Scottish Government

National Qualification Consultation Seminars

General introduction

In Educating for Excellence: The Executive's Response to the National Debate the Scottish Executive made a number of commitments directly relating to National Qualifications: to consult on the future of the Age & Stage regulations; to address the relationship between Standard Grades and the new National Qualifications; and to reduce the amount of time spent on external exams. On 24, 26 and 27 November 2003 the Executive held three consultation seminars, attended by over 140 delegates, in Inverness, Falkirk and Glasgow respectively to discuss those commitments

The seminars were an opportunity for those involved in different areas of education to contribute towards developments at an early stage. Representatives were invited from local authorities, secondary schools and further education institutions as well as pupils, parents and members of the Scottish Executive's National Qualifications Steering Group and Learning and Teaching Scotland's Post-14 Reference Group. They provided a chance for people working in education to discuss important issues affecting national qualifications, and for the Executive to hear their views.

The three aspects affecting National Qualifications which were discussed at the seminars are important issues in their own right but are also closely related to each other. The forthcoming consultation on Age and Stage regulations may lead to the regulations being relaxed further or even replaced with guidance which might better meet local needs. Alternatively, respondents may feel that the current regulations are an important safeguard to ensure candidates are not pressured into sitting exams before they are ready.

To address the relationship between Standard Grade and new National Qualifications (nNQs) issues such as the social maturity of candidates, the opportunities for, and barriers to, progression, and the appropriateness of course content need to be considered. In addition, articulation between Standard Grade and new National Qualifications, and between National Qualifications and Further Education may need to be improved. Concerns about the amount of time young people spend on external assessment were raised during the National Debate. Although much has since been done to reduce and streamline assessment it may be that more could be done to allow a greater focus both on learning and teaching and on formative rather than summative assessment.

The work discussed in these seminars is not happening in isolation from other key initiatives. Importantly, the 3-18 Curriculum Review and the 5-14 Consultation on Assessment may impact upon the future structure, delivery and assessment of National Qualifications, as will other initiatives such as Enterprise in Education and the review of school and college links. The need for improvement in the system of National Qualifications in response to changing circumstances must be balanced against the desire for stability and continuity.

This report is a record of the discussions held during the three seminars. It contains the background briefing material issued to delegates in advance, the activities the delegates were asked to undertake and a collation of delegates' responses.

Programme

Future of Age and Stage Regulations

Introduction

The Executive committed to consult on the future of Age and Stage regulations in Educating for Excellence: The Executive's Response to the National Debate. The consultation document will be issued in early 2004.

The regulations govern when candidates can receive certification for National Units and be presented for external course assessment for Standard Grade and National Courses managed by the Scottish Qualifications Authority. For example: the current regulations restrict entries for new National Qualifications (Intermediate 1 & 2, and Higher) to candidates who are in S4 or 16_ years old. For Standard Grade courses candidates must be in S3 or 15_ years old. Centres can apply for exceptional entry for candidates who do not meet the age and stage criteria (and the process has been simplified for the session 2003/04 following an interim procedural change which allows schools to submit multiple applications for a group class or year to SQA through their Director of Education/Chair of Board of Governors or equivalent) Nevertheless, some consider that the regulations remain a barrier to schools wishing to introduce more flexible approaches to the delivery of the curriculum and inhibit students' educational progress. However, others believe that the regulations act as a safeguard to ensure that the social maturity of candidates is taken into account and undue pressure is not placed on young people to take exams before they are ready.

The seminars provided an early opportunity for participants to discuss with others their views of the regulations and the key issues likely to emerge as part of the consultation. It also allowed the Scottish Executive to take these views into account in developing a consultation document. (It should be noted however that the Scottish Executive is unable to treat the views expressed at the seminars as formal responses to the consultation. When the consultation is launched participants are encouraged to return the official response form that will be included with the document).

The following section sets out the background briefing provided to participants in advance of the seminars along with the activity the groups were asked to undertake.

Briefing paper

The Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) sets down conditions in respect of the presentation of candidates for examinations. However, restrictions on the age and stage of entry to national school examinations in Scotland go back to the inception of the Higher Grade in 1888, (although they are not regulations as such under statute). The restrictions apply only to the sitting of examinations and award of certificates; there is no bar to students taking courses or internal assessments.

In Educating for Excellence - The Scottish Executive's response to the National Debate on Education the Executive has committed to consult on the future of Age & Stage regulations during session 2003-2004. Educating for Excellence also contained a commitment to promote flexibility in the curriculum in order that all young people have the opportunity to achieve their full potential.

The current position for Standard Grade and the new National Qualifications (Access, Intermediate 1 & 2, Higher and Advanced Higher) is set out in the Conditions and Arrangements for National Qualifications, published by the SQA. The regulations were revised after wide ranging consultation in 1999 and allow centres to present candidates for Standard Grade examinations from the end of S3 onwards, and for new National Qualifications (nNQ) examinations from the end of S4. Until session 2002-03 centres could apply for exceptional entry on a candidate by candidate basis to allow candidates to take external examinations outwith these specified times. To reduce the administrative burden for session 2003-04 an interim procedural change was introduced to allow centres, through their Director of Education or, for the independent sector, the Chair of the Board of Governors, to make simplified multiple applications for a group, class or year for exceptional entry.

The situation prior to 1999

Prior to 1999 centres could enter candidates for Standard Grade examinations in S4 and Higher examinations in S5 without application for exceptional entry. Standard Grade could be taken in S3, and Higher in S4 if centres made an application to the SQA for exceptional entry. In the development of Higher Still policy, which brought about the introduction of nNQs in 1999, it was recognised that greater flexibility in provision could enable centres to better meet the needs of pupils. The paper which launched the reform, Higher Still: Opportunity for All (1994), suggested that able pupils should be able to take Credit level Standard Grade in S3. This required a change to Age & Stage regulations.

