CURRICULUM FOR EXCELLENCE
DRAFT EXPERIENCES AND OUTCOMES
Collection, analysis and reporting of data
Final Report
7th January 2009
The Research Team
The University of Glasgow research team responsible for producing this report consists of:
Co-directors:
Prof Vivienne Baumfield
Prof Kay Livingston
Prof Ian Menter
Coordinator:
Dr Moira Hulme
Data manager:
Dr Alison Devlin
SCRE Centre:
Dr Dely Elliot
Mr Stuart Hall
Mr Jon Lewin
Mr Kevin Lowden
Contact:
i.menter@educ.gla.ac.uk
0141 330 3480
or
m.hulme@educ.gla.ac.uk
0141 330 3411
Acknowledgements
The research team gratefully acknowledges the support of many colleagues at LTS in
providing much of the data for analysis.
The greatest thanks go to the many individuals, groups and organisations that have provided
the data on which this report is based, whether through reporting on trials, completing
questionnaires, taking part in focus groups or undertaking interviews.
1
Contents
Executive summary ........................................................................................................ 5
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 9
1.1.
Background............................................................................................................ 9
1.2.
Engagement strategy........................................................................................... 10
1.3.
Structure of the report .......................................................................................... 11
Summary of methodology ......................................................................................... 13
2.1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 13
2.2.
Online Questionnaire ........................................................................................... 13
2.3.
Trialling Feedback................................................................................................ 13
2.4.
Focus Groups ...................................................................................................... 14
2.5.
Pupil engagement strand ..................................................................................... 15
2.6.
Interviews............................................................................................................. 16
2.7.
Other sources of feedback ................................................................................... 16
2.8.
Data analysis ....................................................................................................... 16
2.9.
Summary ............................................................................................................. 17
Teachers’ perspectives.............................................................................................. 19
3.1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 19
3.2.
Professional judgement........................................................................................ 19
3.3.
Leadership and CPD............................................................................................ 21
3.4.
Assessment and pedagogy.................................................................................. 24
3.5.
Making connections across the curriculum........................................................... 28
3.6.
Summary ............................................................................................................. 32
Local authority perspectives ..................................................................................... 33
4.1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 33
4.2.
Assessment ......................................................................................................... 33
4.3.
Exemplification and explanation........................................................................... 34
4.4.
Primary school readiness..................................................................................... 39
4.5.
Secondary school readiness ................................................................................ 40
4.6.
Flexibility in building the curriculum ...................................................................... 41
4.7.
Local authority support for schools....................................................................... 42
4.8.
Summary ............................................................................................................. 46
Colleges and Higher Education Institutions............................................................. 48
5.1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 48
5.2.
Colleges............................................................................................................... 48
5.3.
Higher Education Institutions................................................................................ 51
2
5.4.
6.
Summary ............................................................................................................. 54
Professional associations, learned societies and voluntary organisations .......... 56
6.1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 56
6.2.
Professional associations and learned societies .................................................. 56
6.3.
Voluntary groups.................................................................................................. 62
6.4.
Summary ............................................................................................................. 65
7.
Parents’ and employers’ perspectives ..................................................................... 66
7.1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 66
7.2.
Parents ................................................................................................................ 66
7.3.
Employers............................................................................................................ 70
7.4.
Summary ............................................................................................................. 74
8.
Pupils’ Perspectives .................................................................................................. 76
8.1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 76
8.2.
Focus group discussions...................................................................................... 76
8.3.
Additional engagement methods.......................................................................... 76
8.4.
Pupil focus groups - views and perceptions of learning ........................................ 77
8.5.
Summary ............................................................................................................. 86
9.
Review of the data...................................................................................................... 88
9.1.
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 88
9.2.
Teachers’ feedback in relation to draft sets of Experiences and Outcomes.......... 88
9.3.
Comparison of perspectives................................................................................. 91
9.3.1.
Local authorities............................................................................................... 91
9.3.2.
Further education ............................................................................................. 93
9.3.3.
Voluntary sector ............................................................................................... 95
9.3.4.
Universities ...................................................................................................... 97
9.3.5.
Teacher education ........................................................................................... 99
9.4.
10.
Summary ........................................................................................................... 100
Review of the process ......................................................................................... 103
10.1.
Introduction ........................................................................................................ 103
10.2.
The Engagement Process.................................................................................. 103
10.3.
Review of Progress............................................................................................ 103
10.4.
Views on engagement process drawn from stakeholder focus groups ............... 104
10.5.
Local authority views of engagement process drawn from telephone interviews 107
10.6.
Teacher views on the engagement process drawn from the questionnaires....... 111
10.7.
LTS Team Leaders views on engagement drawn from focus group data ........... 114
10.8.
Views on engagement provided in additional supporting documentation............ 116
10.9.
Summary ........................................................................................................... 118
3
11.
The Way Forward: implementation of Curriculum for Excellence.................... 120
11.1.
Introduction ........................................................................................................ 120
11.2.
The alignment of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment................................... 120
11.3.
CPD for teachers and others.............................................................................. 120
11.4.
Local support ..................................................................................................... 121
11.5.
National support................................................................................................. 121
11.6.
Leadership ......................................................................................................... 122
11.7.
Ongoing review and development...................................................................... 122
11.8.
Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 122
References................................................................................................................. 124
Appendix One: Online and Trialling Questionnaires by Curriculum Area .................... 125
Appendix Two: Sources of data.................................................................................. 132
Appendix Three: Log of non-standard documents submitted for consideration........... 136
Annex Separate Volume of further appendices: Research instruments
4
Executive summary
1. This report contains the findings of a study commissioned from the University of
Glasgow by Learning and Teaching Scotland (LTS) to collect, collate, analyse and
report data on the Curriculum for Excellence Draft Experiences and Outcomes
(January-November 2008). An Interim Report presented in August 2008 covered the
first ten sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes that were published between
November 2007 and February 2008 and a Supplementary Report presented in
December 2008 covered the final four sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes that
were published between April and May 2008. Throughout the engagement period
LTS, in partnership with the Scottish Government and Her Majesty’s Inspectorate for
Education (HMIe), has encouraged feedback on Curriculum for Excellence. In
addition to questionnaires, interviews and focus group discussions, documents,
letters and reports submitted to LTS in response to the publication of the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes were made available to the university team and were
considered within this review.
2. The engagement strategy encouraged participation from a wide range of
stakeholders. 1,762 questionnaires were received in response to the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes following their phased release. This total includes
responses submitted on behalf of individuals and groups and therefore
underestimates the total number of people contributing. 256 trialling questionnaires
were returned from schools participating in the official trialling process. These were
supplemented by 127 trialling visit proforma completed by LTS personnel. A total of
241 participants took part in twenty focus group discussions on the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes for each area of the curriculum. 118 representatives from other key
stakeholder groups participated in a further 17 focus groups, including parents,
pupils, employers, voluntary groups, further and higher education. In addition, the
University Research Team received 133 documents submitted by groups and
individuals in response to the publication of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes.
3. A comparison of findings from an analysis of the three main data sources –
questionnaires, trialling feedback and focus groups - was undertaken in relation to all
14 sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes. The reliability of findings and the
strength of the emergent cross-cutting themes were tested through triangulation.
Throughout this process the research team was attentive in the search for divergent
cases and sensitive to the issue of ‘weighting’. Whilst it is not appropriate to engage
in statistical calculation of weighting in this study, consistent efforts have been made
to indicate the strength and provenance of responses throughout the report. All
feedback from a wide range of stakeholders has been included in the analysis and
equal consideration has been afforded to the perspectives of individuals, groups or
organisations.
4. In feedback across all fourteen areas of the curriculum, participants welcomed the
‘openness’ or ‘flexibility’ of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. Teachers, school
leaders and local authority officers identified moves towards greater flexibility as
potentially ‘re-professionalising’, within the context of further guidance. The ‘strength’
of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes was concurrently perceived as a ‘weakness’.
Teachers welcomed opportunities to exercise professional judgement but within a
supportive framework of clear expectations. Concern was repeatedly expressed by
many teachers that the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, in general, were ‘vague’,
‘woolly’ or ‘unclear’ on their first attempts at interpretation. However, the levels of
concern expressed by teachers who had been involved in the formal trialling process
5
were substantially lower, perhaps indicating the benefits of enhanced support in
periods of sustained engagement.
5. The teaching profession expressed greatest concern in relation to progression.
Across the focus group transcripts and questionnaire datasets, teachers requested
further information to support assessment decisions. A lack of confidence was
expressed in the Draft Experiences and Outcomes as ‘the basis of planning how
children and young people will progress in their learning’. This was particularly
marked in relation to mathematics, science, numeracy, technologies and RME.
Teachers sought further detail to support professional judgments about pupil progress
within and between the wider levels in the draft documents. Concern was expressed
regarding consistency in teachers’ interpretation of standards in the same
department/faculty/stage or school and across schools, regionally and nationally.
School professionals anticipated a need to develop robust systems to monitor
progression effectively. This was often expressed in relation to providing reliable
information at key transition points. A concern with progression was frequently
associated with, and compounded by, uncertainty about future assessment
arrangements following the consultation on the next generation of national
qualifications in Scotland.
6. In terms of professional development needs, additional training was frequently
requested to support non-specialist or less experienced teachers in primary schools,
especially in relation to science, expressive arts and physical education. Additional
support and opportunities for collaboration were requested to prepare teachers to
address core areas of the curriculum that are the responsibility of all teachers:
literacy, numeracy and aspects of health and well-being (and Religious Education in
Catholic Schools). School professionals and local authority officers identified a need
for dedicated time to develop greater awareness and to support systematic whole
school planning. In addition, it was suggested that school leaders needed continuing
support in building curriculum structures to realise the principles of Curriculum for
Excellence.
7. Some questions remained in relation to specific areas of the curriculum. These
included: the positioning of literacy within the literacy and English framework only;
suggested significant omissions in the health and wellbeing Draft Experiences and
Outcomes (identified by health improvement agencies); concern about the privileging
of Christianity in RME; and the place afforded to the study of other world religions
within Religious Education for Catholic Schools. Teachers and other informed
stakeholders expressed serious misgivings about the capacity of the draft science
Experiences and Outcomes to support conceptual development.
8. Feedback from other providers of education services indicates areas of shared
interest and some shared areas of concern. Accounts from local authority officers
brought into sharp focus some of the key tensions and challenges involved in
preparing for full implementation. Significant amongst these challenges is the issue of
providing additional support without constraining creativity and professional
responsibility for local interpretation. Feedback from officers across the 32 local
authorities suggests a need for further explanation as well as detailed exemplification
(that is, explanation that would support local deliberation by teachers). From a
position of oversight of a range of different settings, local authority officers identified a
need to weave together different policy threads to present a coherent narrative for the
profession. This included efforts to align expectations of attainment with expectations
of methodologies conducive to the development of critical thinking and problem
solving capabilities.
6
9. The perspectives of representatives from further education colleges, universities and
the voluntary sector affirmed a need for integrated approaches within the extended
engagement process. Common threads for colleges and universities included a focus
on improved transition across sectors, the recognition of wider achievement, a shared
emphasis on literacy, numeracy and communication skills and the promotion of
enhanced choice for learners. Representatives from further education colleges were
supportive of the need to provide opportunities to support the development of
learners who are not only successful but also confident. Educators within the postcompulsory sector identified clear links with the More Choices, More Chances policy
agenda and welcomed the attention afforded to literacy and numeracy across the
school curriculum. It was acknowledged that further and higher education faced
comparable challenges in coordinating support for the development of
core/transferable or employability skills across existing course provision. It was noted
that opportunities for personalisation within post-compulsory education revolved
around course selection, rather than different rates of progression through assessed
courses.
10. Contributions from further and higher education brought to the fore the issue of
personal agency when approaching curriculum reform. College representatives noted
that strong subject demarcations could be drawn by both tutors and learners and that
learners made strategic choices in assigning priorities, irrespective of principles
expressed in curriculum papers. University tutors reflected on the persistence of
discipline ‘silos’ in higher education as a potential inhibitor of interdisciplinary
learning. These accounts emphasised the importance of consistent approaches
across the curriculum and across sectors of education (3-18 plus) and the importance
of communicating intentions to learners. Participants in the Deans of Education focus
group emphasised the role of teachers as mediators of policy intentions, enacting the
Curriculum for Excellence in the context of day-to-day classroom practice.
11. The voluntary sector emphasised their considerable experience in working across
professional boundaries and in providing alternative opportunities outside formal
classroom settings for learners whose needs are not currently met within
conventional education settings. Several voluntary sector organisations were
responding to national priorities for early intervention and prevention in working with
children and young people at an earlier stage (from late primary onwards). The
voluntary sector offered specialist expertise in resource development and through
consultancy and CPD provision and sought further opportunities for constructive
engagement.
12. This review of data has identified a number of core issues and cross-cutting themes.
Uppermost among these is a concern with progression and the need to achieve an
appropriate balance between explanation and exemplification; one that does not strip
out the ‘re-professionalising’ potential contained in the emphasis placed on
professional judgement in the proposed curriculum framework. A concern with
improved transition, the promotion of connections across the curriculum and the
development of methodologies to promote active learning, collaborative work and
critical thinking were welcomed by practitioners across the sectors of education. The
feedback from stakeholders acknowledges the benefits of closer cooperation
between sectors in addressing national policy priorities.
13. Responses to the various engagement activities following the release and trialling of
the draft sets of Experiences and Outcomes increased in volume as the process
progressed and actual involvement in the trialling of the reforms tended to lead to
much more positive engagement. LTS has responded to practitioners and
stakeholders’ comments and the engagement process has developed and expanded
7
since its inception. However, some stakeholders felt that they had not been
sufficiently involved in the process, particularly the colleges and the faculties of
education. The engagement process did provide individuals and groups with the
opportunity to feed back views about the Draft Experiences and Outcomes but it was
suggested that engagement needs to involve more than this. A number of views were
expressed indicating that thinking, discussion, trialling and reflection also needs to
include pedagogy and that teachers should be engaging in testing the ‘how’ and not
just providing feedback about the ‘what’. It was also suggested that professional
development should have been a key part of the engagement process. Teachers
should have had opportunities to think about and try out new ways of working and
exchange ideas and practice with colleagues from the outset of the engagement
process. Use could be made of GLOW to provide opportunity for teachers to work in
communities of practice and reflect together on how they realise the four capacities
and the contribution that the Experiences and Outcomes can make. More
opportunities could be made available for partnership working across stakeholder
groups to discuss, share and extend the contribution of different groups to Curriculum
for Excellence. The feedback from the local authorities indicated that the engagement
process had differed across the authorities. The methods used to trial the
Experiences and Outcomes, support the teachers in the process and provide
feedback was different. It was not suggested that differences in approaches in the
local authorities were problematic but it highlighted the need to find a balance
between freedom to develop and interpret curriculum guidance according to local
needs and a national framework to maintain an excellent system of education across
Scotland.
14. In collecting, analysing and reporting the data that have been generated over the past
year in relation to the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, it is apparent that there is a
wide range of views concerning the development of a Curriculum for Excellence. The
process of engagement itself has demonstrated how those charged with developing
the statements have been able to learn from each other and to respond to the
feedback that has been generated. Throughout the process there does appear to
have been a growing sense of confidence that the increased flexibility and openness
of the approach taken is seen as an opportunity for increasing professional
engagement by all concerned. There is also recognition that pupils themselves can
play a part in curriculum development.
15. In identifying the five broad themes to guide future activity, the authors of this report
have sought to prioritise what amount to key principles for ongoing successful
implementation and development of a Curriculum for Excellence. It is important that
an alignment between curriculum, pedagogy and assessment is prioritized. Teachers
will be at the centre of the process and so must be provided with the professional
development support that will give them confidence in taking increased responsibility.
This support will need to be provided at local and national levels and by providers of
teacher education. Leadership in curriculum development becomes a responsibility
for all and it is very important that discussions and debate continue as part of the
process of continuing development of the curriculum.
8
1. Introduction
This report contains the findings of a study conducted by the University of Glasgow to collect,
collate, analyse and report data on the Curriculum for Excellence Draft Experiences and
Outcomes (January-November 2008). An Interim Report presented in August 2008 covered
the first ten sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes that were published between November
2007 and February 2008. A Supplementary Report presented in December 2008 covered
the final four sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes that were published between April and
May 2008. This report now provides an analysis and review of all the data that were gathered
throughout the full period. This introduction provides some background information that
contextualises the work reported later. The structure of this report and its supplement is then
outlined, before the methodology for the study as a whole is described.
1.1.
Background
Following the National Debate on Education (2002), the Scottish Executive Education
Department (now the Scottish Government) convened a Curriculum Review Group (2003) to
consider the aims and purposes of education for the 3-18 age range. The review process
was informed by the following priorities identified in the National Debate:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Reduce overcrowding in the curriculum.
Make learning more enjoyable.
Make better connections between the stages in the curriculum from 3 to 18.
Achieve a better balance between 'academic' and 'vocational' subjects.
Broaden the range of learning experiences for young people.
Equip young people with the skills they need now and in future employment.
Make sure that approaches to assessment and certification support learning.
Offer more choice to meet the needs of individual young people (LTS, 20081).
The work of the Review Group culminated in the publication in November 2004 of a
proposed Curriculum for Excellence offering a single curriculum throughout the early years,
primary and secondary school (across the 3-18 age range). The revised curriculum sought
to:
•
•
•
achieve clearly defined rounded outcomes for young people;
smoother transition between different stages of education, especially the entry to
formal primary schooling;
offer new choice, space and time within the curriculum to teachers and schools to
design learning to suit the needs of young people (SEED, 2004:142).
Through the progressive implementation of a Curriculum for Excellence all young people
would be supported to become: successful learners, effective contributors, responsible
citizens and confident individuals.
A Curriculum Review Programme Board subsequently embarked on a three-year
development programme (2004-07) to map the overall architecture of the revised curriculum,
a process that included small-scale practitioner engagement (2005-06). A Curriculum for
Excellence Progress and Proposals was published in March 2006. Draft Experiences and
Outcomes for each curriculum area were released in stages from November 2007 until May
1
Curriculum for Excellence: Background. National Debate on Education. [Online]
http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/curriculumforexcellence/whatiscfe/background.asp
2
SEED (2004) Ambitious Excellent Schools, Edinburgh, Scottish Executive.
