Tackling Bureaucracy
Executive Summary for the Curriculum for Excellence Working Group on Tackling Bureaucracy
Glenys Watt, Keir Bloomer, Onyema Ibe and Mike Nicholson
Blake Stevenson
November 2014
54 Manor Place, Edinburgh, EH3 7EH
T: 0131 225 5600
E: admin@blakestevenson.co.uk
www.blakestevenson.co.uk
Executive Summary
Introduction
Education Scotland, on behalf of the Curriulum for Excellence Working Group on Tackling
Bureaucracy, commissioned Blake Stevenson Ltd in May 2014 to undertake a review of the links
between policy aspirations and the development of bureaucratic systems driven by accountability
requirements at school, local education authority and national levels. The research objectives were to:

explore the sources and nature of the demand for information

examine the systems used and the use made of the information gathered

provide examples of good practice.

make an assessment of the current systems at every level.
We undertook the research in five local authority areas, from a total of six selected by Education
Scotland, and across the areas we interviewed head teachers and teachers in ten primary and ten
secondary schools. The schools were selected by each local authority and the teachers we spoke to
were selected by the head teachers. We interviewed a total of 120 teachers during June and
August/September. Before we began these school visits we examined background resources, in
particular those on the Education Scotland and SQA websites, and spoke to 15 representatives from
the members of the Tackling Bureaucracy Working Group in order to hear their views on the issues
involved and ask them to identify any questions for the field research.
Findings
We provide the findings under the main themes addressed:

Planning

Assessment (and how its recorded)

Reporting

Expectations/demands/inputs from local authorities, Education Scotland/Her Majesty’s
Inspectorate (HMI), Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA)