In addition the Improving Achievements in Scottish Schools: A report to the Secretary of State for Scotland (1996) suggested that Higher Still units (now referred to as National Course units) might replace part of the curriculum for some students who were taking Foundation and General level Standard Grade courses. Allowing a mix of Standard Grade and National Course units would not in itself require a change to the conditions. However improvements to this modular provision in terms of availability of course and group award certification would not be available unless the regulations were amended. A consultation on Age and Stage regulations was carried out in 1998 by the Scottish Office Education and Industry Department which resulted in a relaxation of the previous restrictions.

Current regulations

Under the revised regulations introduced in 1999, students presented for Standard Grade examinations should be at least in S3 (or have attained a stage accepted by SQA as broadly equivalent, or be 15 years and 6 months). For Intermediate 1, Intermediate 2 and Higher level course examinations, students should be at least in S4 (or have attained a stage accepted by SQA as broadly equivalent, or be 16 years and 6 months), and for Advanced Higher students should be at least S5 (or have attained a stage accepted by SQA as broadly equivalent, or be 17 years and 6 months). Students may take nNQ internal assessments in S3, but not external course examinations. Access level qualifications are not affected by the regulations, as there is no external assessment at this level.

Centres can apply for exceptional entry on the basis of either possible hardship or exceptional attainment. In cases of possible hardship centres must estimate that the candidate is sufficiently competent to obtain a grade C at NQ level or grade 3 at Standard Grade. For cases of exceptional attainment centres must estimate that the candidate is sufficiently competent to obtain a grade A on the relevant NQ or grade 1 at Standard Grade. From session 2003-04 centres can apply for exceptional entry on a group, class or year basis through their Director of Education or Chair of the Board of Governors. Previously centres had to apply on a candidate by candidate basis.

At the time of implementation of the regulations, centres provided Standard Grade courses followed by progression to nNQ courses. Since 1999 however a growing number of centres have chosen to replace some or all Standard Grades with Intermediate 1 and Intermediate 2 courses. These correspond with Standard Grade General and Credit level respectively, and are set at the same point on the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). This has created what is perceived as an inconsistency in the Age & Stage regulations; while pupils may sit Standard Grade course assessments at the end of S3, they may not sit external assessment for Intermediate level courses which are set at effectively the same level. There is concern that this acts as a disincentive to centres to offer more flexible progression routes through S3 and S4, counter to current education policy of encouraging flexibility in the curriculum

Impact of 1999 relaxation of Age & Stage Regulations

Some centres are using the 1999 relaxation of Age & Stage regulations to adapt provision to suit local needs and circumstances. This is more marked in S3 and S4 than in S5 and S6. Numbers attaining Standard Grade certification in S3 since 1999, the last diet affected by the previous regulations, have increased dramatically - from 170 to 1,136 just three years later in 2002. The number of pupils attaining Intermediate 1 and 2 course certification in S3, for which exceptional entry permission from SQA must be secured, has risen between 2000, the first nNQ diet, and 2002 from 19 to 307.

There has been little interest in schools offering Higher examinations in S4 to whole classes; rather acceleration to this level tends to take place on an individual rather than group basis, with pupils entering the S5 class to study for the examination. Although there has been an increase at this level the numbers are small relative to the increase at Standard Grade level i.e. from 60 in 1999 to 146 in 2002.

Flexibility in the curriculum

The relaxation of Age & Stage regulations has then to some extent achieved its aim of increasing opportunities for accelerated progression. However there are concerns that the current regulations restrict options for some pupils. A view has been expressed that the continued requirement to apply for exceptional entry for Intermediate level course certification acts as a disincentive to schools to offer more flexible progression routes through S3 and S4.

Timetabling and maturity issues.

Many responses to the 1998 consultation pointed out that it could be difficult in practice to find the staffing and other resources, and spaces in the timetable for those taking qualifications early. The teaching of the same course to pupils of different ages who may vary significantly in social maturity was regarded as undesirable. The appropriateness of course content was also highlighted as a potential issue for younger students, particularly in relation to nNQs which were originally designed to articulate with Standard Grades at the post-16 stage.

There is evidence from HMIE reports that indicates that timetabling to deliver courses at an earlier age has not in itself created a major difficulty; rather, limited resources in terms of staff and classroom space to deliver the courses to make full use of the flexibility remains an issue in some centres. However the aim of the relaxation of Age & Stage was not to offer all courses at all levels, but rather to enable centres to deliver more appropriate and flexible provision to suit the needs of pupils. Also it should be remembered that the relaxation of Age & Stage regulations permits rather than requires centres to present pupils early.

Under the current regulations the Director of Education, or the Chair of the Board of Governors for the independent sector, is required to consider the social maturity of candidates put forward for exceptional entry. Any changes to the regulations would need to ensure maturity issues continue to be addressed. However as age is not the only factor, albeit an important one, in determining social maturity, it should be remembered that it is up to centres to decide what provision best suits their local circumstances.

Compliance with other education policy

The outcomes of this consultation may impact on forthcoming work taking forward the commitments made in the response to the National Debate on investigating the relationship between Standard Grades and the nNQs, and on reducing the amount of time spent on external exams .

The Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework.

Qualifications or programmes of learning positioned at the same SCQF level have the same level of learning outcome.

(A number of delegates requested further details about the SCQF table. The paragraphs below are therefore included for additional information:

The SCQF is a new way of making sense of the large and varied number of Scottish qualifications/training programmes. The framework shows at a glance how different types of learning compare with each other, as shown in the table above. Each qualification is allocated a level according to how demanding the qualification is. At any level the qualifications can cover a wide range of skills and knowledge - some may be specialised, others more general, but they are comparable in terms of knowledge, skills or competence required.

Each qualification is also allocated a number of credits which are based on how long a learner will take to achieve a particular qualification. Most mainstream qualifications in Scotland have been developed on a credit basis with design rules related to the amount and level of credit required. For example, a National Course at Higher requires the accumulation of 24 SCQF points at level 6 whilst an Intermediate 1 requires 24 points at level 4. SCQF credit points can also be used to assist learners to transfer between programmes as some credits earned during study for one course may be transferable to another programme at the same or higher level. For example, if a pupil passed a Unit at Higher Information Systems at school they would be credited for that learning if they went on to complete the Higher at a Further Education College.)

For further information about the framework visit: www.scqf.org.uk.