9
20083, accompanied by an engagement strategy to afford opportunities for feedback from the
main stakeholder groups – teachers, parents, employers and representatives from local
authorities, colleges and universities (November 2007-December 2008).
1.2.
Engagement strategy
This report draws on data gathered between November 2007 and November 2008 as part of
the engagement strategy in preparation for full implementation of Curriculum for Excellence.
There are two main strands to this enquiry. The first relates to data gathered to establish
whether the Draft Experiences and Outcomes are clear and can be used by practitioners to
build on current good practice, contributing to the intentions of Curriculum for Excellence.
Following the release of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, feedback was obtained via
online questionnaires, school trialling proforma, feedback from CPD events and focus groups
convened to discuss each of the 14 sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes (see table 1 for
the feedback calendar).
The purpose of the trialling was to provide feedback on significant subsets of Draft
Experiences and Outcomes to inform revision and refinement; and the identification of good
practice for future exemplification and development. The formal trialling process was
intended to involve a series of pilots conducted in a range of classroom settings across all
sectors over a six-month period – one month for preparation and planning, four months
working with a selection of Draft Experiences and Outcomes which could be accommodated
within existing curriculum plans (implementation), and one month for reviewing and reporting.
This strand also contained telephone interviews with local authority personnel, who provided
additional information and feedback on the trialling process. Further contextual data was
provided by a focus group involving Learning and Teaching Scotland (LTS) personnel: team
leaders from each of the areas of the curriculum.
Table 1: Draft Experiences and Outcomes
Feedback process
November 2007 – June 2008
Science, Numeracy and Modern Languages
December 2007 – June 2008
Mathematics, Classical Languages and Gaelic Learners
January – June 2008
Expressive Arts and Social Studies
February – June 2008
English and Literacy and Gaidhlig and Literacy
April – November 2008
Technologies
May – November 2008
Health and Well-Being
Religious and Moral Education
Religious Education in Roman Catholic Schools
July 2008
LTS team leaders focus group
August – October 2008
Local authority telephone interviews
3
The Draft Experiences and Outcomes for each curriculum area are available for download at:
http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/curriculumforexcellence/outcomes/
10
A second strand of data gathering extended beyond school leaders and teachers to
encompass a wide range of other key stakeholders (see table 2 below). A stated intention of
the engagement strategy was to involve all those who have an interest in the education of
Scotland’s children and young people. Additional feedback was sought through the
development of a pupil engagement strand and a series of regional events and focus groups
to elicit the perspectives of other interested parties including parents, employers, voluntary
groups, further education and universities.
Table 2: additional engagement: non-curriculum area
Feedback process
September – October 2008
Regional events: pupils, parents and employers
September – November 2008
Pupil engagement strand
October – November 2008
Focus groups: voluntary groups, colleges of further education and universities.
Throughout the engagement period LTS, in partnership with the Scottish Government
HMIe, has encouraged feedback on Curriculum for Excellence. Documents, letters
reports submitted to LTS in response to the publication of the Draft Experiences
Outcomes were made available to the university team and were considered within
review.
1.3.
and
and
and
this
Structure of the report
The Interim Report focused on the first ten sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes
(University of Glasgow, 2008): Science; Numeracy; Modern Languages; Mathematics;
Classical Languages; Gaelic Learners; Expressive Arts; Social Studies; Literacy and English;
and Literacy and Gaidhlig.
Throughout that document, reporting of key messages was organised according to four
guiding themes specified by LTS at a Steering Group meeting held on 1st June 2008. These
are:
•
•
•
•
CPD requirement
Exemplification
Further elaboration
Re-write/edit.
In a supplement to the present report the remaining four sets of Draft Experiences and
Outcomes are treated in the same way: Technologies, Health and Well-Being, Religious and
Moral Education and Religious Education in Roman Catholic Schools.
In this final report, in the section that follows we set out the methodology that was deployed
for the project as a whole. There are then three sections dealing respectively with the
perspectives of teachers (including headteachers, deputes and principal teachers), local
authorities, colleges and higher education institutions. The following section distils key
messages to emerge from responses received from professional associations, learned
societies and voluntary organisations. The remaining sections report the perspectives of
parents, employers and pupils, largely gathered at four regional events organised by LTS.
The data upon which these six sections are based were collected in a variety of ways but
11
include focus groups, questionnaires and interviews. Each of these sections is seeking to
distil a massive range of data and full details of the range of material reviewed and analysed
is provided in appendices.
Having reviewed the whole range of perspectives on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes,
Section 9 provides a distillation in order to identify cross-cutting themes.
Section 10 reviews the process of data collection, analysis and reporting and reviews the
engagement process.
The final section draws on the analysis and review of all the data presented in the preceding
sections to suggest a number of ‘ways forward’, in relation to such matters as CPD provision
for teachers and other education staff, leadership, local and national support structures and
the need for ongoing review and development as the Curriculum for Excellence is
implemented.
12
2. Summary of methodology
2.1.
Introduction
A range of data was collected by a variety of mechanisms including online questionnaires,
trialling feedback, focus groups and telephone interviews. These data were analysed using
different methods including Excel and NVivo. LTS also made available a range of
supplementary material received from, for example, professional bodies and subject
associations. Points raised in these submissions have been incorporated in this report where
appropriate (full details of documents submitted can be found in appendix two, sources of
data). Using a number of research instruments and processes for each set of Draft
Experiences and Outcomes afforded attention to a diversity of views and yielded a wide
range of data on both the quantitative and the qualitative aspects of the research. The wide
range of data sources and the availability of different types of data made the triangulation of
findings possible. The availability of varied data in numerous forms is a strength of the
methodology adopted for this research.
2.2.
Online Questionnaire
An online questionnaire was designed by LTS to gather feedback following the release of
each set of Draft Experiences and Outcomes. The questionnaire included a combination of
open and closed questions and could be submitted in paper or online format. The
questionnaires were made available on the Curriculum for Excellence website and datasets
of responses transferred to the University of Glasgow on a monthly basis. Questionnaire
responses to the publication of the first ten sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes closed
on 4th July 2008. 1,107 submissions were received in paper and electronic form across the
ten areas of the curriculum (see appendix one). The closing date for the remaining four sets
of Draft Experiences and Outcomes was 30th November 2008. 655 submissions were
received for these areas, making a grand total of 1,762.
Some caution should be exercised when interpreting the quantitative elements of the
questionnaire data. All data collected was included in the analysis but in some curriculum
areas the response achieved was limited4, which meant that cross-tabulation, or other
sophisticated data analysis further dividing the number according to key variables, was not
possible as it would not produce any meaningful findings. Higher numbers of responses were
achieved for some subjects, for example Science (n=316); however since the population is
an unknown factor the research team could not establish whether the response rate for this
subject is proportionate to its population when compared with other subject areas5.
2.3.
Trialling Feedback
LTS coordinated a process of trialling of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes in
collaboration with local authorities and independent schools. The trialling process was
launched in January 2008 with an event in Inverurie focusing on the draft science
Experiences and Outcomes and further events for each curriculum area were subsequently
conducted. Local authorities identified schools and pre-school establishments to take part in
the trialling process. Each establishment involved in the trialling process was invited to share
feedback (either group or individual) by completing a ‘trialling questionnaire’ that was
available in both electronic and print form. All the trialling proforma were designed and
4
Taking into account the insight received from some of the focus group participants, it appeared that a
large number of teachers were not aware of the existence of the online questionnaires.
5
In theory, it is possible that the response rate for a subject which only generated a small number of
questionnaires is high because the entire population is also very small.
13
distributed by LTS, who also organised the submission and transfer of data. Several of the
questions used in the trialling specific questionnaires were the same as those used for the
online curriculum area questionnaires that were available to all practitioners on the LTS
website. The trialling feedback proforma, however, also addressed additional points, both
general and curriculum area specific.
Trialling feedback was shared with the research team through secure transfer of electronic
datasets (online trialling questionnaire) and through coordinated exchange of print
documents. 256 trialling questionnaires were submitted for analysis.
Establishments involved in the trialling process elected to offer a range of different
responses. The evidence shows that the online questionnaire was not the preferred method
of responding. Response rates for the trialling questionnaires, organised by curriculum area,
can be found in appendix one. Topline frequencies from the trialling questionnaire in each
curriculum area can be found in appendix one.
2.4.
Focus Groups
One or more focus groups of ninety minutes duration were convened for each of the fourteen
sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes in the Curriculum for Excellence (including four
regional groups for both numeracy and literacy). The organisation of the focus groups,
including participant selection, was managed by the university research team. In total, 241
participants took part in 20 curriculum area based focus groups.
Participants were selected from the Curriculum for Excellence online ‘register of interest’
established by LTS for practitioners. This database was supplemented by contacts drawn
from the teacher education network of the University of Glasgow to ensure adequate
representation of teachers from early years, primary, secondary and special education
settings, as well as subject association representatives and local authority officers. Crosssectoral groups were convened to accommodate discussion in the context of transition
across the 3-18 age range. Initial invitations were issued via email, followed by
telephone/email prompts to increase participation. On average the ratio of invitees to
participants was 3:1. Details of the composition of the focus groups can be found in appendix
two.
A member of the university research team acted as the moderator for each of the focus
groups. A topic guide6 employed by the moderators was constructed in consultation with
partners in LTS. The questioning route opened with identification of participants’ current
understanding and engagement with the Draft Experiences and Outcomes; and developed to
promote discussion of the extent to which the revised guidance was likely to support
reflection on current practice, strengthen cross-curricular links and enhance pupil motivation
and engagement. Participants were also asked to identify any professional development
issues arising from the proposed reform of the school curriculum and the implications of
these in their current work context.
During the later part of the project a further 14 focus groups were arranged in order to elicit
the views of a range of other key stakeholders. These were as follows:
•
•
•
Parents
Employers
Further education
6
Copies of all the research instruments, including focus group topic guides and questionnaires, are
available in a separate annex to this report.
14
•
•
•
•
Directors of Teaching and Learning, Higher Education Institutions
Deans of Teacher Education
Voluntary groups
Learning and Teaching Scotland personnel, members of the writing teams
A number of these groups – especially those for parents, employers and pupils were held in
association with four regional events organised by LTS (convened in Dundee, Aberdeen,
Glasgow and Edinburgh between September and October 2008) to raise awareness and
disseminate information about the proposals.
A modified version of the topic guide was prepared for each session and the discussions
were recorded, transcribed and analysed in much the same manner as the curriculum area
based groups described above.
2.5.
Pupil engagement strand
The involvement of pupils was considered an important aspect of the engagement process,
particularly in phase two (September - November 2008). LTS asserted the importance of
involving children and young people in discussion of changes that affect them directly. To
this end, LTS commissioned researchers from the SCRE Centre, University of Glasgow to
conduct a review of data gathered from pupils through a number of channels in addition to
those originally planned.
The engagement strategy expanded from planned regional focus groups, to include feedback
and materials generated in additional pupil workshops (e.g. facilitators’ discussion notes and
materials produced by pupils) and questionnaire responses from young people. This was
supplemented by trialling feedback relating to pupils’ experiences provided by LTS personnel
completing trialling visit proforma.
A total of 33 pupils participated in focus groups convened at four regional venues
(September – October 2008). 30 responses were received to an online questionnaire for P6
to S6 pupils posted by LTS on the Young Scot7 website. 90 trialling visit proforma for the last
four sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes recorded ‘pupil comments’ and general
feedback from early years, primary and secondary pupils. The feedback obtained through
group sessions (workshops) had a more varied audience: early years, primary, secondary,
alternative provision, Additional Support Needs and college learners.
The SCRE Centre undertook analysis and reporting of quantitative data and qualitative
information generated through these methods. Whilst some advice from the researchers
concerning the research instruments was sought, LTS took responsibility for producing the
research instruments (e.g. questionnaire, group session schedules, proforma etc.),
administering and collating data for analysis.
It should be noted that the nature of the consultation questions for adult stakeholders
enabled a more direct focus on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. For children and young
people, the questions for discussion explored pupils’ broader understanding of Curriculum for
Excellence and how their experience of school might address their needs. These data, while
significant, form part of the wider context for curriculum change. The pupil engagement
strand was not intended to provide feedback on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes to
inform future revision and refinement, which is the main focus of the reports prepared on the
basis of other data.
7
A national youth information and citizenship charity.
15
Full details can be found in the SCRE Centre Report on Pupil Engagement, submitted in
January 2009. A summary is provided in section 8 of this report.
2.6.
Interviews
The engagement strategy sought feedback from local authority personnel. 32 local authority
officers (and a representative of the Scottish Council of Independent Schools, SCiS)
participated in telephone interviews between August and November 2008. One key informant
in each local authority was invited to take part in a semi-structured telephone interview.
Interviewees were identified and approached by LTS. The interviews ranged from fifteen
minutes to forty minutes duration. The interview guide was constructed in close collaboration
with colleagues at LTS. The questions made reference to issues emerging from analysis of
trialling feedback and addressed the four guiding themes specified by the Steering Group:
CPD, exemplification, elaboration and re-write/edit.
2.7.
Other sources of feedback
In addition to the three main sources of data from school managers and teachers –
questionnaires, trialling feedback and focus groups – the research team received a high
volume of additional written feedback from a variety of sources. This included feedback from
launch and CPD events (LTS Area Adviser cluster events and specialist events) organised
by LTS to support engagement with the Draft Experiences and Outcomes; and submissions
from events arising from inter-authority collaboration.
Many organisations and individuals responded to positive encouragement to submit
comments and feedback on Curriculum for Excellence. A wide range of interested bodies
submitted feedback for consideration following the phased release of each set of Draft
Experiences and Outcomes. These included formal submissions from within the profession
for example through subject associations and other professional bodies, and submissions on
behalf of individuals or small groups of practitioners who elected to respond in forms other
than the standard questionnaire. Feedback was also received from health improvement
agencies, faith groups, voluntary sector organisations, lobby groups (e.g. sustainable
development), a learned society and a trade association (industry). Feedback was submitted
in electronic and print forms, including email communication and a variety of non standard
proforma. In total, 133 documents were submitted during the feedback period.
2.8.
Data analysis
Focus group discussions and interviews were audio recorded for full transcription with the
informed consent of participants. Qualitative data analysis software, NVivo, was used to
support analysis. The coding scheme applied to transcripts of the curriculum area focus
groups was based on the four themes specified by LTS, which provided a simple structure:
CPD requirement, exemplification, elaboration and re-write/edit. Under each of these lead
headings, subheadings emerging from the analysis were added.
The extracts selected for inclusion in this report are used to illustrate central issues. Care has
been taken not to over-emphasise particularly strongly held minority views. Extracts were
selected from a review of all segments of data coded at each of the four themes. The views
of curriculum area specialists within the Faculty of Education, University of Glasgow were
also sought on interpretation of (anonymised) focus group data as a further test of the
reliability of the analysis. The involvement of educators with extensive professional
experience in each of the curriculum areas, in addition to the research officers, further
strengthens the warrant of the findings.
16
Numerical data obtained from the online curriculum area questionnaires and trialling
questionnaires were summarised using an Excel PivotTable. Manual data entry of all paper
submissions was completed at the University. The respondents’ option to answer question
items with pre-set Likert scale8 type responses (quantitative) as well as open-endedly
(qualitative) led to some challenges for analysis. A large number of respondents provided
their general perception when answering the first part of the question (Likert scale) and then
elaborated on their responses by filling in the comments box. The nature of the questions
presented to respondents may explain what, at times, appears to be a discrepancy between
the generated quantitative and the qualitative questionnaire data. General expressions of
agreement were often qualified by extended further comment on specific aspects.
Consequently high levels of agreement are often underpinned by a series of reservations
and calls for points of clarification.
As the online questionnaires did not restrict participants from answering more than once, the
datasets were carefully checked in order to eliminate any duplication of responses (manual
and automatic checks). Evidence of a variety of different versions of the core trialling
questionnaire precluded the combination of datasets for online and paper submissions. The
frequency tables that appear in appendix one relate to the questions that are common across
all the trialling questionnaire formats. Appendix one also contains a comparison of general
responses offered through the online questionnaire that was open to all practitioners on the
LTS website with responses from teachers who were involved in the formal trialling process.
Finally, in relation to the submission of non standard documents, all written responses were
reviewed and consideration given to their source, provenance, focus and tenor (the main
characteristics of the nature of the comments on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes). A log
of formal submissions (group and individual) appears in appendix three.
Across the various strands of data – questionnaires, trialling feedback, focus groups and non
standard documents - detailed comment in relation to specific outcomes was extracted and
summarised in the Interim and Supplementary Reports (University of Glasgow, 2008). The
findings for the first ten areas were drawn together in the Interim Report and the remaining
four are summarised in the supplement to this final report. The major purpose of these
summaries was to inform the groups tasked with revising and editing the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes for their full publication in 2009.
2.9.
Summary
The engagement strategy encouraged participation from a wide range of stakeholders (see
table 3 overleaf for a summary of responses). As noted above, 1,762 responses were
received to the questionnaires on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes following their
phased release. This total includes responses submitted on behalf of individuals and groups
and therefore underestimates the numbers of contributors. 256 trialling questionnaires were
returned from schools participating in the official trialling process. These were supplemented
by 127 trialling visit proforma completed by LTS personnel. A total of 241 participants took
part in twenty focus group discussions on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes for each area
of the curriculum. 118 representatives from other key stakeholder groups participated in a
further 17 focus groups, including parents, pupils, employers, voluntary groups, further and
higher education. In addition, the University Research Team received 133 documents
submitted by groups and individuals in response to the publication of the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes.
8
The scale includes 1 for strongly agree; 2 for agree; 3 for disagree, 4 for strongly disagree and 5
don’t know.
17
Table 3: Sources of data
Questionnaire responses (individual and group): Experiences and Outcomes
Trialling questionnaires from schools
Trialling visit proforma from LTS
Practitioner focus group participants: Experiences and Outcomes
Focus group participants: other main stakeholders
• Pupils
• Parents
• Employers
• Voluntary groups
• Further education colleges
• Higher Education Institutions, including teacher education
Local authority telephone interviews (and SCiS)
Non standard documents (submitted on behalf of individuals and organisations)
1,762
256
127
241
33
27
22
12
12
12
33
133
A comparison of findings from analysis of the three main data sources – questionnaires,
trialling feedback and focus groups - was undertaken in relation to all 14 sets of Experiences
and Outcomes. The reliability of findings and the strength of the emergent cross-cutting
themes were tested through triangulation. Throughout this process the research team was
attentive in the search for divergent cases and sensitive to the issue of ‘weighting’. Whilst it is
not appropriate to engage in statistical calculation of weighting in this study, consistent efforts
have been made to indicate the strength and provenance of responses throughout the report.
