The Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) has come under fire for pushing through a return to pre-Covid assessment requirements next year, despite its own research finding that parents, teachers and pupils “indicated a reluctance to return to the full 2019 course specifications in 2023-24”.
It has also been revealed - through a freedom of information (FOI) request - that before the SQA decision to reintroduce coursework and exams in practical subjects next year, key advisory bodies were warning that students due to enter the senior phase “had suffered greater loss of learning than many of their more senior peers” and that “a return to the 2019 course requirements should not be done quickly”.
Ultimately, both the Advisory Council and National Qualifications (NQ) groups backed the return to full assessment next year “with some minor refinements”. However, minutes of a meeting of the Advisory Council held in January, released as part of the FOI, show that it was only presented with three options, and that some members of the group questioned why “no gradual option had been provided”.
The minutes add: “While the decision to go with option three was favoured, concerns were raised. Members of the Advisory Council highlighted that additional work may be required of teachers to help candidates in S3 prepare for qualifications. Those sitting Higher and Advanced Highers may also experience a step up with no modifications.”
Teachers have been making the case for a staggered return to pre-Covid assessment so that students have the opportunity to build their skills as they move through the senior phase and experience tackling coursework assignments at National 5 level before being expected to do them at Higher.
Last week, at the Scottish Secondary Teachers’ Association (SSTA) annual congress in Crieff, education secretary Jenny Gilruth said the reductions in assessment for national qualifications were “temporary emergency measures which were introduced in response to pretty unique circumstances”; the decision to reintroduce those measures was taken “independently by the SQA” and announced in March, on the day she became education secretary.
Under the modified assessment arrangements, Ms Gilruth said she was “worried about our overreliance on a final exam” and that there had been no practical assessment in subjects where one might expect it, which could leave “us open to a bit of challenge”.
‘Children aren’t at the stage they should be’
In response, SSTA general secretary Seamus Searson said the SQA claimed to have engaged with the profession but then made its own decision and ignored the information it had received.
He said: “Many of our members were involved in the consultation process and reported back to us. They said ‘don’t do it’, and [the SQA] still went ahead.”
He added: “Teachers are on their knees at the moment. The children aren’t at the stage they should be.
“Our opposition is not to the method of assessment, it’s that the teachers aren’t ready and the pupils aren’t ready and therefore everybody is going to be under more pressure and stress so, what we’re actually saying is, do it in stages - S4 and then S5.
“We all know how important the Highers are. The majority of our members are saying not in Highers because [the pupils] haven’t done the prior learning.”
Making the case for the return to full assessment requirements, the SQA argues that learners will benefit from a more balanced approach to assessment - involving coursework as well as a final exam - and that this will develop important skills and ensure a fuller understanding of the whole course.
The body has also pointed out that awarding bodies in the rest of the UK have already moved back to pre-Covid arrangements.
The papers released via the FOI say: “There is a serious risk that receiving institutions may begin to regard Scotland’s National Courses as being less credible in comparison with qualifications from England, Wales, Northern Ireland and internationally.”
However, the SQA has also said repeatedly that it came to its decision following “engagement with teachers, lecturers, universities, colleges and unions, among others”, although it has so far refused to share the full findings of that engagement.
Originally, the research was due to be published in March but now this has been pushed back to “early summer”.
Drew Burrett - a physics teacher in the west of Scotland - submitted the FOI that revealed the majority of teachers and students want another year of assessment modifications.
SQA did ‘as they wished’
He told Tes Scotland that he made the request for information because he was unhappy with the SQA decision and wanted to know how it had been arrived at. He says he fully suspected that - “being no stranger to the SQA’s total disregard for teachers’ views” - the body would “do as they wished regardless of the responses to their survey”.
He added: “That the SQA should choose to go ahead with reinstating coursework in spite of the responses to its survey and the findings of its own groups and marking teams clearly illustrates the wilful disregard for anything beyond their own chosen agenda.
“That they should also refuse to release the full findings of the survey into the public domain, casts doubt over the transparency of their decision making and does little to build trust in the organisation.
“It is scant consolation that this organisation will soon be replaced, especially as it has been decided that there will be no compulsory redundancies. I fear that the new body will feature the same people, fulfilling the same roles, making similar decisions in the face of opinions from stakeholders and advice from its own committees, albeit under a new name.”
The gathering of teachers’ views was carried out by the SQA in March 2022, at the same time that the body was involved in a large-scale evaluation of the approach taken to awarding in 2022. At that time, participants were also asked whether the full 2019 course specifications should return in 2023-24 or 2024-25.
Papers from a meeting of the SQA Advisory Council held in January state: “Data from engagement with learners, parents and/or carers and practitioners in March 2022 indicated a reluctance to return to the full 2019 course specifications in 2023-24, with the majority of practitioners and learners believing that this should happen in 2024-25. Engagement with National Qualification Support Team members contradicted this view, indicating there should be a return to the full course requirements in 2023-24 to ensure that the national standard is maintained.
“Feedback from SQA’s Advisory Council, the NQ2022 Working Group and the NQ2022 Strategic Group emphasised that learners coming through the last stage of the broad general education had suffered greater loss of learning than many of their more senior peers, due to the focus within schools on the senior phase arrangements. It was felt that these learners could be significantly disadvantaged if the 2019 course specifications are reinstated too quickly and that a return to the 2019 course requirements should not be done quickly and should be driven by attainment evidence across years. Conversely, there was a real concern among these groups that the continued removal of coursework may be disadvantaging learners.”
It has often been said that students in lower secondary were the worst hit when the pandemic was forcing schools to close and leading to high levels of absence, because schools prioritised students in the senior phase who were undertaking national qualifications at the time.
An SQA spokesperson said: “The decision to reintroduce coursework in 2024 was made in the best interests of learners and followed extensive engagement with teachers, lecturers, universities, colleges and unions, among others. Both the Advisory Council and National Qualifications groups supported the decision.
“A return to coursework provides learners with a more balanced approach to assessment, in line with the direction of travel emerging from the independent review of qualifications and assessment, and is particularly beneficial to those learners who may not perform well in high-stakes exams.”
