Br i efi ng Pa p er (11-02)

JUNE 2011

SCOTTISH SCHOOL EDUCATION ISSUES: a briefing

for the Scottish Parliaments Education Committee

Implementation of Curriculum for Excellence 1 The RSE recognizes the strong support that Curriculum for Excellence (CfE) commands from the political parties in Scotland. It has been frequently described by ministers and other educational leaders as the most significant reform for a generation. We welcome the aims and values of CfE, particularly the concern with applications and real world relevance; the focus on active learning, together with discussion, debate and critical thinking; and the opportunities for teachers to exercise initiative. The RSE has, however, seriously questioned the lack of attention to knowledge, the lack of pedagogically proper regard to the disciplines, the lack of clarity of some of the curricular proposals, and inadequacies in the way in which assessment has been addressed. We have also expressed concerns about the insufficient level of resources that are being made available to support this innovation, the absence of specialist leadership in the management of the implementation (particularly the lack of involvement of those with classroom knowledge in the decision-making process), the dearth of proper planning and resourcing for continuing professional development and the extent to which the learning that emerges from the new curriculum is being monitored as it is implemented. 2 Clearly, CfE has an ambitious long term agenda for changing educational climates, cultures and ways of thinking, especially in primary and early secondary schools.There is a priority to establish a shared understanding of what will count as success in the venture.The ongoing implementation strategy for CfE should address the following key points: plan that identifies the strategic direction of CfE, and where the leadership and responsibility is vested for each aspect of the programme. This should put the programme into the hands of those with commitment and teaching or other appropriate experience at all levels, including that of the individual school. intellectual demands, identifying what is worthwhile knowledge and exploring how this engages with the CfE Experiences and Outcomes. It is not clear to us that there is consensus among those developing the reform on the importance of knowledge and the coherence of the disciplines, and to that extent we also believe that the clarity of the aims needs to be improved as well as their communication.

> CfE implies a diversity of practice that should be

addressed and plans made for the effective leadership and articulation of that diversity in the circumstances of a long-term devolved programme. In particular, since this signals a significant change from traditional approaches, the implications of diverse and innovative systems for assessment, traditional examinations and inspections should be publicly discussed.

> What is offered to teachers should be material advice

that is more straightforward, shorter, simpler and more accessible than that offered so far. It should address in depth the concepts of progression and higher order skills.

> The need for an academically rigorous programme of

Continuing Professional Development (CPD) for teachers, as emphasised in Graham Donaldsons report on the future on teacher education in Scotland. This is particularly important in some areas such as primary science. New approaches are needed to replace traditional away-days followed by assumed cascades of information to colleagues. Much of the required CPD involves teachers becoming familiar with developments within the disciplines and in cross-disciplinary fields.This can be provided only by subject specialists in universities (as distinct from their education faculties and schools or the local authority subject advisers) and is as necessary for primary teachers as for secondary.

> There is a need to provide a clear overall management

> There is a need for systematic evidence, rigorously

analysed, in order to evaluate the impact of the reforms. Unfortunately, there seems to be no formal monitoring of the introduction of CfE despite the many years of argument and evidence on the value of formative evaluation and disciplined research.

> Continuing effort should go into effectively

communicating the fundamental purposes and vision of the programme for the 21st century and the ways in which it challenges traditional teaching and schooling. This should stress the importance of raising

Br i efi ng Pa p er (11-02)
Leadership 3 There is an absence of a clear framework of leadership, management and responsibility for all aspects of the CfE programme and there is a real need for transparent national, well informed expert leadership in its implementation.This is particularly important if the move to a much more decentralised system is to be clearly articulated to and understood by practitioners. 4 CfE provides for a greater extension of school autonomy, with a more flexible system in which schools and teachers have significant input into the direction of learning, which we welcome. However, we have grave concerns that, if not properly worked through, it could lead to different agendas being set in schools throughout Scotland. There is a pressing need for continuity in the curriculum and for proper consideration of what should be the common experience for all users and what may be reflected in diversification. The development of common understandings of the structure and details of a curriculum is not the same as centralisation of control of the curriculum. Something approaching a consensus could be reached by teachers of each specific subject, consulting with disciplinary experts from other sectors such as universities and business. Government and its agencies, however, do have a role in encouraging the development of these common aims. analysed, in order not only to evaluate the impact of the reform but also, first, to understand what it means. That evidence has to be produced in a manner that is independent of the policy processes that produced the reform, and has to be publicly available for further scrutiny by researchers other than those who generated the data.These principles of independent data independently analysed are the necessary accompaniment of a reform with the principles of CfE: it is the only way, in debate about the reform, to reflect the pluralism that seems to be its central principle. Research is thus not an arcane activity separate from the development of policy. It is the tool by which policy is understood. 7 Without proper evaluation, we would not properly understand the effects, nor the inevitable partial failures, and so we would not know whether the financial resources allocated to the reform were being spent wisely.We would not be able to build upon the successes nor intelligently modify the failures. Innovations however promising require good research if they are to be made to grow into better policy. The RSE has published an Advice Paper1 on the importance of evaluating educational reforms and CfE specifically, which we commend to members of the Education Committee.