All feedback from a wide range of stakeholders has been included in the analysis and equal
consideration has been afforded to the perspectives of individuals, groups or organisations.
18
3. Teachers’ perspectives
3.1.
Introduction
This section offers a summary of teachers’ perspectives on the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes of the Curriculum for Excellence. The findings presented here are based on data
generated through curriculum area focus groups, trialling feedback and responses to online
curriculum area questionnaires.
This section does not address separate curriculum areas but reports key themes to emerge
from synthesis of data across the three strands of data gathering that incorporate all fourteen
sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes. A detailed summary of the key findings for each
curriculum area, including comments and recommendations relating to specific outcomes, is
contained in the Interim Report (submitted August 2008)9 and the Supplementary Report
(submitted December 2008)10.
The section is structured in four parts. The first part reports positive responses to enhanced
opportunities for professional judgement, which are considered alongside concurrent calls for
greater structure and further guidance. The second part addresses leadership and CPD
requirements, including different forms of CPD and support for non-specialist teachers. The
third part considers issues around assessment and pedagogy, particularly the implications of
the ‘attainment agenda’ on secondary pedagogy. The fourth part examines the prospects for
the promotion of interdisciplinary learning within Curriculum for Excellence.
3.2.
Professional judgement
Many teachers within the focus groups welcomed what they perceived to be a move away
from a prescriptive approach that constrained teacher creativity. The philosophy and
principles informing Curriculum for Excellence, as expressed in the cover paper that
accompanied each set of Draft Experiences and Outcomes, were endorsed by teachers who
participated in focus group discussions; although a minority did not always see a close
alignment between the cover paper and the content of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes.
The greater scope for teacher autonomy and the exercise of informed professional
judgement was frequently seen as re-professionalising, especially by teachers working in
primary schools. It was acknowledged that the new flexibility brought its own challenges. As
one headteacher commented, ‘As a profession I think this is our chance and we have to
grasp it’ (Primary headteacher (Literacy and English) responding to the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes).
Curriculum for Excellence lets teachers put the art back into teaching. It lets them be creative
and lets their personalities shine.
(Primary headteacher, Numeracy)
There is an awful lot more freedom for teachers. That’s the whole idea behind Curriculum for
Excellence; you’re going to bring back professionalism so you have a model where you don’t
have to exactly follow what the Council say in the planning.
(Primary headteacher, Numeracy)
9
Collection, analysis and reporting of data on Curriculum for Excellence draft Experiences and
Outcomes: Interim Report. Report submitted to Learning and Teaching Scotland. Available from:
http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/Images/interim_report_Aug_2008_tcm4-501212.pdf
10
Which addresses Technologies, Religious and Moral Education, Religious Education in Catholic
Schools and Health and Well Being.
19
Focus group participants frequently noted ‘freedom’ and ‘flexibility’ within the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes and associated this with enhanced levels of professional
autonomy. It was suggested by senior managers within schools that the revised curriculum
afforded scope for professional discretion and allowed school leaders to become more
responsive to particular local circumstances.
I thought there was a great deal of flexibility in them, to allow me and my school to really
pursue things that we felt were relevant to our area and the kids in our school. Even looking at
the Development Outcomes, to me there’s not a great deal of nitty gritty, which I think is
actually a positive thing. I’m quite confident that we can develop courses that suit our needs at
our different stages.
(Principal teacher secondary, Social Studies).
It was acknowledged that greater scope for the exercise of professional judgement might
present cultural challenges in the early stages of implementation as teachers adjusted to a
less prescriptive curriculum model. For primary schools, Curriculum for Excellence was
associated by very experienced teachers with a partial return to more integrated or holistic
ways of working. It was suggested that the 5-14 curriculum was a ‘very rigid framework’ that
encouraged primary schools to adopt the more subject-based orientation of secondary
schools with allocations of time to particular ‘subjects’.
It [Curriculum for Excellence] does allow staff to use their professionalism once again which I
think had been removed largely from the door of the primary teachers by dint of very
prescriptive schemes of work which practically told the teacher when to breathe in and when to
breathe out… didn’t allow for individual needs of children and I would be very glad to see the
back of that.
(Primary depute headteacher, Numeracy).
Several participants identified a tension between a welcome (re-)introduction of professional
autonomy and the removal of secure and familiar frameworks to govern action within both
primary and secondary schools. A recurring theme in the focus groups was the dilemma
posed by affording a greater degree of freedom where the parameters of professional
responsibility had shifted towards the management of learning resources and environments
for learning (curriculum delivery), rather than curriculum design (curriculum building).
A lot of staff have lived through 5-14 and a lot of schools went down programmes of work. It’s
quite scary for teachers now to think that they have got this freedom to plan. I want to give
them that freedom, but I think we need some kind of skeleton there behind the skills
progression.
(Primary headteacher, Numeracy focus group)
We’re so used to a set of guidelines for everything. We know them inside out and now that
safety blanket is being taken away and we’ve been given this. I can see why. I understand it’s
about vision. It’s about how you’re going to challenge youngsters for the future and prepare
them. I can understand all that, but we do need some more specific framework. This is very
general and it’s very vague. It’s very good but it isn’t as specific as we’ve been used to and I
think it does pose problems for us.
(Principal teacher secondary, English and Literacy)
Whilst teachers within the focus groups generally welcomed higher levels of discretion, there
was some reluctance to become overly reliant on local judgement. A perceived lack of
direction left many teachers unsure of how to proceed. Within the responses there is an
implicit acknowledgement of the riskiness of autonomy and a sense of exposure to potential
error by removal of the ‘safety blanket’ of prescription. Concern was expressed about ‘getting
it wrong’ and the dangers of moving too far from the ‘comfort’ of ‘the measure’ within a wider
framework of accountability.
20
The key strength is also its key weakness. It’s flexibility - or vagueness, however you want to
say it - that’s its key strength but at the same time we need a bit of reassurance of what we’re
looking for.
(Principal teacher secondary, Modern Languages)
I love the creativity and the freedom that it brings but I worry that I am not seeing anything that
gives me a level to which something is going to be measured. Everything we do is measured
all the time. Everything has to be measurable, so I’m wondering what the balance is between
active learning, creativity and freedom and ‘the measure’. I worry that initially people will go off
and do their own thing and we’ll end up with a hundred versions and then you’re surprised
when somebody comes in and measures it and says that’s not really what we meant.
(Primary headteacher, Numeracy).
Focus group contributions suggest that not all school communities are equally enthusiastic
about possibilities for leading and building a locally responsive curriculum. Initial reactions to
the draft documents contained residual expectations of high levels of central direction and
early stage anxiety at the absence of step-by-step guidance and exemplification, often
referred to pejoratively as a ‘tick box’ mentality. A secondary depute noted, ‘We’re all waiting
for it to be done for us. We’re looking for somebody to go through the process and then for
us to have something to follow’ (numeracy group). In the extract below a primary school
headteacher describes experiences of initial discomfort and then adjustment as teachers
‘unpack’ the Experiences and Outcomes presented in the draft documentation.
When they first came out we looked at them and thought, “Woolly, woolly. What exactly does
this mean? How are we meant to find the evidence?” It’s just getting your head round it and
saying, “Right, we’re not going to have a set of tick boxes now.” It can go wider than that. We
can create a curriculum that suits our children and our staff and use their strengths
accordingly. Once we get away from the “I need a tick box, I need a bit of paper to prove I’ve
done it”, then I think we’ll embrace it.
(Primary headteacher, Literacy and English)
Across the range of curriculum areas, varied levels of confidence were expressed in relation
to the capacity of the profession to take forward Curriculum for Excellence. Teachers with
different levels of experience, and across the range of positions of seniority, were divided on
the extent to which the Draft Experience and Outcomes presented sufficient structure to
scaffold the required planning, monitoring and assessment.
3.3.
Leadership and CPD
Across the three strands of data gathering – focus groups, trialling feedback and
questionnaires – teachers consistently identified a need for CPD and further exemplification
through the production of resources and illustrative planners. Serious concern was
expressed about variability in interpretation between individual teachers, departments/
faculties, schools and authorities. There was a strong call for high quality, nationally
coordinated CPD delivered locally to promote engagement with the profession and the
involvement of the profession in the formulation of local responses.
To make any curriculum work the biggest investment must be ensuring that we have a highly
trained and highly skilled teaching body. Without excellent teachers there will just be ‘A
Curriculum’. Train, retrain, refresh skills, expect and receive high standards from our teachers.
(Group response to the Mathematics questionnaire)
Several commentators reflected on the position of local authorities in relation to curriculum
change. Participants noted the historic devolution of responsibility for the curriculum to local
authorities, who are charged with formulating appropriate local responses to nationally
identified priorities for education. Equally, participants noted the double devolution of
21
responsibilities to school professionals to ‘unpack’ and collaborate on the revised curriculum
at school, cluster and authority level. The process of desired change was typified as one of
collaboration and partnership working at local level, rather than the ‘roll out’ of more
traditional top-down modes of change.
We don’t have a national education system in that it is not the responsibility of our national
government to deliver education. It is the responsibility of the local authorities to provide
education and it has been that way historically. I like the idea that the national Government is
setting forward the things that really matter and are important. There are a lot of issues that
need to be addressed but they need addressing by authorities and by teachers in schools
working together.
(Secondary Principal Teacher, Numeracy).
The most depressing thing is when people say, ‘When will our local authority produce a new
pack of resources?’ If a local authority produces a pack of resources it has entirely ignored the
central point which was that each professional was going to reflect on what their individual
school needed. CPD is not just required for school teachers, it is also required at a higher up
level because in some areas of the country at local authority level they are already thinking
‘How do we do our collective response? What do we tell every school in our area they are
going to do? How do we get a box set, a one size fits all approach?’
(Secondary Principal Teacher, Science).
The importance attached to collaboration with external partners at a local level was not
always equally evident in descriptions of school level developments. There are clear
implications for leadership in the enactment of Curriculum for Excellence. The focus group
discussions contained references to a range of different approaches to professional learning
and curriculum development in schools. Accounts offered by a small minority of secondary
heads of department, suggest that changes to programmes of study and classroom practice
may follow a conventional ‘cascade’ model, rather than develop from a process of school-led
collaborative planning. A minority of comments retained the view that curriculum
development was the responsibility of senior staff and could be ‘delivered through inservices’ to the wider teaching staff.
To me it’s like driving a car, you know. I drive a car but I don’t build an engine. I’m asking
teachers in my department to teach lessons. I’m not asking them to write courses at the
minute. If that comes, I can write the courses. I can tell them what to teach next.
(Secondary Principal Teacher, Maths).
Surely it is up to management and a co-ordinator to train accordingly and then do a
presentation to the rest of the staff to make sure they are aware and that they know that within
this context that’s what you are doing and then marry that off with the resources within the
school.
(Secondary classteacher, Health and Well Being).
Other teachers described more collaborative forms of development that sprang from
opportunities for dialogue with colleagues though a variety of channels and at different levels.
These included inter-authority seminars, the activities of associated schools’ groups and the
formation of in-school collegiate working groups. There was great enthusiasm for enhanced
opportunities to participate in such activities in preparation for full implementation. Teachers
involved in the formal trialling process appreciated the opportunity to reflect on current
practice and experiment and/or plan for change.
It’s not just the new teachers coming out; everybody is out of the comfort zone. No matter
where you are in the chain, it’s new, and we really need to have massive support to go back
and pick up the best aspects from teachers who have the experience in thematics and the new
teachers coming out; and getting together and putting programmes in place that can help us
get through this because it is not going to be a five minute thing. You need to really have a
plan and support for this.
22
(Primary depute headteacher, Literacy and English)
I can see how much I have grown as a science teacher from getting the chance to get out of
my four walls and see what is happening elsewhere. We all know what happens when you go
on a course, you try it once, you come back and then little impetus for doing anything. It’s not
that you don’t necessarily want to do, but you are then back and there’s no support there. We
need to start supporting each other, cross-sector, cross-authority in order to make this work.
(Secondary classteacher, Science).
Some teachers suggested that electronic resources available on the LTS website or the
Journey to Excellence website were a useful starting point for reflection, to be developed
further through critical dialogue with peers.
Some of the stuff on the Journey to Excellence website is absolutely brilliant and it is having
the time for teachers to actually go and discuss it, so it’s meaningful. Anybody can watch it on
their own, but unless you have that collaborative view within your school, then it’s not going to
impact on practice throughout the whole school.
(Primary headteacher, Literacy and English)
Uppermost among teachers’ concerns was the need for time and space to support
appropriate school-level development opportunities. This was frequently associated with ‘buy
in’ or ‘ownership’ of expected revisions to practice. The credibility of proposed changes was
associated with the degree of self-determination achieved by experienced teachers engaged
in collaborative planning. Joint work was identified as a crucial element in working towards
consistency in interpretation across the profession. Opportunities for school-wide planning
were identified as a key aspect by respondents across the three sources of data – focus
groups, trialling feedback and questionnaires.
I think that opportunities for subject specialist teachers in Secondary schools to plan both interdepartmentally and with their linked primaries will be essential to ensure continuity of learning
and non-repetition for pupils … Management teams in schools will require advice on how to
set up effective systems of monitoring and tracking pupil progress and assisting class teachers
in planning the learning experiences for pupils. Dedicated budgeting and time management
will be required to provide realistic and effective planning opportunities both in individual
schools and across Learning Communities.
(Primary principal teacher, numeracy trialling feedback)
The vagueness of the outcomes, and a lack of exemplars, will not ensure consistency across
schools. Individual departments and schools will determine the intent of each outcome (what
and how to deliver) and therein lies the problem of consistency between the levels and across
schools. Careful planning will need to be facilitated with adequate time allowances and
funding for resource development. The outcomes alone will not provide opportunities to
promote good teaching; quality professional development and the aforementioned time and
budget will also be essential.
(Numeracy questionnaire response)
Progression was the area that attracted most negative feedback and calls for further
guidance and greater clarity. A high level of negative feedback was received in response to
the statement, ‘Overall, the Draft Experiences and Outcomes provide a good basis for
planning how children and young people will progress in their learning’. Highest levels of
disagreement were expressed in relation to Mathematics, Science, Technologies and RME.
Whilst the response rates are small in comparison with the teaching population in these
areas, it is nevertheless noteworthy that more negative than positive responses were
received (complete details of responses to the online questionnaires are contained in the
Interim and Supplementary Reports). In response to this question in the Mathematics
questionnaire, based on 130 responses, 65% (n=84) either disagreed (39, 30%) or strongly
disagreed (45, 35%). For Science, based on 314 responses, 57% (n=178) either disagreed
(94, 30%) or strongly disagreed (84, 27%). For Technologies, based on 289 responses, 52%
23
(n=152) either disagreed (93, 32%) or strongly disagreed (59, 20%). For Religious and Moral
Education, based on 54 responses, 54% (n=29) either disagreed (10, 19%) or strongly
disagreed (19, 35%).
In general, higher levels of agreement were expressed by teachers involved in the formal
trialling process. This reflects the importance of sustained engagement in the classroom in
order to unpack and experiment with the Draft Experiences. The level of engagement with
the draft sets of Experiences and Outcomes in the context of classroom practice for
respondents to the online questionnaire on the LTS website is not known and is likely to vary.
There is some evidence (see local authority section 5) that teachers involved in formal
trialling are more likely to be volunteers or ‘enthusiasts’, as well as receiving support from
LTS regional advisers and/or local authority personnel. It should also be noted that whilst
trialling respondents expressed higher levels of agreement with all the statements presented
in the trialling questionnaire (quantitative responses), there was a high degree of consistency
between comments offered in both the online curriculum area questionnaires and the trialling
questionnaires (qualitative responses). The number of trialling respondents was much lower
than the number of respondents to the general questionnaire for each of the fourteen sets of
Experiences and Outcomes.
The very high negative response rate recorded in the online questionnaires for Mathematics,
Science, Technologies and RME was not reflected in the trialling feedback. Of the 47
respondents to the trialling questionnaire for Science, 21% (n=10) either disagreed or
strongly disagreed that the Experiences and Outcomes provided ‘a good basis for planning
how children and young people will progress in their learning’. Only 7 teachers returned
trialling questionnaires for Mathematics of which 2 strongly disagreed; only 8 teachers
submitted trialling questionnaires for Technologies of which one disagreed; and for RME
none of the 7 participating teachers offered a negative response to this question.
It is also worth noting that responses to the questionnaire do not provide information on
respondents understanding of the concept of progression. As Christie and Boyd (2005:3)
note, ‘The concept of progression is not well understood…focusing on progression tends to
drive thinking about the curriculum into a linear mode, which fails to reflect the true
complexity and multi-dimensional nature of learning’. It is nevertheless clear from feedback
from the profession that there are serious concerns about the capacity of the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes to support teachers in planning for full implementation.
3.4.
Assessment and pedagogy
Focus group participants generally welcomed the emphasis on ‘methodologies’ in the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes. Often, attention to the processes of teaching and learning was
contrasted favourably with a perception of escalating pressures for demonstrable gains in
attainment in both primary and secondary schools.
We’re constantly getting pushed by the Scottish Government to attain, attain, attain; push,
push, push. Here are these new levels coming in, the new stages. After a few years are we
going to be pushing that as well? Are they going to let us embed it or when HMI come in are
they going to be saying, how many pupils have you got through first stage, before Primary
One? They never let us be. It’s just constant push.
(Primary Headteacher, Numeracy)
The attainment side of it, you just can’t escape it. It’s like a big wall. You’re always thinking
how’s this going to match up?
(Secondary Principal Teacher, English and Literacy)
24
Focus groups participants frequently described a ‘methodological shift’ required to support
Curriculum for Excellence. Several contributors noted the significance of the Assessment is
for Learning (AifL) programme in preparing the ground for the revised curriculum.
It’s not just about laying out the syllabus for the teacher. It’s more about the stepping stones for
the young person…but I think the methodological shift is there if schools are committed to AifL.
