EVEN in the early years of Higher Still it was quite apparent that, given the equivalence of Standard grade and National Qualification courses, curriculum managers would be tempted to consider the substitution of Access 3, Intermediate 1 and Intermediate 2 courses for Standard grades in the third and fourth years. Coupled with the greater freedom of choice permitted by the lifting of restrictions on “ages and stages”, a pick and mix approach has been an option over the past two or three years.

The wholesale abandonment of Standard grade provision was not envisaged, however, though it must now be acknowledged as an option a few schools might wish to take. This is not to argue that everything is perfectly satisfactory with the current Standard grade, but there is a need for caution before throwing out all of the good work achieved with and for Standard grade pupils. The problem we may face, fuelled by an over-excited press, is a perception that National Qualifications per se are a better route for pupils, or that Standard grades have somehow acquired less value.

Most important, the National Qualification units and courses were written for post-16 students not for younger pupils, and they do not universally progress in lockstep across all subjects at all levels. While there is potential movement between at least two levels of every subject, it may not be in Intermediate 1 and Intermediate 2; these may not adequately replace the current Standard grade, especially at Credit level.

Many science teachers would hesitate before substituting Intermediate 1 in year three followed by Intermediate 2 in year four for a discrete Standard grade in their particular field. This is because of lack of progression between Intermediate 2 and Higher in biology, physics and chemistry. There is a design fault here to which the Scottish Qualifications Authority must give urgent attention - a separate agenda, perhaps, but very important none the less.

A maths department looking at replacing Credit level with Intermediate 2 would definitely want to augment the course with material from the Standard grade Credit course. The content covered by Credit levels in most Standard grades is wider than Intermediate 2. In a subject such as modern studies, for example, the teacher would want to lift sections from the existing course to ensure that the pupil has a more rounded grasp of the concepts and the content, before moving on to Higher.

At Foundation level, the same is not true, and there is a view that many pupils might be stretched further in their learning by undertaking Access and Intermediate 1. The perceived advantage here is that many youngsters struggling with their efforts to sustain a two-year course might benefit from two discrete years of working through these NQ courses, building on their success after completing Access 3. I would argue that it is worth while trying this out in localised experiments where a department can see better provision for pupils, and where there is no consequent increase in workload occasioned by a cut and paste approach.

I am not convinced by the argument that, since we are doing this already (running the NQ courses), there is no workload issue for staff. There are many workload issues inherent in the introduction of the NQ courses and units. Schools will also have to absorb the real costs of the McCrone agreement in terms of structural change and changes to working practices over the next few sessions, and now is not the time to muddy the waters with the wholesale abandonment of Standard grade.

ltimately, the SQA has to review its overall provision for schools and invite informed debate. Standard grade is now of an age where revision could well refresh some tired courses, if these are so perceived. Certainly the procedures for marking the Standard grade exams need urgent consideration because there is a huge capacity for waste in the current practice of every pupil sitting both General and Credit or Foundation and General papers.

It is surely practical to reduce the marking of scripts that, in the final event, prove to be redundant. I understand why that process was introduced, but do we still need to hold to it? Given that the SQA has struggled for three years to find the requisite number of markers, a reorganisation of the final Standard grade examination could simplify the exam and remove the practice of pupils sitting two levels.

Curricular flexibility is at an early stage. All schools are keen to suit courses and opportunities to the needs of their cohort. Decisions to go down any particular route will be predicated upon the needs of pupils. Schools must be free to take the necessary steps to support their staff and pupils in this manner, but press reports that trumpet the demise of Standard grade do little to take forward these opportunities in a manner which is individually considered.

The Scottish Executive must decide whether it favours a laissez-faire approach or is willing to take a public stance in this debate. Schools and indeed local authorities would value clarity here. Press reports that trumpet the demise of Standard grade do little to help us take forward these opportunities in a manner which is individually considered. If this becomes a bandwagon, much that is valuable might be rolled over.

If a wholesale change is heralded by the national press as the next solution, or the new way forward, our capacity to deliver a range of opportunities for our pupils will be impaired.

Gerry Docherty is headteacher of Grangemouth High.