Activity

Delegates were asked to read the briefing paper 'Future of Age & Stage Regulations'. Each group appointed a scribe who noted the responses on an activity sheet which was collected at the end of the seminar.

Questions for discussion

2. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each option and try to arrive at a consensus with regard to an order of priority

3. Option A	Maintain the regulations as operated prior to 2003-04	1 2 3
   	(This would maintain the restrictions as they operated until 2002-03, where applications for exceptional entry were made on a candidate by candidate basis.)
   Option B	Maintain the regulations as operated in session 2003-04	1 2 3
   	(This maintains the restrictions as they operate during the current session, where applications for exceptional entry can be made on a group, class or year basis, endorsed by the Director of Education.)
   Option C	Abolition of the Age and Stage regulations	1 2 3
   	(This would abolish the Age and Stage Regulations altogether, leaving it up to individual centres to decide on the best time for candidates to sit SQA exams.)

4. What factors did you consider to be most important in the process of deciding between the options?
6. What other factors or options, if any, do you think should be considered?

Responses

The following sets out the responses from the seminars.

Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each option and try to arrive at a consensus with regard to an order of priority

The most popular option was Option C with 10 groups putting it in first place. Option B was the second most popular with 8 groups putting it in first place. The least popular option was Option A.

One group felt unable to decide between the options as stated. They favoured Option C but without abolition. They wanted guidance to be generated through local authority policies and frameworks and for individual school decisions to be endorsed by the local authority.

A second group went for Option B as their first choice but put forward an Option D as their preferred choice. This was to amend the 2003-04 regulations to allow presentations in S3 at Int 1/2. This would bring nNQs at Intermediate into line with Standard Grade, since they are regarded as equivalent. (See SCQF table on page 7).

A third group favoured Option C but wanted a clear framework and guidelines before any change was introduced. They also wanted nNQ exams to be allowed in S3.

Two groups favoured Option B as an interim measure but wanted to move towards Option C with Executive Guidance before its introduction.

The order of priority for each option is shown in the table below:

What factors did you consider to be most important in the process of deciding between the options?

The most frequent responses for this question related to whether pupils would be sufficiently mature to deal with the content of some subjects and the added pressure on them if they were being asked to sit examinations earlier. There was also an emphasis on ensuring that the needs of all pupils were met. It was generally considered that schools were in the best position to know pupils and their circumstances and therefore in the best position to make decisions about presentations.

Among the responses were:

• Equivalence between Standard Grade and Intermediate 1/2 should allow presentation for either courses from S3
• Concern about wholesale use of nNQ courses in S3/4 as this could remove benefits of nNQ provision in S5/6. Acceptable for some subjects to use nNQ provision in S3/4 or S2/3 if better articulation to Higher courses, but maturity issues need to be taken into account
• Still two term dash despite 'Higher' Still
• Maturity concerns if starting earlier e.g. Standard Grade/nNQs in S2
• Student member endorsed 'marking time' problem
• School should have autonomy to organise its curriculum and presentation stage to meet individual student needs
• School makes decision based on guidance by Education Authority, taking account of needs of pupils and ability of school to deliver
• Pressure of exams on students of younger age
• Maturity of students to cope with subject content that demands emotional life experience
• Schools know pupils/conditions/constraints, therefore schools should be allowed to make these decisions
• Links with colleges could be enhanced with qualifications in vocational areas in S3 - progression - employment
• Maturity of students - content and language of courses if we present earlier - resource implications
• Timetabling issues if students move between stages at times other than end of year as we know it
• Fear that no restrictions may lead to over-assessment
• Value of Intermediate as stepping stones
• Value of gradual assessment to motivate under nNQ
• Parents see need for exam prior to Higher Grade
• Motivation for pupils

What other factors or options, if any, do you think should be considered?

There was a noticeable concern among the responses with regard to the pressure that might be placed on students, mainly by parents, but also by schools, to present pupils early. There were also a number of pleas for appropriate monitoring and accountability from schools and education authorities. Pupils' views also came through here strongly. They wanted to see a reduction in the time spent over S3 and S4 to approximately 18 months to allow the same amount of time for Highers. They also felt that the pace during S1/S2 was slow and very demotivating and that in S1 pupils had enough knowledge and maturity to make subject choices.

Among the responses were:

• Certification should not drive this - learning and teaching is vital
• Realistic expectations of resources, staffing, timetabling, liaising with local colleges
• Safety net needed for pupils who are being fast tracked with the restrictions in place
• Concern about extent of possible bureaucracy in seeking exceptional entry permission
• General consensus amongst us but aware of how different and flexible our current curricular arrangements are!
• Needs careful close monitoring and support by local authority
• Needs greater articulation with colleges to allow flexibility
• Danger of two tier system of schools
• There is a danger we limit our thinking to the more able and take less cognisance of the full cohort
• Social inclusion issues from streaming or from fast tracking
• Position of universities - offers made on Highers, not on Advanced Higher or Intermediate
• Needs of individual pupils
• 'Maverick' school - issue of accountability eg role of school managers/EA before and after decision
• Practical issues - students don't necessarily progress a level a year - 2-3 years down the line there could be major issues
• Progression issues eg Advanced Higher in S5, what about S6 - should progression be horizontal as well as vertical?
• Student mobility - a problem just now but would be worse with more flexibility
• The acceptance of universities and colleges to recognise marks/grades attained by younger candidates
• Consideration of pressure placed on pupils by schools/parents to sit exams earlier
• Could SQA cope?
• Need for framework within which to work but with flexibility built in
• Needs to be acceptable and regarded as workable by teaching staff
• Schools subjected to pressure because other schools opting to present young people

Relationship between Standard Grade and new National Qualifications

Introduction

The Scottish Executive made the commitment in Educating for Excellence to address the relationship between Standard Grade and the new National Qualifications (nNQs). As education authorities, schools and colleges make greater use of flexibility within the curriculum an increasing number of candidates are being presented for nNQs in S3/S4 and this was highlighted in LT Scotland's recent publication " Flexibility in the Secondary School Curriculum - Emerging Practice". This includes case studies of centres that have replaced some, or all, of their Standard Grade courses with Intermediate courses.