(Secondary headteacher, Numeracy)
I don’t think you could have Curriculum for Excellence without AifL. You can’t have a new
curriculum and then try to force that into an old form of assessment. I think that this curriculum
will need to have a new way to assess - reform of assessment.
(Secondary classteacher, Religious Education in Roman Catholic Schools)
Some teachers acknowledged that Curriculum for Excellence would challenge teachers to
promote higher levels of active engagement through collaborative and cooperative learning,
which would require enhanced skills, a commitment to enquiry and a more facilitative style.
Colleagues whose teaching style favoured didactic techniques informed by a transmission
model of learning would face particular challenges in extending their repertoire. Whilst
promoting more active and experiential learning, teachers welcomed the flexibility to select
teaching and learning approaches tailored to specific needs.
The hardest thing for any teacher in Curriculum for Excellence is giving up that power and
letting the children discover and learn for themselves in as many different activities as you can
provide for them. They will learn more and remember it for longer if they have discovered it
themselves. So the day of standing in front of a board and talking at children all the time is
gone.
(Primary headteacher, Religious Education in Roman Catholic Schools)
Its strength is the fact that it doesn’t prescribe certain methodology. In actual fact, it gives a
goal that leaves it open for an imaginative and varied approach which could be differentiated
to different groups with different background experiences.
(Classteacher secondary, RE (denominational).
A small minority of focus group participants voiced some concern about the readiness of the
profession to undertake the pedagogical shift required by Curriculum for Excellence. These
contributors suggested that sustained support was needed to build ‘confidence’ and were
cautious about the impact of recent developments. These extracts indicate uneven rates of
progress and may indicate some divergence between publicly professed commitments
(‘espoused theories’) and formal records of practice and how practice is actually informed
(Argyris and Schon, 1978).
I hear a lot of talk about formative assessment but when you go into classrooms it’s not really
happening. I do a lot of work with observations and it’s really not. They’re not really sharing
learning intentions. They’re not really using wait time properly. There’s not a lot of discussion
going on. It’s very much on the surface and it’s not deeply embedded yet in practice… It’s a
long process. I think we kid ourselves if we say we’ve got it cracked. We’re not there yet.
We’ve got long way to go.
(Secondary Principal Teacher, Maths)
A lot of what’s going on, especially in our specialist subjects, where they are so unconfident,
they’ll write it down, it’ll look as though the boxes have been ticked. Have the kids actually had
that experience? No. I think this document is just going to replace 5-14 with another set of
mythology as to what’s happening.
(Faculty Head secondary, Expressive Arts)
Several teachers in promoted posts, across the curriculum areas, commented that
accountability to external bodies might act as a potential inhibitor of change. Frequent
25
references were made to the role of HMIE and the powerful influence of inspection on school
level policy and practice. Despite the revised approach to inspection, with its increased
emphasis on school self-evaluation, many participants appeared to continue to question
whether there had been a shift away from a ‘narrow’ ‘attainment agenda’.
The kind of enthusiastic part of me says this is a huge opportunity to make some major
changes to the way that things work in schools, but the suspicious part of me always wants to
know how we’re going to measure it? That’s the question that always comes into my head that
I can’t get away from. I can’t help thinking about how it’s going to be measured and we’re
going to test that and how we’re going to work on attainment and that’s always something at
the back of my head.
(Secondary Principal Teacher, Literacy and English)
It’s very refreshing going back to having some freedom, being able to have meaningful
contexts for learning; but until we are really convinced that HMI don’t want evidence and tick
boxes, we’re still going to feel quite restricted.
(Primary headteacher, Literacy and English)
HMI still have the attainment agenda and they will still be looking to see where children as
individuals have made progress and I just don’t see how that all fits together. We have
professional autonomy, we can be creative and innovative in the best sense of all of these
words and then you are still going to be measured in a quite narrow way. I still find it quite
paradoxical.
(Principal Teacher, Literacy and English)
There was some indication that teachers were able to identify effective practice promoted in
the Draft Experiences and Outcomes and yet were reluctant to make changes that did not
directly contribute to examination attainment. Teachers cited uncertainties around future
arrangements for National Qualifications as contributing to their hesitance.
This new system looks very nice and the ideas behind it are very good but if I’ve got to get
them through an exam, can I afford the time to do this approach which would be a much better
approach? We’re so exam based and driven now with targets that colleagues are very wary
about going into this in detail when they don’t know what the end point will be.
(Principal teacher secondary, Maths group)
We shouldn’t teach for the exams but unfortunately that’s the way the futures of the kids are
determined. I’d love to have a looser curriculum where I could teach things in a more
interesting way but until I know what form of assessment is involved, I don’t really know how to
approach this.
(Secondary classteacher, Maths group)
For some teachers there was an assumption that a wider range of methodologies would
require an investment in time that was not available within the constraints of the assessment
calendar. Whilst willing to engage with more creative methodologies, it was assumed that
this would be more time intensive. The demands of ‘getting through the syllabus’ was seen
as limiting opportunities for more active learning.
We’re restricted to the syllabus that we have got to get them through, whatever level they’re at,
for that exam in May. That’s a huge constraint, and it’s balancing it. The success of your exam
results, or going for Curriculum for Excellence and missing bits out. Because that’s how it
would go, if we went one way we’d have to miss some bits out, which would make a huge
effect on our results. So it’s finding the balance between the two.
(Secondary depute, Numeracy)
I have staff who would be delighted to spend time exploring whichever thing the kids are
keenest on, to spend time on investigative approaches, and we don’t do it because this weight
of kids needs to be at that level by this time. The best way we’ve found to do it isn’t necessarily
26
the best way in the long term, by exploring concepts, it’s by driving them through a particular
set of work. Unless that is sorted for us, I can’t see how people are going to make the best use
of the Outcomes as they’re given. I don’t think there’s any lack of willingness for them to do it,
it’s just that they can’t see a way to reconcile the two.
(Principal teacher secondary, Numeracy focus group)
Teachers in secondary schools commented that producing consistently high levels of pupil
performance in external examinations was an important source of esteem. The professional
identity of the secondary teacher, as subject specialist, is linked to pupil performance in
subject–based examinations. High levels of attainment are associated with respect from
parents, pupils and colleagues including senior managers. Given the currency attached to
attainment, ‘successful’ teachers needed to be convinced of the value of moving away from
‘what works’ in terms of producing results.
In this department there’s great resistance to the idea of this when they’re getting the results
from the kids and that’s what they’re paid to do. What this is about, it’s about our changing role
as a teacher and that [point] isn’t made overtly.
(Principal teacher secondary, English and Literacy)
It seems like a massive risk that you can get the results through the ‘touchy feely’ way of
teaching rather than ‘you will listen and you will learn’. I think it’s definitely going to represent a
massive shift for some in terms of their own practice.
(Principal teacher secondary, English and Literacy)
Several contributors to focus group discussions raised the issue of communicating with
parents. Some participants suggested that many parents were principally concerned with
rates of progress and attainment, rather than processes or contexts of learning which they
regarded as appropriately devolved to education professionals. It was suggested that parents
might experience overload and difficulties deciphering the language used to express the
wider purposes and principles of Curriculum for Excellence. Teachers requested further
guidance on policies for reporting to parents.
The culture in Scotland is that of league tables and parents want to know their child’s achieved
a certain thing by a certain time. I’m slightly wary of engaging with children’s experiences if I’m
still going to have to report to parents. Parents are going to answer, ‘Yes, but can they do
Pythagoras?’
(Secondary Principal Teacher, Numeracy)
If you went through this with parents, “Your child is an effective contributor, a responsible
citizen, a confident individual.” They’d just say, “Ah but is he any good? Did he pass? Is he
doing okay? Right, that’s fine. Don’t blind me with this”.
(Secondary Principal Teacher, Classical Languages)
A minority of participants noted that the transformational change proposed in Curriculum for
Excellence would entail adjustment by all partners, including parents. Some contributors
acknowledged that parent-school relationships could be consolidated through improvements
in communication, particularly information that is exchanged about learning and the new
learning context.
We have to re-educate parents, so that they don’t think they’re going to get umpteen jotters
crammed full of stuff at the end of the term; that it’s much more experiential learning and they
won’t necessarily have a bit of paper or a jotter as proof that they’ve learned.
(Secondary principal teacher, Literacy and English)
In summary, several teachers noted a tension between the aspirations of Curriculum for
Excellence for new learning and perceptions of an outcomes-driven system of assessment.
Participants from primary and secondary schools talked of ‘double vision’ and ‘different
27
worlds’ in describing the multiple and competing demands made of them. A primary
headteacher commented that the Draft Experiences and Outcomes and the national
assessments ‘totally contradicted each other’ (numeracy group). A secondary faculty head
described how teachers were caught between ‘different philosophies’ and expected to deliver
the agenda of both.
You’ve got these two different worlds. People want results and they want the assessments
done, and then you’ve got this world here saying we should be spontaneous, make an
opportunity for spontaneity and activities and experiences and the two things very often don’t
marry at all.
(Principal teacher secondary, Expressive Arts)
Are we looking for relevance for achieving qualifications or are we looking for relevance to
develop these four capacities? To me they don’t lie well together and somebody needs to
make up their mind what they want out the other end of the school system…The teachers are
going to be the piggies in the middle again, who are being asked to deliver two entirely
different philosophies at the same time.
(Faculty Head, Expressive Arts)
There seems to be almost like a double vision - one is that we are empowered and we are able
to develop new things and we are professional enough to do that; and then somebody else
with a slightly different agenda will come and assess and evaluate us. There will have to be a
change in the relationship between how we are assessed and evaluated by our colleagues in
other professional areas.
(Secondary principal teacher, Literacy and English)
3.5.
Making connections across the curriculum
One of the stated aspirations of Curriculum for Excellence is the promotion of
interdisciplinary learning: “taking learning out of ‘silos’ to establish better connectivity in
learning” (George Smuga, September 200811). Greatest challenge can be anticipated where
the boundaries constructed between discrete or specialised ‘subjects’ are strongest.
Accounts offered by teachers in the focus groups frequently made reference to how different
sectors/phases were differently placed to make connections across the curriculum.
Practitioners in early years settings and special schools reported that the ways of working
suggested in the proposed 3-18 curriculum were consistent with current good practice.
One of the strengths within the special sector is that teaching any particular subject in isolation
has never made any sense. So we have maths and numeracy embedded in all of the subject
areas just now. For instance, when we’re teaching maths we have frameworks which show
where PSE, where RE, where social studies fit in, and we haven’t been able to necessarily
wait for all of the outcomes to come out, because that’s very much the way that we work.
(Special school depute, Numeracy)
Our children learn from doing the same thing in lots of different contexts, giving them different
experiences of the same thing. It’s not any kind of vertical progression, it’s just a lateral
progression and that is how we work.
(Special school depute, Numeracy)
Whilst common in the early years, in the extracts below primary headteachers note how
integrated approaches have become less common in the later stages of primary education.
They suggest that a perceived turn towards ‘subjects’ has eroded the capacity of some
11
Area Event keynote presentation ‘Building the Curriculum Three’ presented by George Smuga,
Professional Adviser, Curriculum Division, Scottish Government. Available online from:
http://www.ltscotland.org.uk/curriculumforexcellence/events/eventreports/areaevents/georgesmuga.asp
28
teachers to respond positively to opportunities to develop integrated approaches to planning.
Whilst very experienced primary school teachers are able to draw on previous experience of
thematic approaches to learning, more recent entrants to the profession may require
additional support.
When we talked about this as a staff, the infant teacher found it easier to relate to than upper
school because she’s in the habit of doing cross-curricular plans and looking across the whole
of the curriculum at topics, touching on all of the areas. Since this last year, whenever she’s
doing topics she’s building herself plans or curricular webs so that with every topic she does,
she knows she’s touching lots of bases. Further up the school they’re finding it more difficult.
(Primary headteacher, Numeracy)
I’m in a school that’s very committed to making the most of cross-curricular opportunities.
Although we’re very committed to that, we do tend to find the 5-14 approach to things has led
even primary to go down more subject-based timetables. So we’re breaking away from that
and are very interested to see how it goes.
(Primary headteacher, Numeracy)
For many years 5-14 has been very helpful scaffolding for teachers’ work. So many have been
so used to having everything streamlined and boxed in separate departments and many of our
staff are not used to cross-curricular approaches and need to be given some support at how to
do that effectively.
(Primary headteacher, Religious and Moral Education)
The promotion of interdisciplinary learning within the Draft Experiences and Outcomes - and
especially within the core areas of numeracy, literacy and health and well-being - were
generally welcomed. Secondary school teachers were quick to identify potential benefits in
cross-subject collaboration, including the identification of areas of overlap that might highlight
differences in modes of instruction. Shared areas with differences in approach were cited
most often by teachers of science and numeracy/mathematics.
In the science department there were three different methods of teaching equations which
were not the same as within the maths department. From that, we ended up getting together
and agreeing a common methodology.
(Principal teacher secondary, Numeracy)
One of the really good things about it would be breaking down barriers between the different
subjects. Basically we get it all the time, they are having difficulty re-arranging an equation and
you say well, you’ve done it in Maths – ah but that’s Maths, I know how to do it in Maths but I
don’t know how to do it in physics.
(Principal teacher secondary, Science)
It is not surprising that reservations were most likely to be expressed by teachers in the
secondary sector, for whom subject specialist status is an important source of identity and
whose daily work is organised according to subject differentiation. Reservations were related
to the practical/operational dimensions of promoting cross-subject work – expressed in terms
of workload and coordination issues; or identity issues between school subject communities
– expressed in terms of defence of subject status vis-à-vis possible ‘dilution’.
Responses offered in the focus group indicate that there is not a shared understanding of
what constitutes ‘cross-curricular’ or ‘interdisciplinary’ work in secondary schools. Some
teachers associated cross-curricularity with a planned ‘project’ or ‘one off event’. Others
demonstrated an understanding of cross-curricularity as a sustained commitment to the
provision of experiences that connected learning across the curriculum.
One thing that’s worrying folk is exactly what counts as cross-curricular? Some folk think that it
has to be a project where either maths teachers are going into another subject, or those
29
teachers are coming into us and it has to be very formal and very organised. To find time to
organise projects like that is very, very difficult.
(Principal teacher secondary, Numeracy)
They seem to me to be one off events and the whole aim of Curriculum for Excellence is to
have cross-curricular experiential learning going on more or less all the time.
(Secondary Depute, Numeracy)
Several of the curriculum area focus groups suggested that promotion of cross-curricular
links, as they understood it, would require additional staffing to support inter-disciplinary
learning in classes. Examples were offered of teachers from different disciplines engaged in
collaborative planning and co-teaching. Resource and timetabling implications within
secondary school structures were emphasised as potentially significant inhibitors.
I’ve tried to implement some aspects by working with other departments. Rather than teach
money, the children investigated aspects of money for themselves. They worked with English
and when they were reporting back to class, English would monitor their talk as part of their
English whereas I was looking at the Maths content. Inevitably something like that takes a lot
more time than me teaching them a money lesson, plus I’ve got to have cover for the English
department to come and work with us and vice-versa. I just don’t see how it’s going to work the
way they want it to work, unless we have more flexibility not only within the curriculum but the
time-tabling of the curriculum.
(Principal teacher secondary, Maths)
To get cross-curricular work really going, you don’t want a music teacher in a class, you want a
music and an art teacher, or you want a music and dance teacher or you want your drama and
dance going together. There has to be flexibility within the schools and we’re pared to the
bone.
(Faculty head secondary, Social Studies)
A secondary Maths teacher (Numeracy) commented that whereas the primary school is
‘understanding driven’, secondary schools are ‘product driven’: ‘the bottom line is we have to
get children through exams’. Subject demarcations are defended and cross-curricular
approaches can be viewed as an encroachment, especially if the introduction of crosscurricular ‘topics’ or ‘projects’ appears contrived. Tensions may become apparent if subject
teaching appears ‘skewed’ to meet the requirements of mandated cross-curricularity. In such
circumstances, the reservations of teachers may result in lip service being paid to the notion
of cross-curricularity without significant changes to current practice.
I am in the Health Faculty along with Physical Education and Home Economics and I find that
my teaching has had to be skewed at certain points so that I am teaching common elements
with the other two departments and I have not found it to be positive. We teach our lessons as
we are instructed, but I don’t know if it is actually teaching anything that fits with the kids
attaining the result in the course that they are following.
(Principal teacher secondary, Health and Well Being)
Some concern was expressed about the willingness and capacity of secondary ‘subject
hosts’ to embrace the core curricular foci of numeracy, literacy and aspects of health and
well being. A lack of specialist professional training and the need for additional support for
non-specialists was frequently noted. The engagement of non-specialists may be superficial
without additional time consuming support and development. Stepping outside subject
boundaries raised anxieties in particular topic areas. Nervousness around handling sensitive
or controversial issues was particularly noted in relation to the implementation of the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes for Health and Well Being, especially with regard to
relationships, sexual health and substance misuse.
30
People who are teaching PSE in secondary schools are not specialists in any way, shape or
form and they quite often express concern about having to talk about drugs or sexual activities
with which they are uncomfortable or have a lack of knowledge.
(Secondary head of department, Health and Well-Being)
There’s a lot of work required to build up the skills and confidence of teachers in other subjects
about teaching numeracy.
(Principal Teacher secondary, Maths)
Within the focus groups, participants suggested that there is a danger that core curriculum
areas may fail to become ‘embedded’ and remain the responsibility of ‘home’ subjects, such
as maths, English or physical education. From this perspective, cross curricular themes were
considered to be an extension of traditional subjects. Participants in the English and Literacy
groups questioned why literacy was not formulated as a separate set of Draft Experiences
and Outcomes, as was the case with Numeracy and Health and Well Being. In managing
competing demands on teachers’ time, other contributors noted that subject teaching was
consistently regarded as a core concern; with cross-curricular work regarded as peripheral.
It has to be embedded in the documents for all the other subjects. If it’s to be taken as
seriously as I think Learning and Teaching Scotland want it to be taken by teachers of different
disciplines it has to be in there from the word go. We’ve missed the boat already on that one,
so we have to get in there as quickly as we can or else it will always be viewed as the job for
an English teacher.
(Principal teacher secondary, English and Literacy)
Most of our planning and preparation is within our main subject…Health and Well Being seems
to be ignored not so much by the school but it seems to be ignored to an extent by the
teachers. It’s low down on priorities with things to do and almost as an afterthought sometimes.
