Children starting secondary school should be on the cusp of a wonderful educational adventure. They should leave primary school feeling confident and enthused about learning a whole new tranche of subjects.

Soon they will be buried in physics, chemistry, English and geography — hopefully seeing bright futures for themselves.

When they arrive at high school they ought to be equipped not just with pencils and slide rules but with the basic tools to embark on their adventure with confidence. There is a brave new world of knowledge to navigate. Unfortunately, far too many children lack the equivalent of a compass to guide them through.

By this I mean the solid grounding in numeracy and literacy that should be established in primary school. How can a 12-year-old hope to grasp the map reading and statistical skills needed for, say, geography if they cannot read, write or count effectively?

Today, The Sunday Times reveals that up to 40% of primary school children in some parts of Scotland fail to reach level D in literacy before they leave in P7.

Our figures reflect the concerns expressed by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education (HMI), whose report was finished last month. It said many young people made insufficient progress from the middle stages of primary until well into their secondary education.

No wonder so many struggle. They are trying to cope with the upheaval of a new environment and different friends, umpteen classes, much older children and the pressures of adolescence.

Yet they are already running to catch up academically. It is not surprising that so many become disruptive, recalcitrant and alienated from the entire learning experience. And remember, these pupils will be in the same mixed-ability classes as peers who do have a strong grasp of the basics and wish to accelerate. The keen kids are subsequently dragged down — the reason why school inspectors are so concerned about the backward shift in S1 and S2. Everybody suffers from poor attainment.

Increasingly, commentators and many policy-makers suggest that such pupils are in the wrong place. They should not be forced to study subjects which they feel have no relevance to their lives and which fail to engage them. Instead they should be allowed to embark on vocational courses early, spending their school days on, say, hairdressing, caring skills and joinery.

There is certainly an argument to be made against forcing square pegs into round academic holes. But the figures we reveal today show that we should tread carefully. Many pupils, who might otherwise embrace the secondary school curriculum, might be failing to engage with subjects because they cannot keep up. Even those teenagers who are not destined for university need to read and write with confidence. Would you want an innumerate electrician wiring your home? How would you feel if an illiterate care assistant was put in charge of an elderly parent or sick child?

Research by the National Literacy Trust last year showed how this weakness in our education system perpetuates poverty and failure from one generation to the next. It is not just about the practical difficulties of not being able to master the Highway Code or conduct a meaningful Google search.

Almost one in three women and one in four men with poor literacy are likely to live in a non-working household. They are less likely to vote or even participate in their local community. They will probably lack access to computer technology, which can only leave them more isolated. By contrast, research by the trust found that even a modest literacy improvement meant the likelihood of a man being on state benefits fell from 19% to 6%. The chances of him owning his own home rose from 40% to 78%.

Of course, intergenerational failure makes the work of teachers harder. Many children enter school in deprived areas without the most basic life and language skills. Three-year-olds with educated parents will speak more fluently than five-year-olds raised in homes where drug and alcohol abuse are rife.

This is one reason the education secretary, Fiona Hyslop, has pitched her policy tent firmly in the nursery. By improving early-years education, she can raise attainment into adulthood. All the research from this country as well as the continent and America proves this to be the case. But that does not mean ignoring the weaknesses that exist. HMI has consistently praised early years and the entry levels of primary schools, while raising concerns about the middle years. It’s time we acted seriously on those concerns.

One way forward would be to introduce proper tests to allow teachers, schools and education authorities to see how individual children are progressing. The previous Labour Scottish government replaced these with anonymous “spot checks”, which are then extrapolated to give a national picture. It is significant that the education authority which still tests — East Renfrewshire — has high results even in those schools in poorer areas. It lets the director of education see problems and step in to correct them.

Of course, it may also expose poor teachers and badly managed schools. And it would expose further the local authorities that are failing. We are told that mythical “Scottish consensus” is against testing young children. Why then do the parents of East Renfrewshire not complain or withdraw their children? Probably because they are happy that things are being properly monitored. The education secretary should take note.

joan.mcalpine@sunday-times.co.uk

Times Recommends

• We have kit and leadership. Let’s go
• Behind the scenes at the biggest deal
• Conferences — what a waste of money