The National Debate highlighted stakeholders' desire for further flexibility in the Scottish education system. However, most respondents to the National Debate who discussed Standard Grade considered the introduction of Intermediate qualifications to be the precursor to abolishing Standard Grade. It is important to emphasise that the Scottish Executive is not committed to this or any other specific course of action at this stage. The Scottish Executive will be exploring a range of possible options with the education and wider community. This session gave participants an initial opportunity to explore the issues involved and suggest options for future consideration. The following section contains the briefing paper provided to delegates along with the activity that groups were asked to undertake..

Briefing paper.

The exercise of flexibility and innovation within the school curriculum means schools have the option of replacing some or all Standard Grade courses with National Qualifications if they consider this best meets the needs of their students and have consulted with their stakeholders. Since 1999 a growing number of schools have chosen to replace some or all Standard Grades with Intermediate 1 and Intermediate 2 courses. These correspond in level of difficulty with Standard Grade General and Credit level respectively, and are set at the same point on the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF).

Uptake and Attainment of Standard Grade

The first group of Standard Grade subjects was introduced in 1984 for examination in 1986. The last group was introduced in 1989 for examination in 1991. During the period 1995 - 2001, whilst it has varied year to year, the uptake of Standard grade has remained fairly static overall with 458,000 entries in 1995 compared with 459,000 in 2001 and 456,000 in 2002. Between 2001 and 2003 uptake has fallen by 1.3% from 459,000 to 453,000.

In relation to attainment there has been an increase in the proportion of awards gained at Credit level from just over 36% in 1995 to just over 43% in 2002. Attainment in all other levels, including no awards, has fallen. The fall for General level between 1995 and 2002 was about 2%, from around 42% to just over 40%. Similarly, the proportion of entries resulting in Foundation awards has dropped from approx 15.5% to just over 13%. Even more positive however is the year on year drop in the proportion of entries gaining 'no awards'. This figure has dropped by over a half from about 5.7% to just over 2.6%.

Uptake and Attainment of New National Qualifications

New National Qualifications were phased in from August 1999. Uptake of Intermediate 1 increased from 16,000 in 2001 to over 24,000 in 2003. Uptake at Intermediate 2 over the same period increased from 59,000 to over 72,000. Higher and Advanced Higher entries have also increased over this period - from 147,000 to 166,000 in the case of Higher and from 6,000 to almost 17,000 in the case of Advanced Higher.

The proportion of awards at Intermediate has remained steady at 65% over the period 2001 to 2003. Similarly at Intermediate 2, the proportion of awards has been around 70%. At Higher the proportion of awards has fallen from 75% in 2001 to 70% in 2003, while at Advanced Higher the figures are 77% and 73% respectively. The figures for 2003, however, are pre-appeal.

The main reasons behind the introduction of New National Qualifications are:

Realise individual potential. Courses at 5 levels from Access to Advanced Higher will mean the whole age cohort from those with special educational needs to the most able can work towards achievable qualifications. Students will be able to progress from one level to the next, and on to higher education or work-related qualifications.

Maximise participation. The Access courses will improve the attainment of students with a wide range of learning difficulties. The Intermediate levels will provide more appropriate learning for that wide group of students for whom the S5 Higher is a step too far.

Stretch the academically able. The Advanced Higher will improve the status of the Scottish sixth year, ensuring a progressive educational experience across S5 and S6 (although courses can be taken earlier by particularly able pupils).

Improve levels of attainment. National Qualifications will provide teachers with levels of information and support of a much higher order than ever before. That should lead to more passes and improved grades. But rising attainment will not mean lowering standards of assessment. There will be no compromise on the quality of awards

Bring together academic and vocational courses in a single coherent system, promoting parity of esteem, with rigorous quality assurance involving a combination of internal and external assessment.

Help students build up qualifications flexibly over time, carrying forward credit for attainment in school to college. Work need not be repeated, and credits from school work may be able to contribute towards completely different qualifications.

Increase employability. Core skills are those personal abilities which we need to be responsible and successful members of society - at work and at home. Employers look for the core skills in communication, numeracy, problem solving, information technology and working with others. Students will gain a profile of core skills on their certificate based on those embedded in National Qualification (and Standard Grade) courses studied. It is hoped to reach a position quickly where core skills are a standard part of everyone's education and training in all qualifications.

Activity

Read the briefing paper, 'Relationship between Standard Grade and new National Qualifications'

Questions for discussion

2. What factors might centres and local authorities consider when deciding to offer courses in Standard Grade, new National Qualifications or a combination of both to students in S3 and S4?
4. What options do you think the Scottish Executive should consider when fulfilling their commitment in Educating for Excellence to address the relationship between Standard Grade and new National Qualifications?

You should try to identify at least two options and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each. Use a different sheet for each option.

Responses

What factors might centres and local authorities consider when deciding to offer courses in Standard Grade, new National Qualifications or a combination of both to students in S3 and S4?

A number of groups saw nNQs as a major opportunity to enable authorities and schools to provide a broader and richer curricular experience for young people. In particular there was an opportunity to ensure that vocational education in school sat alongside Standard Grades and nNQs, inside the qualifications framework. Articulation was viewed as a crucial issue which varied considerably in terms of the match between Standard Grades and particular NQ courses. There was a widespread view that a significant number of nNQs need to be revised if they are to provide appropriate experience for S3/4 pupils. Although some believed that Standard Grade courses still met the needs of pupils in many subject areas, others believed that Standard Grades were looking tired and dated. A number felt that the review of curriculum should be completed first before any significant changes were made.