(Principal teacher secondary, Health and Well Being)
It was noted that the presence of visiting specialist tutors in primary schools presented
opportunities for co-teaching and the development of cross-curricular activities. However,
primary schools face the challenge of contending with the full range of Draft Experiences and
Outcomes and this in turn presents challenges related to the use of non-contact time when
specialist tutors/coaches are in school. The volume and pace of change could marginalise
the potentially significant role that might be played by specialists working in collaboration with
permanent core staff.
I’m one of the people who teach Art and Design in primaries just now, who are also covering
McCrone at the same time. We’re hoping that this is in some way going to allow us more
cross-curricular links; more time that is valuable and not time that is counted in minutes by the
class teacher getting out for the non class contact time. We’re just hoping that this might be an
avenue where some improvement can be made. Because of financial constraints and the very
nature of McCrone, that’s a big block to any improvement.
(Creative Link Officer, Expressive Arts)
The promotion of connections across the curriculum through interdisciplinary learning
presents challenges for senior managers charged with ensuring coherence; a problem
described by Reid and Scott (2008:184) as one of achieving ‘a bird’s eye view of the
curriculum landscape’. School managers and teachers recognised the challenge of
translating cross-curricular objectives into everyday systems for monitoring continuity and
progression for learners.
As a manager within school I monitor forward plans. We monitor breadth and balance. If they
are all crossing over one another, how do you know how much Maths has been done? How do
you know how much language has been done? It is the monitoring aspect that concerns me.
(Primary depute, Science)
31
I do have concerns at how little information is there about the interpretation that could be taken
for each statement and of course I am thinking at a whole school level, managing the flow of
continuity and the experiences the children will have.
(Primary headteacher, Health and Well Being)
3.6.
Summary
This review of the initial responses of teachers to the Draft Experiences and Outcomes
highlights the many contingencies involved in teachers’ responses to curriculum reform. In
general, teachers welcomed the move towards a less prescriptive curriculum and valued
opportunities for adaptation based on informed professional judgement. However, serious
concern was repeatedly expressed about the need for greater clarity to support consistent
interpretation of outcomes across the profession. Teachers recognised that ‘its key strength
is also its weakness’ (principal teacher). Whilst embracing the values, purposes and
principles underpinning Curriculum for Excellence, many teachers are still looking for further
guidance in how to translate these principles into practical action.
Trialling feedback was generally more positive than open responses submitted via the online
questionnaire. However across the sources of data, teachers reported concerns regarding
monitoring progression, mapping cross-curricular provision, a need for more detailed
guidance on assessment and success criteria, the provision of quality support for nonspecialist teachers (of interdisciplinary themes and specialist areas of the primary
curriculum). Finding adequate time and resources to support collaborative planning and the
local development of high quality materials was frequently identified as a key challenge.
Equally, participants noted the logistical constraints of working within the parameters of
school and assessment timetables. Teachers consistently sought further elaboration and
exemplification to avoid omission/repetition across stages and to ensure reliable information
on transition. Some teachers described the 5-14 curriculum as a ‘comfort blanket’ and ‘safety
net’, whilst the Draft Experiences and Outcomes were repeatedly described as ‘woolly’,
‘vague’ or ‘unclear’.
A recurring theme in the data is a perception of mixed messages and a juxtaposition of
effective classroom practice (process) with the pursuit of attainment targets (outcomes).
Many of the teachers who participated in the engagement process described a tension
between preferred methodologies and a need to meet pupil, parent, senior management and
local authority expectations of consistently high levels of attainment. In some cases moves
towards more active and experiential learning was seen as risky, posing a threat to pupil
attainment. Others asserted the primary importance of attainment as a principal measure of
competence and success. Similarly a tension was identified between valuing subject
specialist status and the advocacy of interdisciplinary learning. There was a sense that interdisciplinary approaches might pose a challenge to the standing of core subject knowledge
and skills. Finally, there was some evidence of a reluctance to commit to engagement whilst
the Experiences and Outcomes were still in ‘draft’ form, at the same time as widespread
recognition of the value of collaboration at an early stage.
32
4. Local authority perspectives
4.1.
Introduction
The section draws on the accounts of 32 local authority officers and a representative of the
Scottish Council of Independent Schools (SCiS) who participated in telephone interviews.
These interviews focused on the formal trialling of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes,
including consideration of key challenges and implications for the future. Whilst all
interviewees were identified as lead personnel for Curriculum for Excellence in their
authority/organisation, the extent to which they were directly involved in detailed
arrangements for formal trialling differed. Some interviewees were Education Managers,
others were Development Officers seconded from schools or Quality Improvement Officers.
All participants reported that the trialling process connected with their other responsibilities,
more closely for some than for others. The reported portfolio of responsibilities differed
across the sample, with some interviewees able to devote greater levels of attention to
trialling activities than others. Most interviewees described multiple levels of engagement
with Curriculum for Excellence, of which the trialling process was one aspect.
This section is organised in seven main parts. The next part reports concern about the
practice of ‘backward mapping’ from external summative assessment and the challenge of
moving towards teaching for understanding within cultures of performance. The following
identifies tensions between calls from some sections of the profession for detailed
exemplification and encouragement of the imaginative use of the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes. Parts four and five consider the position of primary and secondary schools
respectively in taking forward Curriculum for Excellence according to the local authority
personnel interviewed for this study. Part six notes the demands placed on school leaders by
curriculum flexibility in terms of building curriculum structures and also some implications of
Curriculum for Excellence for current arrangements for early presentation. The final part
reflects on the role of local authorities in supporting schools and reports some inhibitors and
drivers of change.
4.2.
Assessment
Local authority interviewees commented on the established practice by experienced
secondary teachers of ‘backward mapping’ from end-point examinations when designing
programmes of study. Teachers’ responsiveness to the opportunities extended in the revised
lower school curriculum was adversely influenced by a perceived lack of clarity around
summative assessment. This was emphasised in comments that ‘nothing significant’ can
happen outside an attainment frame of reference. In the senior phase teachers were
cautious about embarking on change that might affect pupil attainment (even in the short
term) or that might produce pupil gains that are not easily measurable as indicators of
performance.
Although it is against the principle that the exams should follow the curriculum I think nothing
significant will happen until the consultation on exams is complete and there is a confidence in
the profession as to what the qualifications will look like and then teachers will feel more
comfortable working back from those exams. I know that is counter to a lot of the theory and
ethos of Curriculum for Excellence but there is a strong feeling between teachers that the
further up you move in secondary, teaching is bound to be dominated by exams and
qualifications.
(LA interviewee 1)
The stress on attainment is hampering the development of Curriculum for Excellence
particularly in the secondary but also in the primary. That is a major mindset that has to be
33
addressed. What we are not developing is a deeper understanding, living to learn capability in
youngsters and that is the real challenge that faces us. A challenge that Curriculum for
Excellence can address, but one that we are failing to get across to the workforce.
(LA interviewee 3)
Giving back some professionalism to my colleagues is very rewarding but some of them are
reluctant to take it because they have been living in a highly accountable, highly dependable
culture for so long that risk taking is not something that comes naturally now to the teaching
profession. The biggest stumbling block for many of them is saying, ‘Well, I will do that
because that is enjoyable but what will HMI say about it?’ That is a big issue.
(LA interviewee 9)
One local authority officer suggested that many teachers found security within testing. Tests
provided a reliable measure of performance and progression, a ‘comfort blanket’ that
provided reassurance of teacher capability and pupil progress. The introduction of broader
outcomes and the encouragement of personalised pathways removed the ‘safety net’ of
standard cohort tests. Some teachers approached the Draft Experiences and Outcomes as
tools for assessment and were unsettled by the lack of prescription or detailed recipes that
might be directly transferred to classroom practice.
Secondary schools from S1 are very test driven and getting them to move away from the
safety net of giving kids a test to wholesale formative assessment S1-3 is still a challenge.
Giving kids a test is a sort of ‘comfort blanket’ for a lot of teachers because they then feel
secure in where kids are in terms of progression. If you are not going to be using that so much,
there is a lack of consistency and certainty as to how you do progress.
(LA interviewee 4)
Local authority officers noted the considerable challenge for some teachers in moving from
national assessments (in English and Maths) towards teachers’ professional judgement,
locally moderated. One interviewee claimed there were ‘serious anxieties’ and a ‘growing
sense of confusion’ within the secondary sector as they awaited the outcome of the
assessment consultation, which was described as ‘incredibly late’ in the context of the
original timeline for implementation of Curriculum for Excellence (LA interviewee 12). It
should be noted that whilst concerns were most evident in relation to the secondary sector,
they were not restricted to the secondary schools. Two interviewees noted that primary
schools were also ‘more and more driven by results’ (LA interviewee 16).
Across all the interview transcripts there was a recurring focus on the need for further
information around assessment, recording and reporting in relation to the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes. Clarification was sought by teachers on how to monitor learning within and
between levels. Responses signalled a need to build on the advances made through the
Assessment is for Learning (AifL) programme in developing professional practice in formative
assessment.
4.3.
Exemplification and explanation
Local authority officers identified a tension between the desirability of greater flexibility - as
professionally enhancing - and the security extended to teachers in more directive modes of
prescription. A dilemma presented to the writing teams at a national level and local authority
officers at a regional level was to resist the temptation to fall back on prescription to assuage
initial lack of confidence and uncertainty at an early stage of engagement.
We’re trying to keep Curriculum for Excellence at the top of the agenda; to try and support staff
without doing it all for them. It’s not to be a prescriptive approach but they do need a steer. It’s
confidence building and reassurance that teachers are needing just now.
(LA interviewee 28)
34
For several interviewees Curriculum for Excellence was presented as re-professionalising:
‘giving back professionalism’ to teachers de-skilled by a prescriptive curriculum and an over
emphasis on external summative assessment. The proposed curriculum potentially opened
up space for deliberation on questions of pedagogy (broadly defined12), rather than subject
specific content knowledge.
Curriculum for Excellence is giving teachers back the professionalism that they are due. What
has been hugely rewarding about this process is actually listening to teachers talking about
learning and teaching again. For too many years we have had teachers talking about
programmes of study and books, rather than pedagogy.
(LA interviewee 15)
However, few accounts were able to explicitly align curriculum purposes, pedagogy and
assessment practices. One local authority interviewee asserted the importance of a strong
focus on ‘the how’ of Curriculum for Excellence, narrowly interpreted as teaching
methodology (or ‘instruction’): ‘We’ve been giving the message, “Look, we’ll get to
assessment later.”’ Responses frequently juxtaposed pedagogy and assessment, reaffirming a false dualism. Whilst welcoming enhanced attention to pedagogy, this was
sometimes positioned as a change in direction, rather than closer alignment.
If the Assessment for Learning programme meant anything it is that assessment is integral to
the learning and teaching process. In a sense what we have done this year is separate them
out again and that has been a wee bit unhelpful.
(LA interviewee 15)
Two interviewees were careful to stress that their authorities would not replace the existing
curriculum with a similarly prescriptive model. In stepping back from prescription for teachers,
one interviewee stressed the importance of a similar degree of autonomy for authorities to
allow them to respond to local needs and circumstances. These accounts involved a
reassertion of local authority autonomy from central direction and the need for ‘enabling
interventions’ (Hargreaves, 2003) at school level to prevent ‘negative washback’ (Hutchinson
and Hayward, 2005) on classroom practice from renewed focus on curriculum and
assessment.
Some teachers still require exemplification and we are not going to provide that
exemplification. What we are going to provide hopefully in replacing our programmes of study
are clear policies and guidance and recommended resources and training to ensure that
practitioners develop the critical understanding of self-improvement and the principles and how
they can incorporate that into their teaching rather than replacing the existing 5-14 with a
programme of study and exemplification…. Allowing authorities to have space to develop what
is relevant to them is equally important as developing national guidance to do that.
(LA interviewee 11)
From an authority point of view, we are very determined that outcomes are not going to drive
the experience. Outcomes are signposts along the way. But I suspect in a lot of places
already, people have started to take outcomes and put them down into some sort of course
programme or programme of work and that will be what will actually drive the pupil experience.
(LA interviewee 5)
Interviewees were aware of the tensions within an enhanced view of professional practice
contained in the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. Whilst talking about the desirability of
12
Alexander (2001:513) distinguishes ‘pedagogy as discourse from teaching as act’ yet sees them as
inseparable defining pedagogy as ‘both the act of teaching and its contingent theories and debates –
about, for example, the character of culture and society, the purposes of education, the nature of
childhood and learning and the structure of knowledge’.
35
‘tightening up’ and ‘tying down’ the outcomes, local authority officers were describing how the
draft guidance might be more easily interpreted rather than abandoning the need to engage
in acts of interpretation as professionals exercising discretion. One interviewee commented,
‘You can provide flexibility in ways over and above just simply removing all the structure and
giving people a vague idea’ (LA interviewee 12). Another noted, ‘The danger is that you will
then come out with guidance on assessment and then it will be, oh well that is what we are
meant to do because that is what it says’ (LA interviewee 15). Another commented that
‘exemplification’ could quickly become wholesale ‘reproduction’ (LA interviewee 17). Local
authority officers were aware of the need to support teachers to use the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes imaginatively.
We are caught on a cleft stick with this because on the one hand in the National Debate
teachers said they wanted more freedom and they wanted the curriculum to be de-cluttered.
The Draft outcomes and experiences have done that, but it is almost as if they have gone too
far. It’s going from a very tightly prescribed curriculum to an awful lot of freedom. Teachers
are thinking, how do we do this?
(LA interviewee 4)
The one thing we don’t want to do is to just re-write another 5-14 curriculum that teachers will
just pick up. As soon as you unpack an outcome, you then declare ‘this is the new
curriculum’… I appreciate the difficulty that they have centrally in saying ‘we will give you full
exemplification as well as further elaboration’ but the profession are certainly requesting it.
They are looking for more exemplification. I think they certainly need it.
(LA interviewee 2)
The dilemma was summarised by one interviewee in the assertion that,
‘there is a danger that if you have too much exemplification and elaboration you will restrict
what people feel they can do. There are clearly issues about how much precision in the
definition of the curriculum we need.’
(LA interviewee 29)
Another commented,
‘What we need to be careful about is that the exemplification just simply highlights possibilities
rather than takes people down a narrow road’
(LA interviewee 30)
Local authority personnel with a role in providing support for schools were caught in a double
bind of being seen to provide authoritative support and clear strategic direction, whilst
working within a framework that encourages local deliberation and flexibility.
Personalisation and choice. They keep telling us what it isn’t and we know what it isn’t. It’s not
free, unfettered choice but if it’s not that, then what is it? The continuum is fairly long from
where we are at just now.
(LA interviewee 5)
People need to know what is coming before and what is coming next particularly because of
the broader outcomes; and also what smaller steps would lead you to the outcome. I know
that that could be argued as going back to prescription but I suppose it’s the definition of what
is prescription and what is guidance? It’s more to do with the how.
(LA interviewee 6)
Several interviewees noted the cultural challenges presented by the development of a
‘dependency’ or ‘permission culture’ among sections of the teaching profession. This was
presented as forms of ‘resigned compliance’ (Farrell and Morris, 2004) in statements such as
‘tell me what to do and I will do it’; or ‘learned helplessness’ (Seligman, 1992) suggested in
requests such as ‘give me the package’. It was noted that calls for creativity, innovation and
flexibility may enter some school sites that have, to some extent, become characterised by
resource dependency and reliance on external agents.
36
People are saying, ‘Tell me what you want me to do and I will do it.’ We don’t want to go back
to teaching by rote and lack of creativity, innovation and flexibility. It is a problem in that
people do want and are used to having exemplification, especially in subject areas like Science
where if they want a new course they get someone to write it for them. People are used to
having off the shelf courses and they want benchmarking and standards that they should
follow. So it’s quite a difficult situation. How do we not stifle creativity and flexibility but at the
same time maintain standards?
(LA interviewee 9)
For secondary staff, particularly those who have gone through the Higher Still model where
everything was provided, there’s a little bit of a dependency culture. They can’t get on with
their course until somebody gives them the course.
(LA interviewee 22)
It’s giving teachers and schools the confidence to be creative and innovative and get rid of
what is predominantly a compliance culture or a permission culture with some of our schools.
It’s really getting the message that it’s okay to try new things, have a clear rationale and take
them forward. Too many headteachers have been waiting for an answer to come, just give me
the package.
(LA interviewee 26)
Despite the reservations of some local authority personnel who depicted passive or resigned
responses to change, others were keen to stress that calls for elaboration need not indicate
resistance to engagement. From this perspective, requests for further elaboration suggested
an openness to change with the provision of additional support for experimentation and
adaptation. It was acknowledged that provision of additional detail could not guarantee
desired changes in practice without equal attention to methodologies that promoted active
engagement.
There is a call for elaboration and it isn’t people wanting to be given another course. It isn’t
just give me a course and a set of worksheets so I can just follow it and turn my brain off. It is a
case of give me some support so I can actually enrich my own skills and my own approaches
to learning and teaching so I can get to where a Curriculum for Excellence wants me to be.
Support me, in other words.
(LA interviewee 12)
Exemplification isn’t necessarily going to change the way in which it is delivered and that is
what is going to make the difference to children.
(LA interviewee 14)
Some local authority officers were keen to assert a sense of teachers’ agency, most often in
relation to bringing ‘credibility’ to materials produced. In these accounts, teachers were not
positioned as receivers of exemplars, but producers of materials generated and piloted in the
context of day-to-day classroom practice. In describing the challenges faced in promoting
this approach, local authority officers described processes of negotiation in which they
sought to develop an understanding of the benefits of looser, ‘bottom-up’ forms of
engagement (in contrast to the tightly coupled piloting of external designs).
It’s really important that there is an opportunity to involve practitioners in exemplification. I think
the credibility of material would be greatly enhanced. It’s that old chestnut about people
producing documents in offices that are removed from the chalk-face. I think good quality
exemplification, involving staff who are actually piloting and trying the materials prior to
distribution, would be really useful.
(LA interviewee 19)
Making people understand that we didn’t want to give them too much support from the local
authority or from bodies like LTS just to see how these outcomes and experiences stood up to
37
scrutiny. I suppose just getting people to find the time that is required to do the thinking and
the talking.