Views on the national guidance available

IT systems

Additional issues
i
Planning
Planning in primary schools is highly varied and partly depends on how its purpose is viewed: to help
teachers teach or to help the head teacher check what is happening and have control. The approach
and confidence levels of the head teacher appear to determine the levels of paperwork associated with
planning to a large extent although individual teachers may choose to spend a lot of time on planning
and the paperwork associated with it through their own preference. There are examples of schools
where planning has been reduced significantly over the last year but there are also examples of
schools where bureaucracy remains burdensome.
Planning in secondary schools is largely the domain of each department rather than within the control
of the head teacher and again there is huge variation in how it is approached. Secondary schools
taking part in this research generally thought there was more to do around planning for the Phase of
Broad General Education (BGE) in particular now that they have seen what is required in relation to the
new qualifications. The Senior Phase planning is dictated by the new examinations and has required
significant time in planning new courses.
At both primary and secondary levels some of the time and bureaucracy associated with planning has
been around dealing with the Experiences and Outcomes (Es and Os). Some schools are seeking to
make the process more manageable by assessing groups or bundles of Es and Os although other
schools choose to work with Es and Os individually. The latter approach produces much more
avoidable paperwork.
Assessment and how it is recorded
Within primary schools there is a strong sense of head teachers and/or teachers working to develop
their own approaches to assessment and moderation. This is still a work in progress in some schools
while others feel they have now “worked it out” having spent time over the last year in internal
discussion either at senior management level or across the teaching staff. Some of the challenges
appear to be around the ratings “Developing, Consolidating, Secure” for monitoring and tracking
although national advice on these terms related to reporting. Some schools are still using these and
others use alternative methods such as traffic lights. Schools are using a variety of assessment
methods including classroom tests, standardised tests such as InCAS and bought in assessment
packages such as Performance in English (PiE) and Performance in Maths (PiM). Most schools
mentioned they had participated in the Scottish Survey of Literacy and Numeracy.
In secondary schools the issues are similar to primary schools at BGE and relate to the Experiences
and Outcomes and the Developing, Consolidating, Secure ratings. Overall there is a strong sense that
the tracking and monitoring of progress at BGE in secondary schools is not yet sorted out and is
generally seen, as expressed in the words of one local authority interviewee as “burdensome and
problematic”.
Teachers identified the main bureaucracy at Senior Phase as being associated with the increase in
assessment implicit in the new National qualifications. In addition to the assessments themselves there
has been a high requirement for verification over the past year involving moderation internally and
external verification (three rounds) by the SQA. This has led to increased paperwork in providing
assessments and justifying assessments.
ii
Reporting
Reporting to parents at both primary and secondary is undertaken in a variety of ways but generally
involves some written reports plus at least one parents’ evening per session. The research suggests
that this is an area that requires to be addressed in terms of the levels of written reporting and teachertime taken.
There are a couple of examples where local authorities are testing out new approaches that focus
more heavily on dialogue with parents, with one local authority seeking to test a completely “no written
report” approach.
Expectations/demands from local authorities, Education Scotland and SQA
The expectations/demands for information in the sample of five local authorities taking part in this
research were relatively low with only one of the five requiring much more than the School
Improvement Plan, Standards and Quality report and annual attainment reporting. This is contrary to
views expressed by representatives from two unions, the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) and
the Scottish SecondaryTeachers’ Association (SSTA), during the scoping interviews that saw the local
authorities as demanding substantial amounts of information. It may be that this small sample has by
chance selected local authorities where the demands are lower and that others have higher levels of
demand.
Education Scotland is not perceived by those interviewed in this sample as making direct demands at
all other than through inspections. These appear to generate significant paperwork/ and gathering of
evidence despite the apparent efforts of HMI to assure schools that they do not require to see a large
quantity of evidence/paperwork. Schools that have not been inspected for some time and where the
head teacher has less confidence appear more likely to gather more evidence and paperwork than
may be necessary.
The secondary schools visited were all of the opinion that SQA has made excessive demands over the
past year in relation to assessments and verification and for several the view is that the level of
assessment needs to reduce. There were a lot of negative views in relation to the SQA connected to
the changing guidelines, late arrival of important pieces of information and generally poor
communication such as overly lengthy emails with important information hard to see immediately.
Where there had been face to face events there was more positive feedback. From the scoping
interview it was clear that the SQA has recognised the points raised about verification and is working to
address the issues.
Views on the national guidance available
The overwhelming perception from the research participants is that there is too much guidance and not