Among the responses were:

• New national qualifications were specifically designed with S5/6 in mind rather than S4
• Better progression routes to Higher provided by nNQ - eg emphasis on extended writing skills in History
• Which course is the best/most interesting for the pupils (teachers)
• Movement of pupils between schools using different systems eg move into school doing nNQs where internal assessment has already taken place
• The long term 'robustness' of nNQs has yet to be demonstrated - too early to make a wholesale move to nNQs
• Subject by subject decision making - inconsistencies amongst subjects in terms of progression e.g. science Int1/Int2
• Standard Grade courses still meet needs in many subject areas
• Currency of qualifications - time needed to inform employers if wholesale changes
• Articulation of Higher Still course is suspect in some subjects
• Changes in curricular structures will bring more pressure to move to nNQs
• S. Grades looking tired
• Modular nature of nNQs more meaningful for some pupils
• Links with colleges encouraging NQ use
• Assessment of nNQs burdensome across the board
• Specific work need to be completed on Access 3 to make it more generally applicable as a Foundation substitute
• Lack of consistency in relationship between Standard Grades and nNQs across subjects
• Do students like short term targets/achievement - some evidence that they do, and that it motivates them - also concerns over number of assessments and how these are managed.
• Which is better preparation for the Higher?
• Which is better understood by society? Standard Grade better understood
• A national target date for migration to nNQs and the removal of Standard Grade would be helpful to let schools move forward
• Use of intermediate label suggests its not a worthwhile qualification in its own right, but merely a stepping stone to other levels without Standard Grade
• Articulation and progression with Higher courses
• Internal/external assessment balance
• Balance between practical/academic learning

What options do you think the Scottish Executive should consider when fulfilling their commitment in Educating for Excellence to address the relationship between Standard Grade and new National Qualifications?

You should try to identify at least two options and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each. Use a different sheet for each option.

Out of a total of 19 groups, nine groups included an option to maintain the status quo i.e. maintain a mix of Standard Grades and nNQs. Nine groups included an option to remove Standard Grade and move exclusively to a system of nNQs. Two groups wanted to review nNQs in order to improve articulation between levels. Another group wanted to review nNQs to address the lack of progression and articulate nNQs with 5-14. Two groups included a review Standard Grades as one of their options

The options included were:

• Maintain the status quo
• Remove Standard Grades and replace with nNQs
• Review and update Standard Grades
• Introduce alternative nNQs which do not have internal assessment as an element of passing exams
• Use Standard Grades in S2/S3 and nNQs in S4-S6
• Review interface between various nNQ levels within each subject
• Address issues of lack of progression in some nNQs and articulate with 5-14
• Concentrate on improving articulation between levels in nNQ provision - give notice of removal of Standard Grade by 2008/9
• No Standard Grades; S2-S6 based on 5 columns which are the 5-14 five modes. Pupils in S2, 3, 4, 5, 6 opt for one subject within each mode at an appropriate level
• Unify SQA and Learning and Teaching Scotland to bring curricular development and assessment within one body
• Phase out Foundation courses and replace them with Access for these students
• By-pass S4 external exams in subjects being taken in S5
• Encourage schools to adapt the most appropriate courses for their pupil cohort; facilitate vocational qualifications on a par with Standard Grade/nNQs
• Review nNQs as they stand - they were not meant for post-14 provision plus look at Standard Grades alongside nNQs
• Increase opportunities for vocational activities and learning

Maintain the status quo i.e. a mix of Standard Grades and nNQs

Advantages

Aspects of existing system are good
It is where we currently are
Provides flexibility for schools/ local authorities
Meets the range of needs of individual pupils and recognises that there are issues re inconsistencies between subjects
Decision taken at school/authority levels
Not forcing staff to make a decision against their professional judgement
The vast majority of courses serve the clients very well
Appropriate courses for local circumstances
To retain best of standard grade courses
Departments can choose the best route for their subject to benefit pupils i.e. progression form 5-14
Vocational options could be introduced
Gives common system for employers to try and understand qualifications system through SCQF

Disadvantages

Continual anomalies will exist of running two systems in parallel
Lack of progression in some nNQs
Confusion amongst stakeholders
Lack of clarity to outside world, employers, parents, pupils
Duplication of qualification i.e. Credit/Int 2, General/Int 1
Too complex and confusing
NB 'Sort it and leave it' may not be an option - maybe courses should be subject to regular review
Standard Grade needs considerable revision
Splitting finite resources
Movement between schools becoming an increasing problem
Teachers don't like it because they know parity doesn't always exist
Inefficient use of curricular time: prevents best use of opportunities presented by curricular flexibility

Phase out and replace Standard Grade with nNQs

Advantages

Focus resources on one system
Facilitate movement between schools
Provides one inclusive system
Ensures candidates are familiar with the system from an early age
Enables pupils to enter into a continuous framework for lifelong learning from S3 -S6
Greatly advantageous in 'opening up' broader curriculum
Enhances opportunities for college links, pre-vocational elements
Focus resources on one framework
Can broaden the curriculum by introducing new units as units rather than courses into schools
Progression particularly in those subjects where Standard Grade inappropriate e.g. Higher Economics, P.E., Technical
Simplicity of understanding by end-users
Would remove the (illusory) dip in S2 attainment
Clearly understood by users
Better pathways and progression
Brings together vocational and academic

Disadvantages

nNQs need to be reviewed and overhauled to ensure progression and that they are a suitable exit qualification for all.
nNQs are more costly than Standard Grades
administrative and managerial workload inherent in nNQs - teachers and SQA coordination
increased assessment load bad for pupils - non-stop assessment pressure from S3
Many nNQs currently don't fit well into S3/4 - content and maturity issues - SQA must resolve this
Not exact equivalence between some Standard Grade subjects and nNQs, therefore difficult to place pupils appropriately
Pressure on pupils in relation to internal assessments that have to be passed as well as external exams
Need to review content and get articulation of levels better
Challenge to get student placed at appropriate NQ level at end of S2; how flexible would it be especially if Int 1 and Int don't articulate
More able may not be stretched as Standard Grade gives better differentiation
Lose the flexibility of Standard Grade bi-level teaching.
nNQ courses are narrower in content/scope/time allocation.
nNQ courses also increase the overall burden of assessment from S3
Need to support schools in moving out of their 'comfort' zone' e.g. staff development, revisiting course content
Need to review SQA charging levels within current consultation
Lack of choice
Courses would require to be revised to take account of maturity of youngsters

Review and update existing Standard Grades to bring them up to level of nNQs in terms of interest/motivation - Int 1 and Int 2 go into S5/6 for which they were designed

