Tag Archives: consultation

Devolution of responsibility to schools⤴

from @ Engage for Education

It is the defining mission of this Government to deliver excellence and equity across Scottish education.

I have been tasked by the First Minister to ensure that every child in Scotland – no matter where they are from or how well off their family is – has the same opportunities and an equal chance to succeed.

In the 118 days since I became Education Secretary I have made it a firm priority to get out into Scotland’s schools to hear directly from our teachers and practitioners about what it’s like to teach in Scotland’s classroom.

I have been deeply impressed by the excellent work I have seen. But I have also heard about the barriers and challenges getting in the way of delivering great education.

In response to the issues raised, I have moved decisively to free teachers up to teach by removing unnecessary bureaucracy and workload.

I have provided a definitive statement of priorities for Scotland’s schools, setting out clearly and concisely what teachers should and shouldn’t be focusing on.

These actions will empower teachers to spend their time teaching and giving our children the best possible opportunities to learn.

The next step is to ask ourselves how school education should be run?

Today I set out this Government’s vision for the most critically important part of our early years and school education system – our teachers, practitioners and their relationship with our children.

The presumption at the heart of the governance review I launched today, is that decisions about our children’s learning should be taken  as close to our children as possible – at school level.

Our teachers and early years workers have the expertise and are best placed, to make decisions about children’s learning and school life – supported by parents and the local community.

In my statement to Parliament today I also made clear that this Government will never go down the divisive academy model, and we will not have selection or Grammar Schools in Scotland.

Evidence shows collaboration at every level of education builds capacity and delivers the best outcomes for children and young people. So by working together we can achieve more.

Some of our schools are already working collaboratively through the development of school clusters. Through the governance review I want to hear how this type of collaboration and others can be encouraged.

Of course, some of the support our schools need is best delivered at a local or a regional level.  Many of these services are currently delivered by local authorities, and local authorities will continue to exercise democratic control over Scottish education at a local level.

But we must question the support provided at every level of our education system to ensure it delivers what our teachers, and our children, need.

We need a system of school governance which is clear to parents, teachers,  communities and everyone. The governance review is our opportunity to make this a reality.

I plan to spend a significant amount of time over the next three months talking and listening to teachers, children and young people and those with a stake in Scottish education, about how our education system is run.

I want to hear views from across every part of Scotland – from children and young people, from parents, teachers, practitioners and the wider community.

I encourage you to attend one of our engagement events or submit your views in writing or through our social media channels. Details of how you can engage with the review are available at www.gov.scot/educationgovernancereview

We are ready to take the next steps in making Scotland’s school education world-class. I invite you to join us.

Response to SQA Consultation on Assessment⤴

from @ stuckwithphysics.co.uk

The SQA have released a consultation on the assessment arrangements for the new qualifications, which can be found here - 

Having blogged recently on the subject of assessment, I have decided to publish my own response.

[SQA questions shown in bold, my responses below]

1. Which subject(s) do you deliver?

Physics

 2. It was intended that Units in new National Courses should have both fewer Outcomes and Assessment Standards and that those Outcomes should be expressed in broader terms than the Units in previous National Courses. This was to give practitioners the freedom to decide how to assess the Units. 

How has this worked in your subject(s)?

Not at all

3. In SQA-produced Unit assessment support packs, three approaches to assessment have been suggested — Combined, Unit-by-Unit and Portfolio.

[detail of approaches omitted here]

What has been the most common approach in your subject/s and why?

unit by unit - staff are incredibly over worked and do not have the time to develop assessment material from scratch, especially when the assessment standards are so opaque. Doing so and ensuring they meet the pre-verification standards is not generally considered to be an easy process, so the most sensible decision is to use the materials prepared and provided by the SQA.

What are the challenges in using the other approaches and why?

the recording and administration of the outcomes and assessment standards achieved for every pupil in every certificate class, sometimes at two levels creates an incredible burden in the unit by unit approach. This simply couldn't become any easier by breaking it up into a larger number of smaller assessment tasks

4. Unit and Course assessment have separate and different purposes in new National Courses.

Is there duplication of assessment across Unit and Course assessment in your subject(s)?

Yes

If yes, please give details:

The UASP materials assess pupils with items that are significantly different to the style of the final exam, using entirely different marking instructions, that punish any and all errors with no credit given for correct part answers. This gives candidates no useful information about there progress and allows for no constructive feedback other than 'the SQA say your answer is incorrect'. This has a huge negative impact on the student. Unit A/B tests use exam style questions, the same marking instructions as the final exam and allow students to get an idea of their progress judged against the same criteria as their final grade will be. This also allows for students to receive constructive feedback to help them to improve.

5. How might any opportunities to use evidence from one assessment to meet one or more of the requirements in another assessment in your subject(s) be achieved?

This already happens in the problem solving component in physics unit assessments. Each of the four strands of PS need only be achieved once across any one of the three unit assessments. This may mean a student only answering one such question correctly throughout the whole course, so is not necessarily a useful approach.

[I'm not convinced I have understood your question correctly - if it doesn't mean what I think it did, I apologise for not having deciphered it correctly]

6. What implications does the requirement to meet all Assessment Standards in a Unit have for assessment and also for re-assessment in your subject(s)?

In physics, only the Knowledge and Understanding (KU) assessment standards have to be met in all units - the problem solving (PS) can be met at any point across any of the unit assessments.

The marking instructions allow no flexibility or partial credit (responses are either correct or incorrect) with the necessity for particular details often making it difficult for candidates to answer correctly, though the essence of their answer is sound. The issue is not the tasks, rather it is the manner in which they are judged.

The difficulty of meeting the requirements is further compounded by the insistence that candidates be given only two attempts. If they are unsuccessful on the second attempt they cannot be allow to continue and be given a third attempt unless in 'exceptional circumstances'.

In general, the assessments are less of a 'hoop to jump through' that they were in the old courses, and more of an 'obstacle to negotiate'. Nor are they are not easy obstacles for many candidates.

7. To what extent have you developed you own Unit assessments?

i) Why did you adopt this approach?

None - I have only corrected the many mistakes and reformatted them into a usable, write on paper. The process of preparing and presenting our own materials for prior-verification presented too great a work load for staff, especially when there was very little guidance given and no guarantee that multiple redrafts and resubmissions might be required. There was no telling what time scale this might involve, and assessments were needed by candidates during their progress through the courses.

8. Have you used digital evidence or e-assessment in the internal assessment of Units in your subject(s)?

No

9. Are there any other ways we could approach the internal assessment of Units in the future?

Yes

If yes, please give details:

Provide e-Assessment that meets your standards, gives credit for partially correct responses, automatically logs elements that are 'passed' to be logged against an SQA candidate number, and is dynamic enough to allow reassessment to be tailored to only the key areas that need to be reassessed for each candidate. Not 'writing-off' candidates after two attempts would be fairer, too. Basically an approach that allows teachers to do their job of teaching, whilst shifting the burden of assessment onto the assessment body.

 

 

 

SQA Consultation on Reforming Assessment⤴

from @ stuckwithphysics.co.uk

In an acknowledgement that there are 'issues' with assessment, the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) have opened a on-line consultation.

Their survey can be found here - https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/TFJQCX2

Having produced a few posts recently on the subject of assessment I have been keen to respond to the survey. Once I have checked to make sure it won't cause any trouble, I shall publish my response in another post.

I would urge every teacher in the country, who has ever expressed any concern over the assessment arrangements for the new qualifications to take the time (it's not quick) to make as full a response to the survey as they are able to.