racism: racism ‘functions like a mental illness that only white people have (Katz) hence focus on ‘discovering’ unconscious bias and cognitive distortions’.
Let’s ignore for the sake of time and energy the meritocracy or mental illness questions and jump into the academic freedom issue. What is it we are looking at here? What we find is that the organisation that funds universities, the very institutions that are meant to uphold and defend the value of academic freedom, is promoting an extreme dogma that defines this very freedom as a form of white indifference: defending academic freedom is essentially racist.
As it happens, I know some of the people who run these universities and who do indeed believe in academic freedom. So what on earth are they doing adopting this SFC approach? What are they doing spending months of time and effort attempting to get an ‘anti-racist’ charter badge from an organisation that sees academic freedom as racist?
You can shrug and think it is just a performance. But this is not something in the background. University departments, divisions and lecturers across Scotland are being educated in this new ‘anti-racism’. More than educated, in fact: they are being instructed to adopt this approach and incorporate it into their degree programmes. And the current generation of students (and indeed schoolgirls and schoolboys) are increasingly likely to be educated in this new form of right think administered by our very own SFC Ministry of Truth.
I would call this form of so-called anti-racism, racist. But what would I know? My defence of academic freedom clearly demonstrates my white indifference, something that needs to be educated out of me by the SFC.
But all is not lost. After SUE sent out a press release to a variety of papers, two picked up on the story. First the Daily Express questioned the SFC’s approach. Then the Epoch Times did likewise and cornered sociology professor Gurnam Singh, who developed the material, was forced to backtrack and state that ‘academic freedom is essential to allow the exploration and questioning of ideas, without which academia cannot function’, which I guess makes Professor Singh part of the problem of institutional racism!
The extreme and contradictory nature of critical race theory means it can be challenged. In England, for example, we find that in the world of mathematics there is a kickback against the excesses of this ‘anti-racism’ by maths lecturers who have been instructed by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) to embed EDI (equality, diversity and inclusion) in their lessons.
The dogmatists at the QAA (the body that is supposed to check standards and quality in UK higher education) have instructed mathematicians across the UK to highlight that ‘Some early ideas in statistics were motivated by their proposers’ support for eugenics, some astronomical data were collected on plantations by enslaved people, and, historically, some mathematicians have recorded racist or fascist views or connections to groups such as the Nazis’.
I’m only surprised that lecturers have not be instructed to teach their students that ‘Hitler, Mussolini, members of the KKK, and, we have heard, the Devil himself, did maths when they were young’!
The farcical extremes that the modern ‘anti-racists’ will go to to racialise every aspect of education is beyond comedy or farce. It is both infantile and dangerous.
It is dangerous because it turns education into a moralising process where social justice concerns trump knowledge itself. Academic subjects are sullied and recast as somehow being associated with some of the worst aspects of human history – as a source of guilt and shame rather than as something that has helped to develop and enlighten the modern world.
Thankfully, Dr John Armstrong and a host of academic mathematicians have sent an open letter to the QAA denouncing their attempt to politicise the maths curriculum, noting that ‘Students should be able to study mathematics without also being required to pay for their own political indoctrination’.
SUE was set up to allow parents, teachers and indeed students who believe in Education not Indoctrination to have a voice. If you want to challenge this dangerous agenda, get in touch: info@scottishunionforeducation.co.uk.
As we prepare for our Glasgow public meeting, an educational psychologist and friend of SUE has drafted this leaflet for use by parents, schools and young people.
(The two-sided leaflet is available here and can be printed for use.
Contact us at info@scottishunionforeducation.co.uk).
Schools and teachers take note – stop transing our kids!
Our schools are promoting an ideology which is harming our children’s emotional wellbeing and mental health. It claims that some children are ‘born in the wrong body’ and can ‘change sex’. This is a misleading and dangerous lie.
There are only two sexes: male and female
No child is born in the wrong body
It is impossible to physically change sex
Sex and gender are not the same thing
It is illegal for schools to promote any ideology
Schools should not automatically affirm a child who says he or she is the opposite sex
Schools should always contact the parents of any child who says he or she wants to change sex
Social transition to the opposite sex can be harmful psychologically for any child
Puberty resolves anxieties for nearly all children who are gender questioning
The idea of ‘trans’ is a twenty-first century invention!
The Scottish government must withdraw their guidance on ‘transgender’ pupils in schools!
Stop transing our kids! Tips for parents with gender ideology concerns
As a parent, you have the right and responsibility to ensure that your child is fully safeguarded while engaging in education. It is the view of various professionals, including psychologists and therapists, that the current promotion of gender ideology in many schools is confusing and is potentially psychologically harmful to young children and teenagers.
Here are some issues to raise and things to check with your child’s school.
Tell the school that there is no obligation to follow the Scottish government’s guidance, Supporting Transgender Pupils in Schools.* Much better guidance, Boys and Girls and the Equality Act, has been produced by the organisations Sex Matters and Transgender Trend (with input from lawyers and teachers).
Check that the school understands that it is impossible for children (or indeed any human) to change sex.
Check with the school that the toilets and changing rooms are single sex only and will remain so.
Ask if there is an awareness in school about the fact that the term ‘trans’ has been invented by activists and not by child development experts.
Check if the school uses the services of an LGBTQ youth group. If the school does, request that this contact is terminated.**
Ask the school for a copy of its protocol for managing its response when a pupil states that she or he is ‘trans’.