Advantages

Standard Grades made more attractive - better course/learning experience for pupils
No internal assessment
Many Standard Grade courses are already very successful and appropriate to pupil needs - Standard Grade is now a well-established 'brand' along with Higher

Disadvantages

nNQs currently going through an extensive review process. Do we want/need to initiate a similar exercise for Standard Grade
Cost of carrying out such an exercise
Might require a certain amount of back-tracking by schools/departments which have been introducing Intermediate courses in place of Standard Grade

Introduce alternative nNQs which do not have internal assessment element as an essential element of passing a course

Advantages

Benefits of option 3 without drawback of internal assessment

Disadvantages

Why stop at S4 with removing internal assessment
May cause schools to unnecessarily try to take Higher in S4

Use Standard Grade in S2/S3, nNQs in S4-S6

Advantages

More time for Higher
Better pace and challenge in S2
Increased motivation from S3 certification

Disadvantages

Articulation with 5-14
Some Standard Grades not fit for purpose e.g. Home Economics
S4-S6 pupils in same class
More assessments

To examine and review interface between various NQ levels within each subject

Advantages

nNQs could be made more attractive
No disadvantages mentioned

Address issues of lack of progression in some nNQs and articulation with 5-14 within one framework

Advantages

Understandable framework for reporting
Equalises vocational and academic courses

Disadvantages

No disadvantages mentioned

Concentrate on improving articulation between levels in NQ provision - give notice of removal of Standard Grade by 2008/9

Advantages

One system with improved articulation
Shorter term targets more motivating
Employers might be more comfortable with a single system
Articulation with FE programmes would be improved
Concentrate finance/resources on NQ improvements

Disadvantages

Safety net in Standard Grade is helpful to candidates (General/credit groupings and assessments); need to ensure this applies in NQs - this would depend on credence given to units
Number of assessments would need to be managed/monitored
Review of NQs again? (to improve articulation in a number of areas)

No standard grades. S2-S6 based on 5 columns which are the 5-14 five modes. Pupils in S2, 3, 4, 5, 6 opt for one subject within each mode at an appropriate level

Advantages

Timetabling easier with articulation between years S1-S6
Colleges don't work with Standard Grade - easier links and progression and incorporation of vocational qualifications
Cost - funding and time - with one system. One set of exams to be set, moderated, marked by SQA and sat by pupils
Access level more appropriate for some pupils who can't sustain 2 year course with terminal exam
Multi-age classes could be an advantage - older pupils/younger pupils
Could build up a better portfolio of core skills easier for employers to understand- one SCQF

Disadvantages

Change-over time
Need for staff/curriculum development and support
Need to review content at all levels to allow articulation and coherence
Would need to be national system
'sort it and leave it' - don't adjust every session
assessment overload - NABs- especially for younger pupils

Unify SQA and Learning and Teaching Scotland to bring curricular development and assessment within one body

Advantages

One body would have an overarching view and control of research into learning, development of curriculum, teaching and assessment
Subject reviews currently carried out by SQA - LTS should be more heavily involved - one body would facilitate this

Disadvantages

Funding issues

Redundancy!

Phase out Foundation courses and replace them with Access for these students

Advantages

Less stress on students in relation to prelims and final exam
Simplifies the framework
Gives time to teach in depth

Disadvantages

May label students
May result in call for end of other Standard Grade levels
Internal assessment demands; support needs of students with special needs
Could result in boredom as less time needed

By-pass S4 external exams in subjects being taken in S5

Advantages

Increased teaching time - improve quality of teaching - starts Higher work earlier

Disadvantages
Fear of S5 failure
Change of subject choice - no longer taking subject in S5
Worry about lack of motivation if no S4 exam

Encourage schools to adapt the most appropriate courses for their pupil cohort; facilitate vocational qualifications on a par with Standard Grade/nNQs

Advantages

More appropriate courses
Increased motivation
Maximise pupil achievement
Appropriate pathways for all pupils
Better behaviour
CPD opportunities

Disadvantages

Start-up costs
Teacher confidence
Accommodation/resources

Review nNQs as they stand - they were not meant for post-14 provision plus look at Standard Grades alongside nNQs

Advantages

Progression for pupils
Question - 2 certification routes for post 14?
End date for Standard Grade? - this would focus development
Best of both courses

Disadvantages

Do we always have to progress by moving up? - look at breadth

Increase opportunities for vocational activities and learning

Advantages

Credit for these skills
Employers looking for these skills

Disadvantages

Do we remove other elements to accommodate vocational subjects

Reducing the amount of time spent on external exams

Introduction

The subject reviews of new National Qualifications courses being led by SQA has and is making significant changes to reduce unnecessary demands on teachers, lecturers and students. This has included streamlining internal and external assessment while maintaining and improving quality of courses.

However, in response to views expressed during the National Debate, the Scottish Executive made the commitment in Educating for Excellence to reduce the amount of time spent on external exams including the option of sitting exams only when leaving school instead of every year from S4. It is important to note that the Scottish Executive is not committed to any specific course of action at this stage but will be exploring a range of possible options with the education and wider community. The session gave participants an initial opportunity to explore the issues involved. Participants were invited to consider the total volume of external exams candidates may take over their school careers and how measures for reducing this volume could be developed.

The following section contains the briefing paper provided to delegates in advance.

Briefing paper

One of the key priorities in Educating for Excellence is:

"Simplify and reduce the amount of assessment to cut down the number of tests and exams and the amount of time spent on them. We have started this work, but we will look at more radical options such as only sitting exams when pupils leave school instead of every year from S4."

The National Qualifications Steering Group

The National Qualifications Steering Group's report, Review of Initial Implementation of New National Qualifications (2001), made a series of recommendations aimed at reducing the amount of assessment within new National Qualifications. This included subject by subject reviews to reduce the amount of internal and external assessment and provision of advice and exemplification in order to establish a clearer understanding of the volume and type of assessment required. The subject review process has and will continue to streamline internal and external assessment to reduce unnecessary demands on teachers, lecturers and students.

