defeated. Opposing the move for industrial action, Larry Flanagan said that the motion reflected the time when very deep budget cuts were being threatened in some areas, including Glasgow. However, he warned against industrial action as a current tactic. “You don’t take a ballot on industrial action when you’re not convinced you can win it.” He pointed to the degree of engagement to date of most teachers with CfE, as evidenced by the recent EIS survey of members. In agreement, Frances Murray (Western Isles) said that in any EIS moratorium “there is the danger we’d be sitting on the outside. If we step back from the process, we’d have other versions of CfE coming to the fore.” A further move for a possible CfE boycott was defeated when a motion by Moray local association was rejected by a large majority. Eileen Morrison (Moray) wanted EIS Council to consider a membership boycott unless “an agreed timetable is confirmed for the phased reduction of all class sizes in line with EIS policy.” Local association secretaries would also be asked to comment on the adequacy of local CPD arrangements. Sandy Fowler (South Ayrshire) successfully argued against the motion, saying that it was “dangerous” to associate the separate issues of class sizes and CfE in a single boycott ballot.
“Risk of losing grass roots members if the moratorium proposal is defeated.” Kenny Mitchell
“There is the danger we’d be sitting on the outside. If we step back from the process, we’d have other versions of CfE coming to the fore.” Frances Murray
An agreed timetable needed for the phased reduction of all class sizes in line with EIS policy. Eileen Morrison
“It’s dangerous to associate the separate issues of class sizes and CfE in a single boycott ballot.” Sandy Fowler
AGM In a separate motion Hugh Donnelly successfully persuaded the AGM that the EIS should issue advice to schools that all CfE development should be managed within the framework of school and departmental improvement planning. Mr Donnelly spoke of the “gaps between the aspirations for CfE and the realities on the ground.” In support, May Ferries (Glasgow) spoke of the challenges of the “new professionalism you’re about to be granted” as a result of CfE.
Elsewhere in debate, Richard Foote (Glasgow) argued successfully for a “realistic timeline” for implementation for CfE, changes in assessment arrangements and the introduction of a baccalaureate. At the moment, CfE felt like “doing a major re-fit while out at sea.”
In support, Charlotte Ahmed (Glasgow ) believed the EIS was “being far too polite.” “We are being expected to deliver fundamental changes to the education system without adequate funding and resources to do so.”
The AGM also supported a “campaign” for a further extension to the starting date for the new qualifications regime as a result of a successful motion from Bill Ramsay. The EIS will examine the impact of budget cuts on CPD provision following a motion moved successfully by Susan Quinn (Glasgow). Her seconder, Hugh Donnelly (Glasgow) said that “professional development is at the heart of school improvement.”
Kenn Bryce Stafford (Edinburgh) won support for a motion which sought to ensure the availability of CPD for supply teachers.
The EIS is “being far too polite.”
“We must trust EIS members to get involved. If we disengage from the process, we just give up ground.”
Charlotte Ahmed
Hugh Donnelly
No To National Testing AGM delegates were almost unanimous in rejecting imposed national testing in primary and secondary schools. In its place, delegates accepted the terms of a motion supporting “assessment arrangements which are consistent with CfE and Assessment is for Learning (AifL).”
Speaking in support of the successful motion, Larry Flanagan (Education convener) said that the “one single issue on which CfE may founder is on the issue of assessment practice.” He spoke of the “narrow, data driven, attainment agenda” which had been the reality in many schools. In support, his vice-convener Susan Quinn said that “teachers already had a variety of assessment tools – including diagnostic tests, formative testing and other tests consistent with CfE and AifL. Pat Fallow (Fife), also speaking in support said “You don’t teach children by assessing them, you teach by assessing their needs and then meeting those needs.” Fiona Smith (Glasgow) warned that in the past, at the time of the introduction of the 5-14 programme, “We sleep walked into a testing culture.”
Larry Flanagan Educational Institute of Scotland 3