Ask if the school staff are aware that self-ID and social transitioning can be harmful psychologically for any pupil.
Check that the school recognises the potential for social contagion among pupils and has strategies to manage this.
* There is no legal requirement to use the Scottish government’s guidance.
** An LGBTQ group has referred itself to the police in response to allegations of grooming, and their previous CEO was convicted of paedophilia.
What is the attendance level in Scottish schools? Options: 50:50, phone-a-friend or ask the audience
Julie Sandilands is an English/business teacher who worked in several secondary schools in Fife until 2017. Now based in Cumbria, she works as a private tutor teaching children both in and out of mainstream educational provision.
There has been an avalanche of articles recently about the ongoing problem of poor attendance in the nation’s schools (see here, here and here), and a growing consensus that poor attendance is one of the many costs of the catastrophic, unscientific decision to close schools several times between 2020 and 2021. There is no doubt that this decision has seriously contributed to the problem, and on a personal note, I am eternally grateful that my two Swedish grandchildren experienced no disruption to their education and were met each day by fully visible faces!
Now, focusing solely on Scotland, attendance in some schools is not just a post-lockdown issue, although, according to Scottish government statistics, between 2010 and 2019, attendance bobbed nicely along around the 93 percent mark.
This 93 percent figure could, however, be much lower, as attendance levels are based on the data collection and recording system called SEEMiS used by all local authorities. The system relies on schools to accurately record daily attendance using a set of codes. These data are then used by schools, local authorities and the Scottish government to report to the outside world. Parents/carers are advised of their children’s attendance through academic reports.
Over the years, it came to my attention that the recorded attendance for some students did not appear to reflect actual attendance in lessons, so in 2016 I (once again) started to complete manual registers for each class alongside the digital ones. If pupils arrived late, I also recorded the time arrived so I could calculate the actual time missed in each lesson. For two pupils who were regularly absent from class, it came as no surprise when one pupil, let’s call them pupil A, over the academic year had an official attendance level of 79.3%, yet attendance in English lessons amounted to 56.8%, mostly due to arriving and signing in just before mid-morning break, consistently missing the first two lessons of the day. Now 56.8% is an important statistic, especially when analysing examination results, as the official attendance figure might not necessarily flag absence as being a contributory factor to poor academic performance. Another pupil (B), had achieved an impressive overall attendance of 89.6%, yet actual lesson attendance for all subjects when manually counted was 71.2%.
So why do such discrepancies occur? Because the management information system created and provided by SEEMiS is not only quite complex but also allows schools to use and change codes which can boost individual attendance levels and ultimately whole-school levels. For example, late arrivals are explained in the official statistics as follows:
‘Pupils arriving late are marked as such, with a distinction made for those arriving in the second half of a morning or the second half of the afternoon. Where summary data is necessary, if a pupil has attended most of an opening it is counted as attendance, but if they have been absent for most of a session it is included as authorised absence.’
Confusing at best and very difficult, using the SEEMiS data, to accurately measure absence levels, especially for regular non-attenders or latecomers such as pupils A and B. In addition, parent/carer reasons for absence can influence which codes are used, and very often such reasons are difficult to verify.
SEEMiS is obviously aware that data can be manipulated and have published a policy document titled Fraud Whistle Blowing for Third Parties, where they state their commitment to ‘to dealing, on a confidential basis, with any allegation of material fraud or malpractice brought to its attention by any contractor, supplier, organisation, or members of the general public.’
The Scottish government also acknowledge the problems with the accuracy and reliability of the data in their background notes on the 2016/17 datasets, stating:
‘In previous years, we have highlighted the issue of variability in how some schools and local authorities are recording absence. The main focus of this work was to improve consistency in the way absences where the reason for absence is unknown/unreported are recorded. It is evident from the attendance and absence data that although schools and local authorities have made progress on improving their recording practices, there still remain some schools and local authorities who are not recording attendance and absence correctly. As a result, caution should also be taken when considering year on year national level changes, particularly for sickness, other authorised absence and truancy.’
Going forward, how can overall attendance in Scottish schools be improved? And how can the current management information system produce more realistic datasets?
Well, here are a few suggestions.
A school ethos that emphasises to pupils, parents and carers the importance of regular attendance, with ongoing senior management involvement for repeat offenders, overseeing any subsequent consequences incurred as a result. (In other words, get tough!)
Increased data quality assurance procedures at school, local authority and national level.
The completion of manual registers in lessons to supplement digital ones, either for the whole class or for regular non-attenders or latecomers.
Re-evaluation and/or simplification of code use, e.g., any lessons missed simply due to being late, in morning or afternoon sessions, is counted as absence. (Just like in the real world!)
Let’s also hope that now we are living in the post-Covid era, both ‘Covid-19 sickness with provision for home learning’ and ‘Covid-19 self-isolation with provision for home learning’ are removed from the ‘attendance’ criteria list and recorded as sickness without educational provision (authorised absence).
Until the accuracy of recording and reporting on school attendance (i.e. actually present in lessons or school activities) is improved, it is most definitely the case that caution should be applied when analysing the official biennial data.
Thanks for reading the SUE Newsletter.
Please visit our Substack
Please join the union and get in touch with our organisers.
Email us at info@scottishunionforeducation.co.uk
Please pass this newsletter on to your friends, family and workmates.