ADES Response to Consultation on National Qualifications
Consultation on National Qualifications –
Response from the Association of Directors of Education Scotland
PROPOSAL 1
National Qualifications at Access, Higher and Advanced Higher will be retained as points of stability. Highers, in particular, will remain the ‘gold standard’ of the Scottish Education system. The content of all National Qualifications will be updated to reflect the values, purposes and principles of Curriculum for Excellence. Some aspects of the structure of these qualifications will also be reviewed.
Question 1 – Do you welcome the intention to update all qualifications at Access, Higher and Advanced Higher in line with Curriculum for Excellence? Please comment on any implications to be considered.
Answer
There is a consistent welcome for the intention to update all qualifications. At Access Higher and Advanced Higher in line with Curriculum for Excellence. Individual local authority responses contain varying levels of detail on this, however the unifying points and the points supported by the Association of Directors are as follows.
There is a willingness to change and a welcome for the move to update the qualifications, however there is a need to be clear about what is meant by the comments made that the Higher remains as the “gold standard”. Our assumption is that this means that the qualification would be seen as a continuing benchmark for particular achievement and that it will be the main qualification used for entrance to Higher Education in particular. While we support this we would also wish to see further change within the assessments used for all of these awards. It is very important that we avoid preparation for the familiar and we seek a greater emphasis on testing the skills and capacities which are central to a Curriculum for Excellence. We recognise that the final qualifications framework should build on the work that is done on a curriculum which is designed to go from age 3 to 18
There are other issues which are vitally important to the Association. The first is that the qualifications require to have currency and, while there may be changes in the way that young people and other learners are assessed in order to gain the qualifications, the credibility and currency has to be beyond doubt. Our view is that this means that Universities, Colleges and Employers must be involved in the development of the framework in order to ensure that these are recognised and deployed.
We also see a considerable need for all of the qualifications to be designed in such a way that they allow for multi level teaching, or at very least, bi-level teaching in order to preserve flexibility in schools and, in particular, to protect minority subjects.
We would also hope that the courses leading to qualifications would be structured in such a way, and would build on that which young people had learned previously, so that more young people were able to meet the standard that has been set for them.
As part of this, we see a need alongside the qualifications framework, to recognise wider achievement and ensure that there is due recognition of other qualifications and evidence of the wider experience of learners.
When the framework is being designed it is important that we get the content right as well as the structure and the Association sees this as an ideal opportunity to give genuine priority to those courses which are currently described as vocational. An expansion of the subject areas within this qualification framework would be welcome.
Finally there were some concerns that the opportunities for young people to take Highers flexibly throughout the senior phase might lead to a dash in S4 for those most able pupils who then might sacrifice the depth which is central to Curriculum for Excellence.
PROPOSAL 2
A new qualification will replace the present Standard Grade General and Credit levels and Intermediate 1 and 2 (SCQF 4 and SCQF 5) qualifications. The new qualification will be available in a wide range of subjects, as at present. The new qualification will reflect the best features of Standard Grade and Intermediate. Standard Grade Foundation level will be removed and Access 3 will provide certification at SCQF level 3. (See Annex A table 1 for illustration of new qualification on SCQF framework.)
Question 2 – Early consultation has identified the ‘best’ features of Standard Grade and Intermediate qualifications as:
·
The ‘inclusive’ approach to certification contained in Standard Grade; and
·
The unit based structure of Intermediate qualifications
Are there any other features in the present Standard Grade and Intermediate qualifications which should be included in the new qualification at SCQF levels 4 and 5?
Answer
There is a general welcome for any moves that are made to simplify the assessment framework at S4. It is currently being perceived as unduly complex, however there are some concerns about the idea of moving towards a single presentation rather than the presentation at two levels, which is currently the standard grade. While this is seen as being uneconomic and at times cumbersome, there would be a willingness to look at a structure which offered some form of safety net in the way that the current standard grade does.
There is also a welcome for the internal elements of standard grade and we would wish to see these preserved. This could be allied to an effort to broaden the methods of assessment that were used at this level.