(LA interviewee 30)
One interview noted that more recent entrants to the profession had only known national
assessments within their professional experience and consequently the move away from 514 outcomes presented a challenge to their current understanding of their professional role.
The younger teachers, they have only known national tests. How are they going to assess and
measure progression of the children in their charge when these things are taken away?
(LA interviewee 3)
Principal among local authorities’ concerns was the need to provide greater support for
teachers making decisions around progression through levels. Concern was expressed in
terms of reducing the potential for variability in teacher assessment i.e. the reliability of
assessment.
One of the things that we have found is difficulty in tracking progression between levels and
between sectors. How do we actually go about this? How do we effectively track progression?
How do we have a shared standard across the authority and across the country? How do you
know that a child has achieved level 2? What are the benchmarks that the child has achieved
level 3 or importantly level 4?
(LA interviewee 2)
To give them back their professionalism means that we have a development need in relation
to, how do you take an outcome and turn it into something you will then use with your class? If
an outcome is meant to cover three years, then what does that actually mean? It’s not so
much how you unpack an outcome, but how you actually deal with an outcome over such a
long period of time and how would you know when you had got to the end of it?
(LA interviewee 15)
One interviewee identified concerns about the openness of the outcomes and range of
different experiences that might be available to a group of students working toward the same
outcome in terms of subject knowledge. The same interviewee reported that teachers
involved in the trials for science had suggested that the underpinning knowledge and
understanding was ‘hidden’ or ‘buried’ and that the focus on methodology rather than content
was seen as problematic.
One teacher bought some wind turbine kits and developed some lessons on the physics
behind wind turbines and then went on to develop the ideas of individual research and
commercial viability as described by the outcome. Another teacher following our own
programme did a similar set of lessons including investigations on solar panels. The teacher
coordinating the trial within the school noticed that one group, the class that did the solar
panels learned about conduction, convection, insulation, radiation and transfer of heat;
whereas the one that did the wind turbine learned about kinetic energy and rotational energy.
She felt that when they were planning progression from that stage to the next if those two sets
of classes merged, there would be real problems for the teacher taking the children forward.
They have met this outcome but have completely different sets of underlying physics.
(LA interviewee 10)
Two LA officers identified a need for unpacking different stages in each curriculum area but
also exemplification of inter-disciplinary studies emphasised in Building the Curriculum Three
and the need for collegiate planning in secondary schools to ensure integration of literacy,
numeracy and aspects of health and well-being across the curriculum.
Three interviewees associated the need for exemplification with regard to specific aspects of
subject knowledge; this was especially noted in regard to primary science. One local
authority officer reported a trialling visit where a visiting specialist in science had questioned
38
the depth of study undertaken by primary pupils and raised concerns about the level of
intellectual challenge and implications for progression on transition to secondary school. This
interviewee suggested that additional layers are required to show how concepts and thinking
challenges develop through the levels. Another interviewee noted that primary teachers
involved in the trialling tended to refer back to 5-14 materials to make sense of general
outcomes and that this might inhibit any desired displacement of previous practices. Another
interviewee identified a greater need for exemplification in early, first and second level
science for non-subject specialists and suggested a different role for exemplification to lend
coherence at the secondary stage.
I saw great techniques in terms of AifL and really good classroom organisation and good
engagement with children. Great dialogue and excellent open-ended questioning, in fact a
variety of questioning techniques but they were teaching the wrong science. So we ended up
with children who were confidently wrong.
(LA interviewee 10)
The above extract summarises concerns around the advocacy of ‘supportive pedagogy’
(Hayward, 2007) to the detriment of secure ‘subject’ knowledge, in this case in relation to
primary science. Whilst not an argument for simply ‘topping up’ subject specific professional
knowledge, it indicates the challenge of extending subject knowledge (content) and
pedagogical content knowledge (making content ‘instructional’) (Shulman, 1985) to meet the
challenges of the revised curriculum.
4.4.
Primary school readiness
In the extract below an LA officer notes that there is a popular assumption that primary
teachers are better placed to take forward the emphasis on making connections across the
curriculum and that the principles of Curriculum for Excellence lend themselves to the more
holistic orientations of the primary practitioner. Whilst not challenging the claim that primaries
are better placed because of their historical commitments and previous practice, the
interviewee cautions that association with previous ways of working (or constructs of
Curriculum for Excellence as aligned with previous practice) may not be beneficial. This is
because teachers may not engage with the Experiences and Outcomes to the same extent if
settled on a view of the revised curriculum as ‘old wine in new bottles’. Secondly, assumed
expertise in cross-mapping and the existence of ‘natural’ links across curriculum areas may
encourage broader and more superficial linking than is desirable i.e. prevent depth of
engagement and consideration of the rationale and strategies for linkage.
There appears to be a view that the primary sector are well in advance of the secondaries
which I think is probably true. They are much more able to cope with Curriculum for
Excellence. There are even some people who think the primary schools have almost got it
cracked. There is a danger that they will think that what they were doing twenty years ago fits
the bill and will revert back to that. If you take inter-disciplinary enquiry across the outcomes,
they are better able to cope with this than their secondary colleagues. My fear is that they will
try to almost do too much and link up everything and there is a great danger in that.
(LA interviewee 3)
The pre-five sector think that they are well on the way and they pretty much have it cracked
because that is what they have been doing for years anyway. In the main, primaries are more
open and more willing to talk about it and to start to pick things off and to try a bit here and
there. Some of the older primary teachers are saying that they are just going back to what
they used to do pre 5-14.
(LA interviewee 5)
Five interviewees felt that primary schools in their authority were currently better placed to
implement Curriculum for Excellence. Interviewees reflected that the size of teaching staff
39
and school roll in (smaller) primary schools offered greater opportunities for collaborative
work than (larger) secondary settings.
4.5.
Secondary school readiness
Not surprisingly local authority officers commented on the strong subject identities held by
some secondary teachers and the influence of this on initial reactions to the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes.
Secondary science people were feeding back, ‘Where is the science in this?’ The draft
outcomes and experiences are focused on experiences and focused on teaching and learning,
rather than content. For more traditional teachers, that’s a real problem. I remember vividly
one scientist saying, and this was a young teacher, ‘I came into teaching because I am a
chemist.’ If we want transformation in schools we have really got to get these folk moving.
(LA interviewee 4)
Other local authority officers noted the challenge of embedding literacy, numeracy and
aspects of health and well-being across the curriculum, especially in the secondary sector.
One officer described the practice of secondary teachers as ‘delivering their own subjects in
purity’, suggesting that interdisciplinary and cross-curricular work may involve a diluting of
subject expertise and hence the authority of the secondary subject specialist (LA interviewee
17).
It’s trying to push the pedagogy with secondary teachers that the learning and teaching issues
are as important as the subject specific issues.
(LA interviewee 9)
We believe that it is only by changing people’s thinking about how they teach and how children
learn, that you are actually going to get anywhere.
(LA interviewee 14)
One local authority officer noted an association between subject identification and
effectiveness at promoting and protecting subject positionality (turf wars) as a source of
reward and status within secondary schools. As previously noted, esteem in schools is
increasingly associated with ‘performative participation’ (Troman, Jeffrey and Raggl, 2007).
The turn towards collaboration runs counter to the entrepreneurial, individualistic ethos that
characterises cultures of performance. In secondary schools where there are established
cultures of hierarchy or ‘balkanised’ subject cultures (Hargreaves, 1997), such a shift in
orientation would prove particularly challenging.
Primary staff appear to be more comfortable, appear to be moving forward across a range of
curricular areas, looking at planning, piloting different models, integrating the different
outcomes and experiences. We are getting far more negative responses from secondary staff.
The way they have operated until now is being much more challenged, the subject-based
model of why you get promotions, because you’re good at that particular subject in the
curriculum. This Curriculum for Excellence model is posing significant challenges for some
staff in that. The reward up until now for promotion is to run a department. You fight your
corner for that subject. We’re now saying to staff, “Well actually, we’d really like you all to work
together on an integrated theme”. That’s a challenge.
(LA interviewee 22)
A small minority of interviewees noted that the move to faculty structures in some schools
and authorities had some impact on subject ‘silos’. Two local authority officers cited the
creation of faculty structures as a potential driver of inter-disciplinary approaches.
Faculty structures lend themselves to the inter-disciplinary approach. It’s a lot easier because
you’ve got a principal teacher who is covering curriculum provision across two to three
departments. It’s easy to see where the commonalities are and also to thin down the
40
unnecessary repetition that can sometimes happen. One of the other good things that is
coming out where faculties are looking at different departments is the common language and
common approach to teaching common skills.
(LA interviewee 28)
It was also noted that the grouping of clusters of subject areas within broad curriculum areas
(such as Technologies or Expressive Arts) poses challenges not only for teachers’
professional identities but also organisational challenges within existing secondary
structures.
The clustering of the subjects in itself is not particularly an issue, rather how staff can work
together within the current structure of a secondary school. This part of things is going to be a
longer road than we might have hoped. I think it will take quite a bit of time, evolution rather
than revolution, to have meaningful programmes developed in secondary that draw on the
different areas.
(LA interviewee 22)
4.6.
Flexibility in building the curriculum
It was noted that curriculum flexibility raised professional challenges for senior staff charged
with leading curriculum change in local contexts. It could not be assumed that are all school
leaders were equally equipped for this task. One local authority interviewee asserted that
many school leaders did not have considerable experience of curriculum building.
Building the Curriculum Three talks about reform to the curriculum and it mentions curriculum
planners and the phrase, ‘curriculum planning,’ but nowhere does it state how you go about
this. The curriculum in secondary schools has been the same for 20 years. What experiences
do school leaders have of taking the document Building the Curriculum 3 and turning it into
reality? What are the processes you have to go through? Most school leaders haven’t had to
do that in their whole school career.
(LA interviewee 4)
Seven interviewees made reference to the demands of Building the Curriculum Three for
secondary headteachers.
The largest hurdle or barrier to get out of the way in terms of putting together the kind of
curriculum structure that has been identified in Building the Curriculum 3 in secondary schools
is the subject department structure.
(LA interviewee 8)
Two interviewees made explicit reference to the issue of early presentation or ‘fast tracking’.
A key concern here was whether full cohort early presentation at S3 for Standard Grade and
Intermediate courses will remain in place in the revised curriculum structures.
Most of our schools have actually gone down the road of at least fast-tracking and having early
presentation with Standard Grade English and Standard Grade Maths. The first impressions
seem to be that S3 pupils have performed well and this has provided them with challenge and
motivation in S1 and S2. If that is not in place within the new structure for S1-3, the question is
how motivating the whole curriculum can be and whether it will keep pupils focused.
(LA interviewee 8)
Some of our schools have gone for early presentation and have been very successful in the
first year of presenting across the board at Standard Grade in S3. The worry then is for them,
‘We have just done this and that is working and you are saying to us now that S1-S3, that level
will not be certificated in any way’. They are going to be saying, ‘is that going to put us back
into no pace and challenge again in S1 and S2 like we used to have?’ So it is trying to give
value, impetus and pace in S1-3.
(LA interviewee 9)
41
The above extracts illustrate how a concern with pace and challenge, prompted by concerns
relating to the well reported performance ‘dip’ in the early years of secondary education, has
focused attention on early presentation as a source of motivation. Local policies on early
cohort presentation sit uncomfortably with an espoused national commitment to greater
personalisation and choice. It may be necessary to demonstrate that the accelerated pace of
early entry does not simply amount to a ‘hurry along curriculum’ (Dadds, 2001) and remains
consistent with the broader principles of thoughtful reflection and professional judgement
implied in the Curriculum for Excellence.
Having oversight of a range of different school settings, local authority personnel noted
specific needs influenced by school type or location. Moves towards an integrated, coherent
curriculum were particularly welcomed by authorities with 3-18 all-through schools. In other
contexts it was noted that teachers of primary school composite classes faced particular
challenges in offering a range of experiences and monitoring progression. Similarly in
authorities containing junior high schools a need for understanding and monitoring of
progression between junior high and senior school was acknowledged. The particular needs
of children and young people with additional support needs were raised by three
interviewees. These officers felt that the Draft Experiences and Outcomes were ‘too general,
need to be broken down further’ (LA interviewee 16) and wanted to emphasise feedback
from schools that had mentioned a perceived neglect of special education in formulating the
revised curriculum.
Special school headteachers feel that there hasn’t been any kind of focus in their areas to the
same extent as the others. There is maybe a feeling that they have been left out and they can’t
quite relate when they look at all the levels, how that will fit into all the work that they are
involved in.
(LA interviewee 8)
4.7.
Local authority support for schools
Several interviewees noted the significance of Assessment is for Learning (AifL) and Building
the Curriculum Two (active learning) in preparing the ground for Curriculum for Excellence. In
one authority ‘learning teams’, originally used as a vehicle for embedding Assessment for
Learning methodology, were now being developed to promote changes in teaching in line
with the expectations of Curriculum for Excellence (LA interviewee 22). Similarly, others
noted the effectiveness of supported teacher enquiry in producing change.
If you look at the model that came from the Assessment is for Learning programme, whereby
you get small groups of teachers to look at areas that might have future benefits for learning
and teaching. If you value them - put a bit of money in, put a bit of prestige in and support them
to step beyond what they’ve done before - that is a process that people enjoy being a part of
and it is a way of creating change in the classroom.
(LA interviewee 29)
Uncertainty and waiting for clarification was a source of frustration for some local authority
officers, who had responsibilities for coordination and strategic direction at an authority level.
The draft status of the documents was seen as an impediment to engagement by teachers
who were adopting a cautious ‘wait and see’ position before ‘diving in’.
People are so reluctant to do anything until they know how we are going to judge children. It’s
expecting people to put a lot of energy and time into developing something when they don’t
know the full picture.
(LA interviewee 16)
While the title draft remains, there is a wariness to dive in too deep.
42
(LA interviewee 17)
There is a sense amongst schools that they are draft at the moment so perhaps we should
wait and see if there are significant changes. That puts a bit of a strain on authorities because
obviously we don’t want to wait. We want to move forward. So there is a wee bit of a tension
there.
(LA interviewee 19)
Prior to the announcement of the extension of the implementation period, one officer
questioned the authenticity of the engagement process, particularly the likelihood of
significant revisions following consultation with the profession.
There is a wee bit of doubt in my mind about how much this consultation on the outcomes is
actually genuine. The reason I say that is because at the EAA Coordinators meetings we are
told again and again these are going through a rigorous quality assurance process. They have
been cleansed and re-written and washed and spun dried and genuinely had everything done
to them that could possibly be done and therefore here is something of very high quality. I
don’t believe that things are going to change now hugely; that things are going to come from
practitioners that haven’t already been thrown up. So why are we asking people to commit to
doing that with the expectation that some things might change? I am a wee bit anxious about
that. I think there is a lot to be lost in getting people to engage with something and then to
actually find that they come out as they were. I hope I am wrong on that one.
(LA interviewee 5)
Three other interviewees also commented that the Draft Experiences and Outcomes were
likely to be subject to some refinement rather than substantive revision.
I suspect they probably won’t change a huge amount and that is just acknowledging the fact
that most of the outcomes are fine. There is probably not a huge amount that needs to be done
with them. It is understanding how to use them that needs to be done.
(LA interviewee 15)
Journey or ‘story’ metaphors were used to talk about the need for direction and coherence. A
perception of fragmentation and disjointed or overlapping developments evoked calls for a
stronger overall ‘narrative’ to bring coherence to the process and to lend confidence to
teachers involved in navigating change.
Sometimes people have talked of a narrative. In some ways the outcomes are like little
chapters and that means there are an awful lot of chapters. The chapters themselves can be
quite involved and complex but they should fit together in some sort of interwoven way that by
the end of it all you have some sort of story that goes somewhere. Asking every individual to
write their own chapter risks an absolute lack of an intelligible story.
(LA interviewee 12)
I am a big picture person and I think most people are. We need to see what it is that we are
really trying to do or be told, ‘It’s not coming folks. Get on with it’. I am very reluctant to lead
people down an alleyway that might suit us but that we might have to do a quick turnaround at
the bottom and come back up again.
(LA interviewee 5)
The whole point about this is that it is supposed to be curriculum-driven and exam-supported.
This is potentially a radical change and people can’t get their heads round it. It is not the fact
that they don’t want radical change but they can’t get the picture of where we are going in their
heads. They don’t know what the end of the journey is.
(LA interviewee 12)
One interviewee identified the relational issues involved in negotiating change with teachers
who continued to hold expectations of higher levels of local authority and central direction.
43
This interviewee felt that she was in a precarious position, ‘skating on thin ice’, asking
teachers to move forward without stronger national guidance.
They want someone to hand them, ‘This is what you have to teach’. Probably the biggest
issue for us in supporting schools is to give them the confidence to go ahead and get started
rather that wait for these documents which are not going to exist. It’s a bit like skating on thin
ice when you say, ‘No, these are not going to be coming and you should be starting now.’ I
think the biggest issue is building trust and confidence.
(LA interviewee 9)
LA officers found lack of detailed information frustrated planning efforts and suggested that
greater clarity on how the implementation process was to be managed would be helpful.
Some authorities had given clear instructions to schools on phased implementation from
autumn 2009, for example two curriculum areas per year for primary schools commencing
with literacy and numeracy (LA interviewee 25, LA interviewee 26). Officers also expressed
uncertainty over when 5-14 assessment would be phased out and whether ‘benchmark
testing at different points’ would be introduced (LA interviewee 21). Additional challenges
including closely aligning Curriculum for Excellence with existing locally directed learning and
teaching policies at different stages of development.
The beginning of implementation is 2009/10 but the softer message is that implementation is
not a big bang, that it is phased and gradual. I think there is a bit of a fuzziness there as to the
expectations on local authorities.
(LA interviewee 17)
The line being taken was that we were not looking for full implementation by next year, and if
that’s the case, what do we mean by partial implementation or phased implementation? There
is still vagueness about just how much we are expecting our schools to move to in terms of
Curriculum for Excellence from the beginning of 2009/2010. I’ve attended a number of
meetings where they say, “Some aspects of Curriculum for Excellence will be implemented in
each school” but that could be interpreted in different ways, from fairly major structural
changes to the way timetables are organised, to a school that’s starting to experiment in crosscurricular approaches.