enough time to look at it. Finding the pieces of information that really matter can be difficult and many
teachers rely on their head teacher/someone in the senior management team to distil the key points for
them. The role of senior members of staff as a conduit for key messages from national guidance
iii
emerged as being very important. While some people had found some useful guidance on both the
Education Scotland and SQA websites, the general view was that the sites are hard to navigate and
sometimes important guidance is found by chance. Some interviewees spoke of finding useful
guidance by looking at other local authorities’ websites. A lot of teachers spoke of the need for more
examples of good practice.
IT systems
The system most commonly used is SEEMIS and nearly all interviewees found it difficult to use and
regard it as not fully fit for purpose. There were also broadband issues in some areas meaning that
teachers could spend significant amounts of time in the school day trying to log on to the system.
Some teachers commented on the fact that they cannot access SEEMIS at home meaning they often
write reports in Word at home and then have to copy and paste them over, not a good use of valuable
time.
Additional issues
The report comments on a number of other issues which, while related to tackling bureaucracy, are not
directly concerned with planning, assessing, recording and reporting. These included the general
increase in workload for teachers and the increased stress levels related to this. While more tasks
have been added, both educational and bureaucratic, it does not appear that much has been taken
away leading to higher workloads. Teachers felt that the increased bureaucracy is just one aspect of a
bigger picture of increased workload.
Another specific issue raised was the time required to write reports for children with additional special
needs and for GIRFEC related meetings. In some schools this placed a significant extra workload,
particularly on senior staff.
All secondary schools expressed concerns about the National 4s and had a number of specific
practical issues including the difficulties of teaching bi-level classes in some subjects where the course
content is very different from that at National 5. There were strong views that pupils sitting only N4s
were stigmatised as they did not sit an external examination and, where there had been an authority or
school decision to remove study leave for these pupils, schools had to provide for them over
examination time.’
Many teachers expressed concern about the pressures for S4 pupils sitting the National 5s especially
in some schools where pupils had taken a high number of exams (eight were cited in one school) the
level of assessment was excessive. The pressure of the “two term dash” has caused some schools to
re-think how they will address preparation for S4 with some saying they will start the courses in S3
although national advice relates to a BGE from S1-S3 and including fourth level.
While it was not a direct research objective we did ask interviewees about progress on the Tackling
Bureaucracy report itself. All the local authorities have held meetings about the report and some have
taken active steps to introduce reductions to paperwork/bureaucracy as a direct result from it. While
head teachers all knew about the report teachers were only vaguely aware of it.
iv
Finally there were some more fundamental issues raised with regard to CfE itself. The overwhelming
perception from those interviewed is that CfE has not turned out the way it was intended. Many spoke
of still liking the principles and theory behind CfE but that the process of implementation has lost sight of
some of these principles. In particular the levels of assessment and the new exams in S4 caused a
few interviewees to query whether the effort was worth the benefit in comparison to the previous
exams.
Conclusions and recommendations
As might be expected, given the principle within CfE of empowering schools, there is huge variation
across the sample visited as to how schools are planning and assessing at BGE. Some schools feel
reasonably satisfied that they have “got there” while others are still labouring to make it manageable.
The research concludes that while there has been some recent improvement in reducing paperwork
and bureaucracy, particularly in primary schools, there is still more that can be done to help make all
systems and accountability requirements more manageable including aspects of planning, assessing,
recording and reporting.
It finds that even where there is good practice in relation to planning and assessment in primary
schools, problems remain in relation to reporting to parents. SEEMIS is considered by almost all
teachers and head teachers who commented on it to be cumbersome, difficult to access and timeconsuming to use. There is also a discontent with the kind of report that it generates. Many teachers
feel that occasional written reports are not the best way to communicate with parents and that better,
less time consuming ways should be found.
At secondary school there is generally a weakness around current systems for the collection and
recording of information throughout the BGE. Some teachers continue to find the Es and Os difficult to
operate and there is dissatisfaction with the approach to assessment using
developing/consolidating/secure. At Senior Phase level there is a strong sense that the current levels
of assessment and verification cannot be maintained and that these will have to be addressed by SQA
(although it is apparent that SQA has already taken steps to reduce the levels of verification in this
current academic session). Issues relating to SEEMIS and reporting to parents are the same as for
primary schools.
Local authorities involved in this research seem not to be over-demanding of information from schools
but a couple of them are wondering whether they are in fact knowledgeable enough about what is
happening in schools. The research team recognises that the sample of five local authorities is small
and there may be others where the demands made are higher.
HMI have tried to make it clear that they do not want excessive paperwork in connection with