Graham Donaldsons Review of teacher education in Scotland 5 We welcome Graham Donaldsons report on the future of teacher education in Scotland, and urge that the recommendations be put into practice as soon as possible.This will require strong leadership both nationally and in those institutions with the main responsibility for teacher education universities, schools and local authorities. In the universities the leadership of the implementation has to be at the highest level as the changes cannot be achieved by the Faculties or Schools of Education alone.This implies new kinds of commitment to teacher education initiated by senior management and supported by disciplinary and cross disciplinary programmes across the universities. Such commitment would recognise the potential for students to arrive at university in the future much better prepared as a result of their teachers solid subject backgrounds. Research and Evaluation 6 As already indicated, there seems to be no formal monitoring of the introduction of CfE.There is then a pressing need for systematic evidence, rigorously

New Executive Agency for Scottish Education 9 In this context, we find the establishment of the new executive agency for Scottish education, based on the bringing together of HMIe and LTS, surprising.These bodies have had distinctive remits; for LTS this has been development of and support for curricular implementation, and for HMIe it has been quality assurance for our schools and local authorities. Furthermore, there has been a history of concerns about the importance of maintaining these distinctions, particularly the role of HMIe. 10 Perhaps the justification for the merging of LTS and HMIe is based on some principle of partnership, but principles of openness and accountability are at least as important.The extent of consultation and the arguments on which the establishment of the new agency is based are unclear, and there has been no indication or any acknowledgement of the need to plan for independent evaluation of its performance. Scottish education should be wary of placing quality assurance responsibilities in the hands of those who are being assessed.

1 An Agenda for Research at a time of Educational Reform in Scotland, RSE Advice Paper no. 10-13, November 2010. http://www.royalsoced.org.uk/govt_responses/2010/AD10_13.pdf

Br i efi ng Pa p er (11-02)
Cross-disciplinary and cross-curricular aspects 11 There is a pressing need to embed cross-disciplinary and cross-curricular teaching and assessment in the curriculum as originally envisaged by CfE. With particular reference to science, cross-disciplinary learning involves subject specialists teaching beyond the confines of their specialist knowledge and working with other subject specialists in order to point out the connections between the science disciplines and to highlight the real-world and contemporary relevance of science. Cross-disciplinary working also offers opportunities for developing team work and problem solving skills.All of these attributes are essential features of the CfE.We are concerned that there is a fundamental misunderstanding of the very nature of cross-curricular and cross-disciplinary working within the current CfE delivery programme, and this must be addressed urgently if opportunities are not to be missed.The delivery of CfE, and the associated qualifications and assessment regime must cater for cross-curricular areas as well as the coherent pillars of knowledge and understanding which are represented by the disciplines.This will involve a radical shift in teaching culture and practice. Support for Teachers Professional Development 12 The successful implementation of CfE requires a significant strengthening in the disciplinary expertise of primary teachers, and in the cross-disciplinary features of the teaching of all subjects in secondary and primary.There will have to be much more frequent and widespread participation by teachers in professional development in specialist subjects and in pedagogical issues (e.g. concerning the particular difficulties of relating disparate subjects to each other). CfE therefore has significant implications for teachers initial education and for their continuing professional development. 13 Maintaining and developing professional knowledge and skills is a key indicator of continuing professional competence.A great deal more time and resource must be given for CPD of teachers in their areas of disciplinary expertise and in fostering cross-disciplinary working, comparable to the provision that characterises highly successful educational systems around the world.This renewal and enhancement of subject skills for teachers should have equal prominence with the welcome new opportunities which have been provided for the development of pedagogical and management skills. More must be done to establish a vision for CPD.
2 http://www.royalsoced.org.uk/govt_responses/2011/AD11_01.pdf 3 http://www.rsc.org/Education/Teachers/Resources/InvestigateChemistry.asp