The report also considered the possibility of reducing assessment by candidates only taking external assessment when exiting a subject. The report pointed out that:

"it has always been possible for candidates to by-pass external exams en route to an exam at a higher level….However, this has rarely happened, since candidates and schools prefer to secure a qualification in case of later failure" (p. 56).

With specific reference to new National Qualifications, the report commented that:

"candidates could obtain a full set of units at a lower level, and not bother sitting the external exam if they intended to proceed to the next level and were reasonably confident of success. If adopted on a widespread basis, this would reduce external assessment, marking and appeals. However, there has been a general reluctance to by-pass unnecessary exams, and candidates would need an incentive to adopt this approach" (p.56).

The report referred to compensatory awards and unit certification as possible incentives but subsequent experience has shown that neither has proved particularly successful in this regard.

How many exams do students take?

The following information illustrates possible patterns in the amount of exams taken by students from S4:

8 Standard Grades in S4
5 Highers in S5
3 Advanced Highers in S6, or 2 Advanced Highers and 1 or 2 Highers, or 1 Advanced Higher and other NQ combinations.

8 Standard Grades in S4
2 or 3 Highers and 2 Intermediate 2s in S5
1 Advanced Higher + other Highers/Intermediate 2s in S6.

7 or 8 Standard Grades in S4
1 Higher + other Intermediate 2s/Intermediate 1s in S5
Other Highers/Intermediate 2s/Intermediate 1s in S6.

5 Standard Grades + (Access/Intermediate 1 units but these are not externally assessed) in S4
Intermediate 1/Intermediate 2 courses in S5 and S6.

What do students think?

The following quotes are taken from the responses to the National Debate:

"It's like 2 years, and it just like adds up to an hour and a half where you've got to sit in a room and do an exam, and then you've got to remember stuff that you learned like at the start of 2 years. Maybe they should like shorten the course or something, and just have like continual assessments." School pupils, S4-S6 Inverness

"They put far too much pressure on you. You work throughout the whole year and then try to remember all the stuff you sat way back in October or somewhere to do it in your actual exam at the end of it. I think if you did your course work and then sat the higher bit or the higher portion of it then move on to the next bit and the next bit rather than one massive exam. The higher split in three." School pupils, S4-S6 Glasgow.

Activity

Read the briefing paper, 'Reducing the amount of time spent on exams'

Questions for discussion

2. From the responses to the National Debate and from other sources the Scottish Executive is aware that there is concern regarding the amount of time young people spend on external exams from the end of S4.

3. Discuss the nature of this concern with a view to identifying the factors that give rise to it.

4. What suggestions can you make that might inform the Scottish Executive in its task of taking forward the commitment to reduce the amount of time spent on external exams?

Responses

From the responses to the National Debate and from other sources the Scottish Executive is aware that there is concern regarding the amount of time young people spend on external exams from the end of S4.

Discuss the nature of this concern with a view to identifying the factors that give rise to it.

The key point to emerge during this discussion was that there was little concern among groups across all three seminars with regard to reducing the time spent on exams. Delegates wondered if the concern originated within the Higher Still developments or whether it was financial? They felt that if there was a problem with over-assessment it related more to internal assessment. The importance of a 'safety net' for pupils was also strongly emphasised.

• How much of a concern is there? Did it originate in Higher Still or is it financial?
• Pressure because of number of exams at a young age
• Safety net - both before next level and at the different level
• Suspect internal assessment is the issue
• The rush to Higher
• Why have external exams?
• Some pupils are disadvantaged by the nature of assessment - abilities for example in reading/writing
• NABs - useful to identify progress but can cause pressure at certain times
• Fear of 'off' day
• Prelims use up time
• Not in favour of exit exams only
• Student view - better to achieve qualification at Standard Grade before moving on (safety net); should be more recognition of internal assessment e.g. prelim folios to reduce pressure on final exams
• Schools still favour the rigour of external assessment and don't feel internal assessment is reliable enough to inform decisions about pupil progress
• Concern not thought to be real and pupils do not feel overloaded
• Very little evidence from those in the group (including student members) of concern about over-assessment; pupils value S4 experience of sitting formal exams, as preparation for S5/6 exams
• Defer 31 March SQA deadline to reduce the need for 2 diets of prelims
• Exam is needed to confirm teachers' judgement of pupil performance
• Parents and pupils value safety net of certification as a legitimate trade-off against examination time
• Is the concern really with external exams or with overall assessment overload?
• Stress on pupils with a single end exam
• Who is served by exams and grades? Pupils? universities? employers?
• Replace 2 Standard Grades exams with 1 longer exam with multiple outcomes
• Replace external exams with school exams drawn from an item bank
• Lack of trust among professional over internal assessment
• Current prelims not adequate for appeals so these are becoming longer
• It is not only the time spent on external exams it is also the amount of internal assessment in terms of NABs
• Reduce exams to cover 2 years not 3 - but 'not to put all eggs in one basket' with only 1year of exams
• Is concern about pupils' well-being or loss of teaching time?
• Purpose of external assessment? - demands of stakeholders, motivation
• Could SQA cope with assessment on demand ie assessment on leaving - 2 diets
• Intermediate level similar to Access with improved internal assessment
• End of S4 still relevant given age and stage discussions earlier - should it be S3?
• Not simply external exam burden, ongoing internal assessment also perceived as a burden
• Concerns about the amount of time spent on assessing within each of the 3 units of Higher as well as the time spent on exams
• Danger of S3 and S4 becoming the S1 and S2 if no exams
• Need to consider internal assessment as well as external exams

What suggestions can you make that might inform the Scottish Executive in its task of taking forward the commitment to reduce the amount of time spent on external exams?

Most groups were in disagreement with the commitment and it was felt that we should focus on reducing overload of NABs to enable more teaching and learning. Some felt that the question needed to be considered alongside the previous discussion on the relationship between Standard grade and nNQs. Others thought it was important to gather evidence from all stakeholders in order to find out if a reduction in the amount of time spent on exams was actually what was wanted or needed.

