The Scottish government has been urged by an expert panel to push ahead with its reform of qualifications and assessment or risk “falling behind” on the international stage.
Academics told a Holyrood committee this morning that if the government continued “stalling” or “moving very slowly” on qualifications reform, Scotland - which had been “ahead of the game” when it introduced Curriculum for Excellence - would be overtaken by other countries.
Professor Gordon Stobart, who carried out an analysis of the Scottish examination system in 2021, painted a picture of a government that was good at consulting, but not at acting on the feedback it received.
He said the sheer number of “committees, discussions and consolations” taking place in Scottish education was leading to “inaction”, while other countries were pushing forward with reform and “looking at ways of bringing the assessment system and the curriculum up to date”.
He concluded: “If there’s this ongoing internal debate in Scotland but no movement, dare I say, don’t be surprised if you find others have gone past you.”
Professor Stobart made his comments at this morning’s meeting of the Scottish Parliament’s Education, Children and Young People Committee, which was taking evidence on the progress made in implementing the recommendations of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) 2021 report on Curriculum for Excellence.
That report highlighted the “misalignment” between the aspirations of CfE and the very traditional qualifications undertaken by students in the senior phase of secondary. It led to the Scottish government committing to reform assessment and qualifications and appointing Professor Louise Hayward to lead an independent review.
That review reported in June. It recommended scrapping exams for qualifications below Higher level and introducing a Scottish Diploma of Achievement to give a more rounded picture of school leavers’ achievements.
However, the government has yet to respond. Then, yesterday, education secretary Jenny Gilruth told the Scottish parliament that the review’s proposals would not be debated until “the new year”, citing “the challenges our schools are currently responding to” as the reason for the delay.
But the education committee witnesses suggested today that the problems the Scottish education system is facing, including worsening behaviour and attendance, were a reason to push ahead with change, not to delay.
Professor Stobart said the disengagement of pupils post-Covid should be “an incentive to make school more interesting and rewarding”.
He added: “They’ve changed and we may need to change the system.”
Meanwhile, Professor Walter Humes - an honorary professor at the University of Stirling - who was also giving evidence to the committee, said he thought the decision to delay qualifications reform would “actually disappoint a lot of teachers” and it was another example of the government’s “inclination to delay big decisions”.
Earlier in his evidence, Professor Humes said there had been “a loss of nerve” when it came to other aspects of the government’s education reform agenda, including the plans to replace the Scottish Qualifications Authority and reform Education Scotland.
He said teachers were at the stage where “they simply want a decision to be taken” on qualifications.
Professor Humes said: “Big decisions are not easy but in the world of politics there comes a point when you have to reach policy closure and take the decision and live with the consequences.”
Other panel members - Dr Marina Shapira, an associate professor at the University of Stirling, and Dr Janet Brown, the former chief executive of the Scottish Qualifications Authority, who is now the convener of the Royal Society of Edinburgh’s education committee - both suggested that there would always be another reason for delay “coming round the corner”.
Dr Brown said: “I agree with Professor Stobart - if we don’t do something, we will fall behind.
“It’s really, really critical that we think it through, but Scotland will never reach a consensus on its qualification structure, and we just need to accept that, and somebody needs to take a decision and take the leadership and do something.”
Earlier, the committee heard why change was needed.
Dr Shapira highlighted the findings of the University of Stirling research she was involved in, published earlier this year, looking at how CfE is being implemented in secondary schools.
She said that it found the way schools are judged - and the focus on National 5 and Higher pass rates - was leading to “appalling” practices. Pupils were being told to “abandon” subjects they were unlikely to perform well in, she said, and limited resources were being concentrated on high-performing students to the detriment of those working at “lower levels”, who were “not getting adequate provision”.
Professor Stobart, meanwhile, said Scottish pupils are probably the most overexamined in the world - with external exams at the end of S4, S5 and S6.
Instead of “leaving school without any recognition other than a few certificates”, he suggested the end of compulsory education should be “celebrated with a broad description of what students can do”.
Scottish Labour education spokesperson Pam Duncan-Glancy said: “While the SNP government is seems incapable of making a decision to improve education, the world around us is moving on.
“We cannot have the young people of Scotland being held back due to SNP dithering - we cannot allow Scotland to fall further behind other counties when it comes to education.”
