The Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) has raised concerns about the volume of students being presented for two maths courses at the same time.
A new SQA report highlights high levels of “dual presentation” at both National 4 and National 5 maths. It also focuses on dual presentation for N5 maths and the separate N5 application of mathematics (AoM) qualification.
It warns that high volumes of dual presentation are “highly discouraged”. While this report relates specifically to maths, it was released at the same time as a more general SQA report on dual presentation.
Dual presentation ‘highly discouraged’
The percentage of students entered for both N4 and N5 maths “decreased substantially” during the Covid-19 pandemic, but returned to pre-pandemic levels in 2023.
While “attainment of dual-entered candidates is consistently lower than those entered only to National 5”, the N5 A-C attainment of the dual-presented cohort has increased from 7.4 per cent in 2019 to 33.8 per cent in 2023 - fuelling concerns in the SQA that many students are doing both courses unnecessarily.
This trend “may suggest a shift in the cohort being presented for both National courses, with some centres presenting large volumes of candidates, which is highly discouraged”, the SQA report states.
The SQA is concerned that there are many students doing N5 who are not ready for it, but also that many are taking N4 when there is little risk of them failing N5 - dual presentation is often seen as a way of providing a fallback if a student does not pass the higher-level qualification.
“Entering learners into National 5, when reliable assessment information suggests they are not yet prepared, can result in unnecessary additional workload as well as a discouraging learning and assessment experience,” states the report.
“This can negatively impact upon their confidence in that subject. Equally, dual presenting a learner who is on track to safely achieve at National 5 level also results in unnecessary additional workload and over-assessment.”
The SQA does not entirely oppose dual presentation, but does not think it should be considered in most cases.
“In a very limited number of exceptional circumstances, presenting learners at both National 4 and National 5 may be in their best interests,” states the report. “However, the dual-presentation approach is not an intended or expected presentation pattern to be applied to whole cohorts of students.”
Rise of application of mathematics
Meanwhile, the rising popularity of AoM - a separate maths qualification introduced in 2019 - has led to a different type of dual presentation: N5 students who take both this and the more established maths course.
The SQA finds that students double-presented to AoM and maths at N5 “tend to be higher attaining”. The A-C attainment of those taking both has remained at around 77 per cent between 2019 and 2023.
Again, the SQA discourages this practice: it advises that N5 maths and National 5 AoM “were designed as separate pathways; entry into both courses is not an intended or expected presentation pattern”.
The SQA report adds that “double entry can create unnecessary additional workload for both learners and schools, and may result in a discouraging learning and assessment experience”.
Risk of ‘nothing for two years of work’
A number of teachers have taken to social media over the past 24 hours to push back at the idea that schools are at fault for putting high numbers of students forward for both N4 and N5 in maths and other subjects.
One said: “I’d far rather give a borderline pupil a chance at the exam and have the back-up than have them get nothing for two years of work. I’d also far rather have a better system than N4/5 but that’s still a long time away.”
Another objected to any suggestion that dual presentation was causing lower attainment, saying: “It’s a symptom of the pupil not coping at N5 and subsequently being entered at N4 also.
“The implication that simply stopping dual presentation would lead to better attainment shows a lack of understanding by the SQA.”
Current qualifications system ‘poorly’ designed
A teacher of English said: “N4 isn’t challenging enough for most of those who might just fail N5, so if we don’t dual present, it is very difficult to decide the right course. As a wise [headteacher] said to me, we need N4.5.”
Some teachers compared the current system to the old Standard Grades that were replaced by the Nationals a decade ago. They were designed to allow students to flow easily between its Foundation, General and Credit levels if they were struggling, or if they were doing better than anticipated.
“The aspirational element of [Standard Grade] was its biggest strength,” said one teacher. “I saw so many kids striving to achieve the highest they could. In my subject, it was rich and engaging - not so now. I see and hear so many say bring back SG, surely those in charge see and hear it as well?”
Another described the “lack of articulation” between National levels as “annoying” and said the current system of qualifications “was designed so poorly, particularly for content/outcome driven subjects like sciences and maths”.
For the latest Scottish education news, analysis and features delivered directly to your inbox, sign up to Tes magazine’s The Week in Scotland newsletter