inspections but, from the evidence gathered, it seems that this message is not being universally heard.
It was suggested that the approach to inspection can vary from team to team and there are still high
levels of anxiety about inspections which tends to make teachers want to gather too much evidence.
v
Overall, there was a strong impression of the need for further work on strategic oversight of CfE as a
whole so that some individual elements of the system such as assessment, excessive paperwork and
growing teacher workload do not reduce its impact.12
The report makes the following recommendations:
1. There is a clear view from those interviewed that the IT systems used in schools ( in particular
SEEMIS which appears to be widely used), should be reviewed to ensure that they are userfriendly and fit for purpose.
2. Reporting to parents appears to have become overly complicated and burdensome in some
schools. Once some of the pilots mentioned in this report have been tested, if they are seen to
work, they should be made available as examples of good practice to other schools.
3. Assessment and the recording of assessment, particularly in connection with the new National
Qualifications, appear to have become disproportionate to the benefit achieved. As a matter of
urgency, SQA should continue to seek means to significantly reduce the assessment burden
on schools.
4. Communication of new information by SQA should be as straightforward as possible.
Important messages should not be contained in extensive emails covering a wide range of
topics. It should not be possible to miss important messages. As has been evidenced face to
face events with SQA are welcomed by teachers and more of this direct engagement will help
build teachers’ confidence in CfE.
5. Both SQA and Education Scotland need to improve the navigability of their websites and make
the important guidance more readable, simpler and easier to find. It is important that the
distinction between strategic guidance and other forms of advice or examples of good practice
should be obvious.
6. Examples of good practice should be made easily available. The sharing of practice should be
further encouraged. This includes good practice both from local authorities and schools.
7. An unintended consequence of the emphasis on new qualifications has been the relative
neglect of the phase of BGE in the early secondary years. It is also clear that schools are
finding the transition from the phase of BGE to the senior phase problematic with some
schools wanting, in effect, to begin the senior phase at some stage in S3. Further clear
guidance is needed to help secondary schools with the phase of BGE for S1-S3. This includes
the assessing and recording element but also the fit with S4 which many schools are now revisiting.
1
Please note, the recent report of the Working Group on the First Year of the New National
Qualifications has identified issues to be addressed by all involved in delivering CfE and the national
exams. The Working Group report post-dated this current research.
2
The National Parent Forum of Scotland launched its report Sharing Learning, Sharing AssessmentReport for Parents in September 2014. This report post-dated this current research.
vi
8. Further steps should be taken to re-assure schools that HMI do not require a large quantity of
evidence/paperwork in connection with Inspections and to give examples of the levels of
evidence they will require.
9. This research has focused on primary and secondary schools. In order to provide a fuller
picture it may be useful to consider conducting a similar limited process with the early years
sector where a couple of interviewees thought the level of bureaucracy and paperwork was
particularly high.
10. There needs to be more effective strategic oversight of the development of CfE as a whole in
order to avoid disproportionate emphasis on some aspects (such as verification) at the
expense of others (linking the phase of BGE with S4) and the unintended consequence of
growth in teacher workload.
11. It appears there is a need to re-visit the original intentions of CfE and further develop
confidence/understanding of its purposes/aims across the whole system to better support head
teachers and teachers in their work.
12. There is a sense that some of the original CfE rationale has been lost sight of. It is not the remit
of this review to comment on this other than to anticipate that the proposed OECD evaluation
in 2015 take cognisance of the findings in this report.
vii
Blake Stevenson Ltd
Education Scotland: Tackling Bureaucracy – Final Report, September 2014
Glossary of terms and abbreviations
Interdisciplinary learning (IDL)
Learning that is not confined to a single subject or discipline but brings together knowledge,
understandings and skills from two or more areas.
Experiences and Outcomes (Es and Os)
Statements that seek to define the curriculum in terms of outcomes. Each E and O indicates the kind
of learning experience the pupil should undergo and states what he/she should be able to do as a
result.
Significant Aspects of Learning
An assessment resource designed to help teachers plan and track pupils' progress through the levels
of Curriculum for Excellence by giving a 'big picture' of progress rather than by focusing on individual Es
and Os.
Phase of Broad General Education (BGE)
A phase of education extending up to the end of third year in secondary school in which pupils
experience learning in all areas of the curriculum.
Developing, Consolidating, Secure (D,C,S)
Used as a system of assessing pupils' work against the Es and Os relevant to a particular level of
Curriculum for Excellence. Learners are said to be 'secure' if the learning is firmly embedded and they
are ready to progress to the next level. Otherwise their learning may be considered to be at an early
stage or as making progress but not yet fully secure.
Senior Phase
The final years of school education (S4-6) during which learners secure qualifications that equip them
for further and higher education or for entry to employment.
InCAS
A system of standardised computerised assessment widely used in primary schools.
viii
Blake Stevenson Ltd
Education Scotland: Tackling Bureaucracy – Final Report, September 2014