Among the many suggestions made were:

• Reduce the number of levels
• One paper for Foundation/General and one paper for General/Credit
• What are the exams for? Look at examples of what happens elsewhere - no
• external exams - awards made on basis of continuous assessment
• Can exam diet be replaced by rigorous external central moderation of internal assessment
• Unit assessments should be graded not just pass or fail
• Look at possibility of sitting only one level at Standard Grade but with some form of compensatory award for narrow fails
• Consider only sitting NABs to achieve unit awards but no need for those wanting a course award
• Avoid having 2 exams on one day
• Greater reliance on internal assessment - is reluctance to take this on due to a public lack of confidence, or lack of confidence among teachers?
• Reduce/remove terminal exams and replace with graded NABs assessed externally
• One other radical proposal, not enthusiastically endorsed by student members, was to only assess when dropping a subject (S2, S3, S4, S5)
• For nNQs NABs should be both summative and formative. NAB results could contribute to the overall course award and thus reduce the length of exams
• Reduce or even remove external assessment - assess in other ways - need to validate and improve confidence in internal assessments - graded internal assessments with moderation
• Standard Grade is a security blanket for teachers currently under huge pressure from internal assessment
• Sit only exams that will not be taken on
• Sit only one better level paper e.g. Credit or have one paper that covers all levels and allow appropriate grade outcomes
• We would keep external exams at S4 but recommend restructuring to avoid need to take exams at 2 levels
• We would reduce amount of time spent on internal assessment by removing the requirement to pass NABs - if NABs are to remain, make them contribute more to formative assessment

Summary of evaluations

To what extent did the seminar achieve its aims?

All delegates regarded the seminars as having achieved their aims either fully or partly - 65% said fully and 35% said partly.

Did the briefing papers provide sufficient background information for the discussions?

Most delegates found the briefing papers helpful in setting the context for the programme and workshop sessions: e.g.

Yes, they provided a useful backdrop for the discussions
Good basis for discussion
Yes, these were a good synopsis
Yes, enough and not too waffly
Yes, detailed - good background information
Yes, found these papers very useful
Yes, more information on SVQs etc framework and its relationship to NQs
Mostly, although some of the issues - especially for the second session, went far beyond the briefing paper

Was the time given for discussion sufficient to allow completion of the tasks?

Most delegates thought the time given for discussion was sufficient: e.g.

Yes, very generous
The time allocated was about right
Yes, possibly too much time, possibly could have had a working coffee break and a shorter lunch break
Yes - discussion would have been enhanced by presence of younger teachers with more recent experience of being pupils - balanced with knowledge gained in the classroom
Could have had a little longer on the last discussion
Timing was pitched about right
The discussion could have lasted much longer but good focus was maintained and time was correct
Yes, one of the few conferences I have attended where discussions were focused and sufficient time was available
Could have used more time for second task
Mainly
Yes, well planned - time allocated was fine - we tended to have extra discussions also
No
Yes, good discussion, very helpful

How useful were the report back sessions?

Most delegates found the report back sessions useful although a number commented on the fact that there was a good deal of repetition: e.g.

Very useful, hope the report from the seminar will capture all the range of responses
Mixed - on occasions little by way of new points as we moved around the group
Very - interesting to hear wide range of ideas/views
Very useful - good points made
Very helpful
Extremely
Individually useful but, inevitably, a great deal of repetition
Too long and repetitive - largely due to speakers repeating previous points
Very useful
Excellent
Very useful
Fairly useful
Good to see the general opinion - who was similar to us and who had differing views; gave a well-rounded perspective to the overall topics
Interesting to hear additional viewpoints
Very useful and interesting to hear other points of view which may differ from your own
Reasonably so - will wait for conference report

Are there any general comments you wish to make about the seminar including the Hotel catering and facilities

Most delegates clearly enjoyed the day and commented positively on the value of having a mix of people present - school, college and authority representatives, as well as parents and students. In two out of the three venues those who attended were pleased with the facilities and catering. Unfortunately, those attending the Glasgow venue experienced poor heating and this was understandably reflected in the comments. Those included below are the ones not relating to the facilities.

Our discussions would have been broader had we had pupil and more classroom teacher input. Other than that enjoyable and informative day - worthwhile, thanks
Extremely valuable to have school students present - articulate and useful contributions
Good opportunity to discuss issues.
Good to have a parent in the group. Would have liked a student too! Overall, arrangements fine. Thanks to Mike, Eileen and troops
Group composition very good - mixture of school/college/authority - good to hear views from pupils
I liked the mix of people but perhaps there could have been a session with 'cognate' groups.

Next steps

The seminars proved a very worthwhile exercise, both for the Executive to hear the views of a wide variety of people involved in different roles in education and to give delegates the opportunity to discuss important aspects of the National Qualifications system with each other. The quality and level of discussion was often high, as evidenced in the responses collated in this report, and reflected a wide range of differing views.

The Executive will take account of the views that were made as it takes forward the commitments made in Educating for Excellence relating to National Qualifications. The development of the consultation document on the future of Age and Stage regulations has been influenced by points made at the seminars. The document will be published in early March. A copy will be sent to all seminar participants and they are encouraged to return the response form. Work to take forward the commitments to address the relationship between Standard Grade and new National Qualifications and to reduce the amount of time spent on external exams will also progress throughout this year and beyond.

Copies of this report will be placed on the National Qualifications Steering Group website - www.scotland.gov.uk/education/nationalqualifications. This site contains information about policy developments in National Qualifications and will be of interest to a variety of stakeholders from the school and further education sector.

References

Scottish Executive (2003) - Educating for Excellence: The Executive's Response to the National Debate. www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/education/ndser-00.asp. (The Scottish Executive)

Learning and Teaching Scotland, (2003) - Flexibility in the Curriculum: Emerging Practice.

www.ltscotland.org.uk/curriculumflexibility/supportingresources/emergingpractice.asp (Learning and Teaching Scotland).

National Qualifications Steering Group, (2001) - Review of initial implementation of new National Qualifications.www.scotland.gov.uk/library3/education/nqir-00.asp. (The Scottish Executive).

Scottish Office (1994) - Higher Still: Opportunity for All. (The Scottish Office.)

Scottish Office Education and Industry Department, (1996) - Improving Achievements in Scottish Schools: A report to the Secretary of State for Scotland. (The Stationary Office)