(LA interviewee 21)
One of my main tasks at the moment is to try to write the strategic approach that the authority
is going to take and that has been hugely challenging because there is not a lot of solid
information for us to work on and we have found that very frustrating. I know that people see
this as an opportunity but there is still a feeling for us that someone is going to come along and
say, ‘Yes, but…’
(LA interviewee 5)
We can’t make any decisions until we get the results of the consultation. By assessment I don’t
just mean the qualification structure I mean the change from national testing to what? We are
not quite sure where nationally that is going to go and the formal reporting on the levels: (a) to
inform our authority attainment statistics; and (b) to inform national attainment statistics.
(LA interviewee 17)
Seven interviewees referred to budgetary constraints influencing available support for
Curriculum for Excellence at authority level.
I push Curriculum for Excellence in the three authorities that I work in, but all authorities have
to be pushing for this. There’s a role for HMIE and central government to try to make sure that
authorities are putting the resources in because I am hearing complaints from schools that
they have to make do with their own resources rather than getting significant support from the
Authority.
(LA interviewee 2)
44
The impact of the Concordat agreement and the Authority’s decision on cuts for education has
had an impact. Timetabling for secondaries is very, very tight. The staff have very little
flexibility within their week now, so asking them to volunteer to take on some extra things, the
good will isn’t there as much as it has been in the past. Equally headteachers are finding it
very difficult to release staff because things are so, so tight.
(LA interviewee 22)
While all the money’s been devolved by the Scottish Government to the Council through the
Concordat every Department in the Council is fighting for a slice of the cake. If we had ring
fenced funding for this it would have been monitored and audited very closely at national level
and that would have kept schools and Authorities very focussed on the fact that this has to be
done. We would have had more opportunities to release staff from school to undertake
curriculum planning.
(LA interviewee 28)
Three interviewees commented directly on the impact of the removal of ring-fenced monies
for Curriculum for Excellence and the impact on sustainability of support for collaborative
work within school clusters supported by release time. One interviewee (LA interviewee 8)
suggested that existing resource constraints had influenced the trialling process by limiting
possibilities for teachers meeting with peers and local authority officers outside school.
Restricted CPD budgets acted as a stimulus for considering the possibilities and potential for
peer support in school-led CPD.
My own feeling is that we have to build up the expertise and the knowledge that we have within
our own schools and establishments and encourage a lot more peer support: people within the
schools using their own knowledge and expertise to create and develop and not look for
outside help all the time.
(LA interviewee 9)
School-based provision also had the advantage of overcoming the difficulties in attending LA
sessions presented by geographical location for some teachers. The provision of schoolbased sessions did not however remove the difficulties of finding time within the school day
for collaborative work. One interviewee noted the limitations of twilight provision for teachers
with child care commitments beyond school hours.
Local authority officers recognised the importance of consulting with the schools in
discussion of appropriately tailored CPD provision and noted the limitations of the cascade
model. Several interviewees advocated an engagement design that elicited active
participation from the school community.
There is often a view that you speak to a Head Teacher about Curriculum for Excellence once
and they will then pass it on to their staff.
(LA interviewee 3)
We need to talk to teachers and find out what they need and not just decide what it is that we
think they need.
(LA interviewee 5)
CPD is not going on a course. If we could just get the message through that just doing it,
having a go, is CPD. Obviously alongside having a go, trying it out, is the time for reflection,
and that’s what staff involved in the learning teams and those who have engaged with it more
formally have said. Having the time to meet, discuss, reflect professionally, has been the most
valuable thing.
(LA interviewee 22)
The trialling process extended opportunities for delegated leadership, which were cited as
valuable by local authority personnel. The trialling process provided opportunities for
teachers to influence developments.
45
The class teachers and people involved in the trialling are the people who are making
decisions about how we’re going to take this forward in our Authority. They’re the people
making decisions about what we think about the outcomes, what we like about them, what we
don’t like about them, what we think needs to be changed. Often that can just be people sitting
in an Education Development Service area saying that, whereas this has been getting right
down to the classroom. The way we’re taking things forward now as an Authority has actually
come from them and not from a top-down approach.
(LA interviewee 25)
One interviewee described how funding for cross-curricular collaborative projects at an
authority level had prepared the way for further developments and encouraged teachers to
look at the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. Three local authorities had worked together to
offer a series of cross-sector and inter-authority engagement seminars as a precursor to
trialling. Another authority has established ‘curriculum reference groups’, composed of
volunteer teachers from across the curriculum areas, to work with and provide feedback on
the Draft experience and outcomes and to support colleagues among the wider school
teacher population through school-based CPD. Despite some uncertainty, local authorities
fitted for change drew effectively on previous experience to encourage distributed, active
participation from networks of schools and to encourage the adoption of a deliberative or
‘inquiry stance’ to future developments (Cochran Smith and Lytle, 2001).
4.8.
Summary
Despite the uneven nature of the trialling feedback process and the difficulties encountered,
local authority officers were keen to build on the experience and to share lessons with the
wider community. One interviewee intended to establish learning sets with groups of
teachers drawn from across sectors to ‘tease out’ the outcomes further. Another emphasised
the significance of learning from peers (rather than external experts) as a key to producing
changes in practice and proposed a coaching system to drive developments forward at
school level.
We will have to make sure that just because the trialling is finished, the experience has not
been lost. We are very keen at the centre to gather and collate the responses and to be able
to use them and work with them and build on that and maybe create opportunities for them to
share good practice and hope that that will stimulate and inform not just other schools that are
involved in the trialling but all schools will get the benefit from the trialling. So we will put
things in place to try to make sure that we use their experiences.
(LA interviewee 7)
We have got to give as many of our staff as much time as possible to reflect on the
Experiences and Outcomes. It’s a really important opportunity to ask fundamental questions
about the relevance of what you’re doing. If you’ve been teaching for a number of years, how
does what you’re doing as a teacher at the moment fit in with the aim and the principles of
Curriculum for Excellence?
(LA interviewee 21)
Another authority intended to promote the sharing of materials through a cluster engagement
model, wherein different clusters produce materials in targeted curriculum review areas.
Another interviewee highlighted the benefits of setting up ‘learning communities’ to improve
primary-secondary liaison and continuity and progression on school transfer. The trialling
process had also re-focused attention on the need to address curriculum structures within
secondary schools to accommodate greater opportunities for joint work and peer supported
professional learning. One local authority officer, for example, spoke of the need to
harmonise timetables to promote opportunities for collaborative work across secondaries (LA
interviewee 22).
46
All local authorities were working to align national policies and guidance with local aims and
expectations. Developments included: continued local consultation and engagement, for
example through workshops with children and young people, teachers, parents and families;
investment in leadership development; the use of ICT to support online professional learning
communities, including the development of WIKIs; target setting and the creation of ‘strategy
groups’ and ‘action groups’ to respond to the challenges and opportunities presented by
Curriculum for Excellence; and a commitment to ‘showcasing’ emerging good practice.
47
5. Colleges and Higher Education Institutions
5.1.
Introduction
This section reports the views elicited at focus group meetings held with representatives of
further education colleges and higher education institutions (HEIs). The topic guide for the
focus groups included coverage of: awareness, understanding of, and engagement with,
Curriculum for Excellence; views on the four capacities; factors that motivate learning;
interdisciplinary learning; assessment; stakeholders’ roles in the implementation of
Curriculum for Excellence and other emerging issues.
5.2.
Colleges
Participants were invited to take part in the discussions by the Scottish Further Education
Unit. Only four college staff members attended the Stirling event, whilst seven went to the
Glasgow discussion.
The conceptions of Curriculum for Excellence seemed to fall at either end of a continuum.
Two participants showed an excellent awareness of the Curriculum for Excellence
philosophy, ideals and content and what it is trying to achieve by ‘moving away [from an]
assessment-driven curriculum’. Their level of Curriculum for Excellence engagement
contributed to their overall understanding:
I chair the Royal Society of … Committee for Scotland so we’ve been involved with
Curriculum for Excellence as… when it started … five years ago, so I would say I’ve got a
good level of understanding.
I … understand the broad principles and have been part of a college group looking at the
implications for FE and … understanding what schools are doing because we’ve got a lot
of youngsters coming in who are school-college partners.
(College staff, Stirling)
However, most participants from college groups expressed the view that they remained ‘in
the dark’ for a long period. According to college staff, this lack of awareness of Curriculum for
Excellence is a reflection of the general state of Curriculum for Excellence awareness in their
respective colleges:
…nobody else in my department …. [They] know nothing about [Curriculum for
Excellence]. We don’t know anything about it.
(College staff, Stirling)
There’s not a buzz at the college about Curriculum for Excellence. It’s not discussed very
much.
(College staff, Glasgow)
This lack of awareness can easily have significant consequences leading to an incorrect view
regarding the main purpose of the curriculum. A college representative admitted to a
misconception of Curriculum for Excellence prior to the discussion:
What I thought it was, it’s the fact that there’s not enough people passing the subjects so
what we’ve done is … we’re going to make it easier so we get more people through.
(College staff, Stirling)
It was evident, though, that college staff wanted to familiarise themselves with Curriculum for
Excellence, knowing that college practices need to change to enable transformation ‘to flow
from secondary education into further education’ (College staff, Stirling):
48
I didn’t have an awful lot of knowledge of Curriculum for Excellence. I want to learn more
… and I want to know what the impact is going to be on our future student cohorts, what
it’s going to mean to us.
(College staff, Glasgow)
Colleges explained that attributes similar to the four capacities of Curriculum for Excellence
were already being promoted and developed as part of college ethos in general. Therefore,
the school ethos developed through Curriculum for Excellence will fit in nicely with the
college ethos. They perceived Curriculum for Excellence to have a ‘much stronger
[emphasis] on skills and attitudes than knowledge’ (College staff, Stirling):
…if these successful learners, confident individuals etc. if that is all being the ethos of the
schools in preparation for the students … then I think we would welcome it because that’s
pretty much our ethos … the ethos of any college….
(College staff, Glasgow)
An area of concern was expressed with regard to school pupils moving to colleges. Colleges
were concerned that there might be ‘a transition issue between school and college’ because
they have ‘different attitudes than some of the schools, different procedures and students
have to … come into college without … any preparation for it and be expected to cope’
(College staff, Glasgow).
Regarding the development of the four capacities, college staff suggested that they must be
considered alongside the needs of the particular student and the courses being studied
(College staff, Glasgow). They argued that there should be flexibility in shifting the balance
for these four capacities, as they are not on an equal footing for most occasions:
…the balance between knowledge, skills and attitudes depends very much on … the needs of
the individual student.
…this balance…is very much shifting sands…because depending on what the student is
there to do…developing knowledge might be the priority, in a more vocational-based course,
it might be skill base and with other students, it might be that attitude [is] the most important
thing and yet for all of these on any course, they’re all necessary.
…the other thing is that built into this is the idea that everybody is going to go ever upwards
and in many cases, it’s not ever upwards, it’s expanding at a certain level that you’re at and
being able to do that effectively and going over old ground again to maintain knowledge and
understanding and attitudes.
(College staff, Glasgow)
College representatives recognised that students ‘learn at different speeds’, and this, they
suggested, must be taken into account when planning for classroom activities:
…whether it’s pieces of paper or whether it’s a computer, it changes according to the
learner as well as to the deliverer.
(College staff, Stirling)
They also explained that regardless of how motivating the activities were, there was always a
chance that some students will remain unengaged:
Of course, [Curriculum for Excellence] activities will motivate and engage children and
young people but they’ll never motivate and engage all children and young people…one of
the things that we’ve always got to remember is that sometimes, activities become
boring…. You’ve got to constantly change to keep them engaged.
(College staff, Glasgow)
49
Questions were also raised concerning those who had already achieved one or more of
these four capacities. In an endeavour to cater for the low-achievers, college staff argued
that high-achievers might suffer as a result.
The only thing that concerns me at the moment…is those that are already confident,
successful learners…is there enough knowledge base? Is there enough stretching for
them?
(College staff, Stirling)
The college representatives’ comments highlighted three issues that could be considered in
interdisciplinary learning. Firstly, there is a need to establish connections from one subject
area to another. The second is that connections need to be made from subject-specific
lessons into real life practice. The third and last issue suggested was the need for
partnership. For example, two teachers teaching linked subject areas.
It was also made explicit that despite the benefits that can be generated by interdisciplinary
teaching, the actual practice is largely based on the resources available:
Quite often these cross-curricular activities are the first thing to go where there’s pressure
to reduce the number of units….
(College staff, Glasgow)
We have to make the learning relevant to the young people across the other learning
areas but also to life as well…but for teachers we have to look…unless we know…what’s
going on in other areas, we can’t link that across the curriculum….
(College staff, Glasgow)
It was suggested that if disruptive students would be given lessons and tasks which enable
them to see the bridge between their education and world of work, then learning would be
more relevant and this would facilitate behaviour management:
… some of the ones who are disruptive are disruptive because they’re not engaged in
learning because they’re doing boring, meaningless things and that there would be less
disruption if they can do things that are fun, that they can see the point of a bit more.
(College staff, Stirling)
College representatives also explained that it is the middle learners who often suffer when
there is too much class disruption:
…the top get on often…the middle gets lost and the bottom get attention and they’re the
ones that having taught in schools and done guidance and now see a lot of teachers, the
bottom disruptive pupils are allowed often to disrupt for everybody and the top ones will
get on in spite…, but those middle lot who want and need attention but won’t push
themselves forward for it are the ones that suffer because the disruptive ones are taking
too much energy, they’re not allowed to exclude them, they’re not allowed to put them
out…and…that is the great problem.
(College staff, Stirling)
This suggests that in making learning relevant for students, teachers should also carefully
address any existing behavioural problems or lack of class management.
Assessment was felt to be a contentious topic:
I don’t want to bring up the topic of assessment because I think this lovely, rosy picture of
wonderfully engaged children and learning experiences…. That’s why we’re all teachers,
that’s what we want…the pressures of achievement, retention and performance
indicators…stop us doing things the way we would really like to.
(College staff, Glasgow)
50
In general, college staff members were in agreement with the pedagogic ideals of the
Curriculum for Excellence, but in practice, they felt, teaching is an assessment-driven
activity. This restricts teachers with regard to the different learning activities that would
eventually help their learners to pass their exams and gain qualifications:
…because so much of what we do, certainly at National Qualification level, is competence
based. I think there’s an awful lot of teaching to the assessment and it’s been quite
restricted really in some ways and that might go against trying to develop broader skills.
(College staff, Stirling)
Another staff member confirmed what they felt to be the current overemphasis on
assessment-led teaching that hinders development of pupils’ ‘broader skills’. For this reason,
college staff welcomed the opportunity for teachers to enjoy teaching with no strings
attached, so to speak.
College staff members maintained that because of colleges’ rich experience with disaffected
learners, they had something to offer schools with regard to implementation of Curriculum for
Excellence, and a vital role to play in its overall success:
I feel that colleges because of the experiences that we’ve had over the years, we could
offer a lot to school teachers in continuing professional development of the styles of
engaging and challenging learners that we’ve learned over the years ….
(College staff, Stirling)
Since Curriculum for Excellence is devised not only to cater for the academically successful
students but also for those who might be needing more choices, more chances, colleges’
continuous partnership with schools through school/college liaison is expected to raise pupil
awareness of the other options available to them (College staff, Stirling).
5.3.
Higher Education Institutions
This section consists of the views of two groups of participants: HE representatives (9), and
the four Deans of Education, who took part in two separate focus group discussions. HE
representatives consisted of Customer Service staff, Learning and Teaching Committee
Chairpersons, Deans and Vice-Deans, amongst others.
Despite limited involvement, some HEI representatives expressed the view that they were
fairly knowledgeable and were ‘keeping up to date’ with Curriculum for Excellence and the
four capacities. One HEI representative acknowledged the significance of Curriculum for
Excellence for Scottish education:
…this whole project…is potentially a genuinely innovative project that could have a
significant effect on school education.
(HEI Representative)
Discussion revealed that one particular university became more interested in Curriculum for
Excellence after undertaking a ‘reflection on its own curriculum and processes’, which made
them realise ‘that there is a greater need for the university to form partnerships with schools
both in terms of the transition of learners but also in the recognition of the curriculum in its
wider sense from the school sector’ – an approach that is strongly supported by Curriculum
for Excellence (HEI representative).
It was argued very strongly by the Deans of Education that the very foundation for student
teachers to learn all the four capacities is through planning lessons for teaching and learning,
which is an essential part of what teachers are expected to do:
51
…it is about planning for learning in a very much wider context than whatever curriculum
document is in front of you. How we’re responding to Curriculum for Excellence is…to go
with our gut instinct…we’ve pulled back and we’re…focussing on the design principles and
we’re looking at our programmes to see if you’re teaching well…even if you’ve never even
heard of Curriculum for Excellence, how could you not be planning for successful
learners? How could you not be doing that? How could you not want children to be
confident in their learning and become confident? That’s nothing to do with the curriculum,
that’s just the way it is because you’re a teacher.
(Dean of Education)
Similarly, participants emphasised the role of the teacher in encouraging participation and
motivating learners. In this regard, this necessitates supporting teachers adequately in order
for them to accomplish this task successfully:
It must be about empowering the teacher to look for different ways of engaging the child. It
can’t be ten tips for a teacher because what happens if you come to 11. I don’t have any
more tips, I don’t know what to do so I would hope that we’re not going down this line of
motivating activities for providing that. That is up to individual teachers….
(Dean of Education)
Another Dean of Education also maintained that in making connections across curricular
areas, the whole endeavour is primarily teacher-centred:
Yes [the draft experiences and outcomes provide opportunities to make connections
across the curricular areas]… if people will…it’s the teachers that will provide the
opportunities, not the curriculum, not the outcomes, not the experiences. It’s the teachers
that have to provide them.
(Dean of Education)
Generally, the HEI representatives expressed a very favourable view of the ‘interdisciplinary
approach’ in the curriculum, after realising that strongly focusing on individual disciplines
might, in fact, prevent effective learning:
…we very much welcome the cross-curricular and interdisciplinary aspects of the
proposals because we have been increasingly identifying one of the barriers to learning of
young people coming from school is the university set-up, which is very strongly
disciplinary and so we are setting about giving young people ways in which they can
explore interdisciplinary enquiries.
