Scottish students in senior secondary have three consecutive years of high-stakes exams - as well as practice exams up to three times a year - and it is leading to “disillusionment for young people and frustration for teachers”, according to members of the national qualifications and assessment review group.
Instead of teachers being able to “excite” students in the senior phase about their learning or encourage “passion about what they are doing”, they are engaging in “fairly predictable behaviours” because “much of the senior phase experience is focused on preparing for examinations”, according to Louise Hayward, who headed-up the review of qualifications and assessment that reported in June.
Professor Hayward - who also made the observation about “disillusionment” and “frustration” - took questions this morning from the Scottish Parliament’s Education, Children and Young People Committee, where secondary headteacher and independent review group (IRG) member Peter Bain also gave evidence.
He told MSPs: “The whole system is designed to pass exams, not to prepare our youngsters for life after school.”
Mr Bain said that the focus on exam passes at Higher, in particular, was “narrowing the curriculum” because schools did not want to fall down “the artificial league table[s]” produced by national newspapers.
However, both Professor Hayward and Mr Bain said they were not calling for exams to be scrapped altogether but for “a broad range of approaches to assessment”.
“An exam is one part of that - but it’s to broaden that,” said Professor Hayward.
The review group, which published its final report in June, is recommending a “significant reduction” in school exams and that any qualification below Higher level should be internally assessed.
It also wants a “Scottish Diploma of Achievement” (SDA) to be introduced to better recognise students’ wider achievements.
In the wake of the report, education secretary Jenny Gilruth said she wanted to take more time to consult with teachers amid concerns that many felt they had not been involved enough in the process.
Today, Professor Hayward said that the IRG had tried to engage with the profession - and packages of materials were sent to every school in the country - but through social media she had become aware that engagement had been “patchy” and had “got blocked at different points in the system”.
She said: “I was getting feedback from teachers saying ‘nobody’s asked me’ and then you start to realise it was getting through into some areas, but in other areas it didn’t seem to be working terribly effectively.”
Mr Bain said consulting more widely made sense and could do no harm - using the adage “measure twice, cut once”.
He said that few people liked the idea of change, but when the thinking behind the review group’s proposals was properly explained, he believed, teachers would get on board.
He said that 11 headteachers had been involved directly in the development of the SDA and they supported it, and now they wanted to know “the devil in the detail”.
“They want to move into a planning for implementation stage, but they accept it in principle,” said Mr Bain. “The teachers and the schools that did not engage, and do not understand it, they are the ones that are more vocally saying ‘hold on a minute’. And, because there are a fair few of them, it’s quite natural that the Cabinet secretary has taken pause.”
He added: “They will come to the agreement everyone else has once they understand it - that this is a good idea that needs teasing out.”
Professor Ken Muir, who was also giving evidence as a member of the review group, and who published a landmark 2022 report on Scottish education reform, said: “It’s very easy to set out a list of risks in changing any system. My personal view is that the biggest risk for us now is not changing the system because we know there are significant issues with it as it is currently set up.”