Guidance and Exemplars 14 Whilst the scope given to teachers to interpret the CfE experiences and outcomes is welcome, teachers cannot be expected to invent a detailed syllabus for themselves.There is some concern that the advice offered for teachers through the Building the Curriculum series and the Experiences and Outcomes offers no convincing overall framework and suffers from interpretation difficulties and inadequate attention to progression.There is a pressing need amongst the teaching profession for guidance, exemplars and discipline-specific expertise which would enable teachers to capitalise on the permissive elements of CfE. 15 In relation to these latter aspects, the RSE has committed significant resources to explore some of the demands that CfE makes on teachers and schools. The RSE established a working group that has considered and made recommendations on the teaching of History in Scotlands schools2. Furthermore, in partnership with the Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC), the RSE has exemplified a subset of the learning outcomes and experiences of CfE as they relate to chemistry.The exemplification has mapped out curriculum plans and practical experiences and experiments that are consistent with the requirements of CfE3. Following the successful launch and the positive reaction from teachers in relation to the Chemistry materials, work is underway to develop an exemplification that would promote the value of learning Computing and Information Science and support a more engaging experience for both teachers and students. Assessment and Qualifications 16 In relation to examinations, a major challenge being faced by secondary school teachers in particular is the current uncertainty surrounding the structure, content, assessment criteria, modes of assessment (e.g. internal or external to schools), and school stages at which the assessments will take place, and the resource implications of the examinations for the new national qualifications from school year 2013-14. Whilst it is clear that assessment should not drive learning, a well-designed examination structure is necessary to make precise the general statements of intent in a curriculum policy, and ensure that aims are being achieved. Benefit would be derived from there being a more explicit statement about how the learning and assessment strands are being taken forward in parallel. It is important that the CfE Management Board continue to work to address this.

Br i efi ng Pa p er (11-02)
17 We understand that the precise number and range of qualifications, as well as when they are undertaken, will be a decision for schools and local authorities. We are concerned, however, that the proposed structure of the new qualifications could lead to a narrowing of the curriculum in the senior secondary or, if breadth is to be retained, an S4 S6 programme created on the assumption that CfE will provide a sufficiently broad education up to S3. It needs to be clearly stated whether such narrowing of the curriculum will take place, or if not, how the current breadth is to be retained. Schools require guidance and support to enable them to make informed decisions on delivering the qualifications. 18 In relation to the cross-disciplinary contexts, in an assessment-driven system, consideration needs to be given to identifying and exemplifying innovative ways of assessing cross-disciplinary thinking and common skills sets, for example in project working and by setting problems in unfamiliar contexts. 19 There is a need to consider the link between the assessment regime and the entrance requirements of Universities (Scottish, UK or International). The flexibility of the senior phase of qualifications may not sit well with requirements such as '5 Highers at one sitting' and may have an impact on the destinations of learners. In this context, we welcome the steps being taken by Universities Scotland, the Scottish Government and other partner organisations to develop a strategic approach to Higher Educations engagement with CfE. Engagement with Higher and Further Education Sectors 20 Given the challenges of the new approach to teaching and learning, there is an opportunity and perhaps the necessity for closer links to be forged between schools and universities in Scotland. Given the increasing emphasis being placed on the impact of work being done by the universities, and the allocation of funds for knowledge exchange (KE) and public engagement activities, there is an opportunity to develop a coherent system for linking the CPD needs of teachers with universities. More consideration should be given to exploring the possibility of using cluster based models for CPD and greater collaboration between schools, HE and FE, and industry.

Additional Information and References

Any enquiries about this Briefing Paper should be addressed to Mr William Hardie, Secretary to the RSE Education Committee. (Email: evidenceadvice@royalsoced.org.uk) Responses are published on the RSE website (www.royalsoced.org.uk).

The Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) is Scotlands National Academy. It is an independent body with a multidisciplinary fellowship of men and women of international standing which makes it uniquely placed to offer informed, independent comment on matters of national interest. The Royal Society of Edinburgh, Scotland's National Academy, is Scottish Charity No. SC000470
4