After the dust settles.

14th March 2014 at 00:00

Recently, I have been questioned in some detail on the new National qualifications by a member of staff at the EIS teaching union's headquarters, a casual acquaintance from my local hostelry, a cousin with a child in S4 and the Scottish Parliament's Education and Culture Committee. The thrust of the questions has been predicated on the immediate educational diet for 2014 and the need for reassurance that students will be able to succeed.

I believe they will, primarily because of the selfless and tireless work of Scotland's teachers to achieve this outcome, in spite of the many unnecessary obstacles that schools have had to overcome.

The EIS submission to the committee states that the workload associated with delivering the new qualifications is unsustainable; for that reason alone, a review of the process is required. However, of equal importance is the need to evaluate whether the objectives of the senior phase of education are being delivered in a meaningful way.

Curriculum for Excellence promised a reduction in the formal assessment burden, more time to facilitate deeper learning, a breadth across senior school and broadening out of achievement, progressive 15-18 pathways for students seeking to go down a vocational route and greater interdisciplinary learning. Are these aims being achieved?

This is a transitional year, of course, and many schools have focused on protecting the current S4 cohort. This has meant minimising change. If, however, we discover when the dust settles that we have simply replaced Standard Grade with National 4 and 5, we will have ended up with a poorer product.

All the evidence suggests that students being presented for National 4 and 5 this year are facing the type of assessment tsunami that led to a major review of Higher Still in the year after its full implementation. And the overkill of verification from the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) has added dramatically to the workload concerns of teachers.

SQA's failure to provide an adequate fallback from Higher to National 5 led to many schools deciding not to bypass lower-level qualifications through fear of students falling through the net. There has also been a failure to effectively communicate the changed nature of unit assessments (skills not content), to promote the combined unit assessment and to avoid punitive thresholds for focused skills.

We will need to take stock and adjust where required. If the S3 profile of achievement is not to be the basis of forward planning for the senior phase, what is? If students don't study over a two-year course of S4-S5, can we maintain breadth and still create additional time for teaching and learning? Where should we be in two years' time?

There are many school experiences out there and we need to interrogate them in the context of the key aims of CfE and to share lessons learned.

Larry Flanagan is general secretary of the EIS teaching union

Log-in as an existing print or digital subscriber

Forgotten your subscriber ID?


To access this content and the full TES archive, subscribe now.

View subscriber offers


Get TES online and delivered to your door – for less than the price of a coffee

Save 33% off the cover price with this great subscription offer. Every copy delivered to your door by first-class post, plus full access to TES online and the TES app for just £1.90 per week.
Subscribers also enjoy a range of fantastic offers and benefits worth over £270:

  • Discounts off TES Institute courses
  • Access over 200,000 articles in the TES online archive
  • Free Tastecard membership worth £79.99
  • Discounts with Zipcar,, Virgin Wines and other partners
Order your low-cost subscription today