(HEI representative)
Despite the potentially ‘exciting’ new ways of working, the importance was emphasised of
giving teachers sufficient time not only to fully understand the new mechanisms involved in
working collaboratively with other subject specialists, but also to develop their confidence as
they embark on this approach:
The potential to work across the curriculum in schools is hugely exciting…but again needs
a bit of time and confidence to develop because teachers are genuinely perplexed by it,
not clear as to what’s intended, afraid to step out of the comfort zone in some cases while
others embrace it quite happily.
(HEI representative)
According to the Deans of Education, linking lessons across different subject areas is not
without problems, primarily because of teachers’ widely held view that their main
responsibility is to ‘teach their subject’, as opposed to ‘teaching children’. Teachers also
tended to be protective of their subject and partnership with another subject specialist might
be viewed as a means of diluting or weakening their subject:
52
…everybody wants to hold on to their subject area because that’s what they’re there to do.
They don’t see it as teaching children. They see it as teaching their subject and if history
becomes diluted because they’re doing something with a much greater focus on modern
studies, then the potential to work across curricular areas…becomes ‘ floppy’.
(Dean of Education)
Curriculum for Excellence was viewed as having a real potential for ‘the development of
people who can make a contribution to society’ as opposed to individual institutions merely
meeting and maintaining a certain standard (HEI representative). A Dean of Education
agreed that Curriculum for Excellence offers a lot of potentially motivating activities for both
ordinary and disaffected learners. What would be challenging, however, is having a national
standard, which is linked to assessment:
…the importance of curriculum by motivating activities for all children…again, it comes
back to ‘Is it possible to prescribe that nationally?’
(Dean of Education)
The need for recognition of the wider achievement of graduates was raised not only because
it is addressed by Curriculum for Excellence, but also because it is a particular notion raised
by the employer groups. Universities felt that it is an area they needed to respond to (HEI
representative). Yet, it is fraught with difficulties because of the lack of a standard means of
measuring these achievements.
In connection with this, a lot of pupil experiences, which are very much part of young
people’s development and learning, are not formally assessed:
…experiences for youngsters at school seldom came through their Higher grades but
more through the experience of arts collaborating to produce a show of drama, of working
together, of teamwork, of discipline, of commitment…. None of that was assessed in any
formal way and it still isn’t.
(HEI representative)
It was also suggested that these additional ways of measuring pupils’ achievements could
potentially help university admissions officers to make their decisions if more than one
applicant presents with the same qualifications.
A Dean of Education observed teacher education’s key role in the roll out of the Curriculum
for Excellence, whilst expressing some concern relating to student teachers’ transition to
schools, as the ideas promoted in teacher education institutions may not coincide with what
they see in practice:
the responsibility lies on us as teacher educators to give [students] those experiences….
My concern is when they go into schools and see something that is totally different from
the experiences that we’re giving them, which is to say, be creative in your thinking, make
the connections in any way that you feel like doing it, don’t be straight-jacketted by the
draft experiences and outcomes….
...will need to have experience and mentors and people who can provide living examples
rather than just paper. Then, therefore, the teacher education places have got to be able
to contribute.… At the moment…they’re not being asked.
(Dean of Education)
It was contended that teacher educators’ main concern is ‘to make sure that the students
understand the Curriculum for Excellence in its broadest sense, in its broadest nature’, and
to ensure that links with other initiatives (e.g. Assessment is for Learning) were made clear to
them.
53
It was maintained that planning for the Curriculum for Excellence takes places ‘in a very
much wider context’, and thus requires partnerships between universities and local
authorities:
If we could work with local authorities, with groups of schools, etc.…people who might
provide resource and some of the troops needed, if this is going to really get down to for
the benefit of every child.
We all have partnerships and we all have well-established partnerships with our local
authorities. It’s just finding a route that allows us to participate in what is going
on…utilising our time spent in school…some way of joining that up with implementing
Curriculum for Excellence…the huge resource coming from universities if there was a sort
of two-way process. I think that’s a really positive next step, if you like, because we’re
there, we’re positive, we’re used to working with teachers, we can do it at a local level as
opposed to looking for the sort of national guidance….
(Dean of Education)
A consensus appears to be building that the proposed curriculum is bringing about a
‘oneness’ of education in Scotland, whereby integrated services would be indispensable:
…with Fiona Hyslop, there was a real sense from her that she saw a kind of oneness with
Scottish education and there shouldn’t be all these kind of disjointed…and that was quite
heartening.
We need to integrate children’s services and that whole provision…. How does this fit
with an integrated service…?
…another attempt…to tackle that sort of persistent level of under-achievement and I think
that’s where…we really have to focus on, that’s what’s new. This is yet another attempt to
try to come again at this. That is where the need for integrated services comes in.
(Dean of Education)
Working together will help ensure that pupils, who are at the receiving end, will get the most
out of the curriculum.
5.4.
Summary
Most of the discussions with the college staff and the two groups of HEIs centred around
the Curriculum for Excellence in general, rather than the Draft Experiences and Outcomes in
particular. Overall, the responses were limited by the generally low level of awareness of the
participants, especially in the college sector. Nevertheless, college staff welcomed the
principles underlying the Curriculum for Excellence since these fit well with the ethos
promoted in the FE sector. Additionally, Curriculum for Excellence has a strong message
concerning parity of esteem in the development of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Finally,
the new curriculum gives lecturers and teachers the opportunity to tailor their teaching not
solely to meet assessment requirements but also to develop learners’ broader skills.
Despite the limited involvement of several participants from the HEI groups in the
engagement process, the two groups as a whole demonstrated a reasonable understanding
of the proposed Curriculum for Excellence. Although the potential of the new curriculum to
develop people who ‘make a contribution to society’ was acknowledged, issues related to
national assessments and recognition of students’ wider achievement were raised. Deans of
Education saw that their institutions have a major contribution to make in preparing future
teachers who are suitably equipped and confident to meet the challenges of Curriculum for
Excellence.
54
Both college and HEI groups suggested that collaboration between key stakeholders is a
positive way forward, especially in regard to the promotion of interdisciplinary learning. In
addition, the value of partnerships between universities and local authorities was also
stressed to ensure that adequate levels of resource are allocated to support the
implementation of the new curriculum, especially with regard to the provision of ongoing
CPD. As one Dean of Education suggested, Curriculum for Excellence endorses a ‘oneness’
of education in Scotland through integration of services, collaboration and partnerships
amongst all the key stakeholders in education.
55
6. Professional associations, learned societies and voluntary organisations
6.1.
Introduction
This section reports the views professional associations, learned societies and a number of
voluntary organisations. The views of the professional associations and learned societies
are drawn from the written submissions that they made whereas the views of the voluntary
organisations were elicited during a focus group discussion. In both cases the views covered
the following topics, as in the previous section: awareness, understanding of, and
engagement with, Curriculum for Excellence; views of the four capacities; factors that
motivate learning; interdisciplinary learning; assessment, stakeholders’ roles in the
implementation of Curriculum for Excellence and other emerging issues.
6.2.
Professional associations and learned societies
The responses were received after consultation with moderate and large-sized groups of
individuals. At the same time, there were also individual responses on behalf of organisations
(e.g. Archaeology Scotland, Church of Scotland, Technology Teachers’ Association).
Comments were often a combination of ‘hopes and concerns’.
The Royal Society of Edinburgh (RSE) commends Curriculum for Excellence’s ‘attention to
fundamental skills and understanding, such as how to think, how to speak and write, how to
make links between diverse areas of learning, how to link formal learning to experience, how
to learn independently and how to solve problems’ – aspects, which they believe to have
always been endeavoured/practised by the best teachers and schools. The Association for
Science Education (Scotland) also believe in the centrality of the teacher’s role in the delivery
of a high-quality curriculum:
…a great deal will depend on the experience, skills and motivation of the practitioner on
whether the possibilities embraced within the Sci[ence] Experiences and Outcomes are
fully explored. The amount and quality of science a pupil will experience, particularly
primary pupils, will depend largely on the confidence of their teacher to teach any outcome
to a particular depth.
(Association for Science Education)
The Royal Society of Edinburgh contended that ‘the fundamental concepts, laws, methods of
operation, etc.’ in a few subjects (e.g. Mathematics, Science) were hardly mentioned – not so
much of the how but the ‘when’ and ‘what’ in order to achieve the outcomes. STEM-ED,
Scotland made a similar point in Science, stressing the ‘lack of definition of the basic
“substance” underlying the outcomes’.
Broad understanding, they explained, is crucial in subjects like Science as ‘competence
requires deep foundations of experiment- or experience-based knowledge within a logical
conceptual framework’. A similar issue was raised in Mathematics, where the drafts tended
to focus on the ‘consequences of mathematical learning’, instead of learning mathematics
per se (RSE).
For both Science and Mathematics, a strong emphasis was placed on the role of the teacher
who has expertise in a particular area of knowledge as well as the ‘teaching by telling’ or
‘lecturing’ technique. The RSE maintained that although these techniques, may seem ‘dry
and not an effective source of learning’, they are needed because ‘students would not, on
56
their own be able to answer the questions…the didacticism of the expert is required to
advance…understanding’:
Where will the bedrock of understanding come from whereby the next generation of
scientists or even of scientifically aware lay-persons will be developed?
Teachers are a key priority for a successful education system. Teaching effectively
requires the prior deep knowledge of a discipline and of the cognate areas of knowledge
that are typically introduced at each stage of learning.
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
The Royal Society of Edinburgh acknowledged that ‘the curriculum is important, [but] an
excellent cohort of teachers is arguably more important’. In giving pupils the opportunities ‘to
develop a specialist interest of a specifically disciplinary kind, ‘deep learning’ would be
essential for ‘the minority who will eventually take that discipline forward in the next
generation’:
…continuing attention needs to be given to maintaining the disciplines and to maintaining
the pedagogy of each discipline. …any pedagogical practices that don’t allow for that to
happen …. will, in the end, erode the disciplinary basis on which all sound learning is
based.
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
Since the teacher’s role is deemed crucial in improving learning, there was a convergence of
views from different professional bodies that ‘substantial and on-going teacher CPD’ would
be vital (STEM-ED, ASE, RSE, Scottish Screen, Scottish ICT Development Group, NHS
Lothian Health Promotion Service) especially at the national level (Scottish Catholic
Education Service).
Teachers are a key priority for a successful education system. Teaching effectively
requires the prior deep knowledge of a discipline and of the cognate areas of knowledge
that are typically introduced at each stage of learning.
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
The principle of promoting good teaching and good learning is independent of subject or
curriculum bias.
(Technology Teachers’ Association)
CPD is viewed as necessary for teachers to develop the skills and knowledge they need ‘to
be comfortable with what they teach’. The Scottish ICT Development Group also expressed
concern that ‘teachers who are not very technologically literate will not be ambitious or
challenging enough in their interpretation of these guidelines’. Apart from the knowledge
received, CPD sessions are opportunities for teachers to meet and exchange good practice
with teachers from different schools and other departments (ASE).
If a common understanding of each curricular area is to be developed by teachers
themselves, then a great deal more time and resource must be given for the continuing
professional development of teachers in their areas of disciplinary expertise and in
fostering of interdisciplinary working.
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
CPD sessions to allow teachers from different schools and for teachers from different
curricular areas in the same school to meet and share good practice. Several indicated that
inexperienced teachers and/or teachers lacking in confidence prefer more structured
teaching and learning and will therefore need support to adequately deliver the ideals of
the more active learning and teaching of Curriculum for Excellence. Student teachers
require the content knowledge of science, the practical abilities as well as the teaching and
presentational skills and the development of all of these results in a very steep learning
curve for many.
(Association for Science Education)
57
… the challenges lies also in school and professional development …. The work and
development required in school and in teacher development (inc ITE) is considerable.
(Scottish Screen, Social Studies)
Similarly, Scottish Screen on Literacy and English believed that ‘teachers in Scotland will
need the necessary skills to deliver 21st century literacy: pedagogical skills and a wider
literacy of their own’. According to the Technology Teachers Association, ‘experiences and
outcomes … [were] written in a style that would encourage a variety of teaching approaches’.
This will have major implications for both CPD for existing teachers and teacher educators as
well as for initial teacher education (Scottish Screen, Literacy and English; Technologies).
The Church of Scotland acknowledged that it may also take time for teachers to adapt to the
‘implications of the changes’, but they were confident that the pros outweighed the cons.
… teachers will need time to think of the implications of the changes and how they may be
taken forward as well as the opportunity to learn to work more closely with others across
subject and other boundaries. These processes will take time but it is vital that that time
and the accompanying resource is [sic] found if the new Curriculum is to achieve its
potential for all.
(Church of Scotland)
… the challenges lies also in school and professional development …. The work and
development required in school and in teacher development (inc ITE) is considerable.
(Scottish Screen, Social Studies)
If teachers are to achieve the aims aspired to in the Cover paper, they will need CPD that
enables them to locate their own experience of religion within diverse, contemporary
Scotland.
(Scottish Council of Jewish Communities)
Lastly, it was suggested that developing centrally the supporting explanation and guidance
for the Draft experiences and outcomes would be much preferred because ‘the task is far too
complicated and important to be attempted separately by each local authority or school’
(STEM-ED).
The RSE also suggested that another way forward might be: a) to exemplify how outcomes
could translate into real learning tasks, b) for a team of teachers and other educators to
create documents that offer guidance to teachers on logical conceptual frameworks that
could link outcomes to a stronger learning journey.
The Association for Science Education also stressed that in addition to CPD opportunities,
schools need funding – ‘not…for apparatus and equipment but for suitable accommodation
and for time to allow effective collaboration, development and CPD’ to happen (ASE).
Professional bodies could see the benefits of focusing on interdisciplinary learning, but they
also cautioned that it entails a lot of challenges, especially for the secondary sector.
The attention to interdisciplinarity is welcome. However, championing interdisciplinarity
without strong attention to and investment in the subjects (the ‘disciplines’) themselves is
futile.
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
Interdisciplinary working is very important to Curriculum for Excellence.
(Scottish ICT Development Group)
The potential for links are [sic] there – if implicit – in the outcomes. The focus on creativity,
particularly in the use of ICT, opens up exciting potential to bring together Technology and
Expressive Arts, as well as the more overt links to Science and Mathematics.
(Scottish Screen)
58
The Church of Scotland recognised that ‘RME has much to contribute and learn from other
areas of learning within the curriculum’, and so, it welcomed ‘a breaking down of the
traditional barriers between subjects’. STEM-ED Scotland believed that both interdisciplinary
application and breadth of perspectives are ‘important for both future specialists and nonspecialists [and for] better understanding of fundamentals in all subjects concerned’.
According to ASE ‘due to the structures and organisation of primary schools, cross-curricular
links were less of an issue than in secondary schools where more joint planning and
communication would be required’. Further, the Scottish Sikh Women’s Association
commented that administering cross-curricular work is ‘easier in the Primary school’ but ‘this
has to be done with sensitivity’. RSE also commented that interdisciplinary learning ‘is crucial
to encourage and create teaching opportunities that break down the barriers’ between
traditional subjects and their teachers, leading to enhanced dialogue and cross-learning. The
Scottish ICT Development Group also suggested that opportunities for interdisciplinary
working must be ‘highlighted in the document and exemplification’.
On a positive note, there are subjects, which are linked by default. For example, Social
Studies arguably addresses cultural issues as Expressive Arts and English do. Therefore,
Curriculum for Excellence will build a stronger relationship between these subjects ‘but the
challenge…lies in the existing subject and departmental boundaries in secondary schools’
(Scottish Screen).
Archaeology, for example, is an area that lends itself to interdisciplinary learning:
Archaeology can provide such an innovative approach to cross-curricular and
interdisciplinary work. The historic environment is part of our everyday lives – where we
live, work and play. Archaeology can help us gain an understanding of that historic
environment, and the remains within it, and also allows young people to develop a sense of
place and a respect for other cultures, become responsible citizens, and gain awareness of
global issues such as sustainability and cultural diversity.
(Archaeology Scotland)
The Technology Teachers’ Association (TTA) saw the potential of the Draft experiences and
outcomes for interdisciplinary learning but the difficulty entailed was also acknowledged:
It would be convenient to say that they do provide ample opportunities for
interdisciplinary links but past experience shows that this will be very difficult to
achieve. The strengths of individual subjects have ensured high quality outcomes in
the majority (admittedly, not all) of secondary schools for many years.
(Technology Teachers’ Association)
The TTA expressed their willingness to ‘encourage links with other areas of the curriculum
but … [were] wary of losing the quality that the traditional subject-based curriculum has given
us over many years’. The RSE suggested there was a need for caution and balance.
Although they agree that ‘psychological research suggests that coherent disciplinary
frameworks support the learning process and can also be creatively articulated as pillars of
cross-disciplinary understanding’, it is also the case that ‘[m]any powerful disciplinary
syntheses have been forged from deep disciplinary awareness’. Examples given were
mathematics and computing; and psychology and genetics.
In many cases, it was argued that ‘there is no robust understanding or framing of
interdisciplinary goals’ (RSE):
The relationships between subject areas are often imprecisely specified in the documents,
even though these connections are intended to be one of the strengths of the new
approach to the curriculum.
59
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
Whilst the opportunities for links to other areas of the curriculum are certain there, they
remain rather too implicit.
(Scottish Screen)
The weighting given to subjects was also raised as a potential issue. Expressive Arts and
Language, for example, were often seen as ‘instrumental’ for learning other subjects, and
therefore, there was a tendency not to give proper attention to their own characteristics
(Scottish Screen).
The greatest challenge, however, was perceived to be the guidance and support that
teachers will need to put the theory of interdisciplinary learning into practice:
The aim that ‘all science staff look for opportunities to develop and reinforce science
knowledge and skills within their teaching activities and work with their colleagues in other
subjects to plan inter-disciplinary studies and a coherent approach to the development of
literacy and numeracy skills, and to themes such as citizenship or enterprise’ is
encouraging, but will require an unprecedented cultural change in the teaching profession.
This challenge will not be met without a major injection of support and resource.
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
The proposed curriculum is a move away from an assessment-driven one, but concern
among professional bodies over pupils’ readiness for examination at the end of S4 was clear:
It is commendable that teachers are allowed the freedom to develop and deliver
mathematics to a depth and width suitable to the times and appropriate for the students in
their charge. However, this must be content described with a well- defined minimum level
of knowledge/skill to be attained. The required content must reflect the fact that the student
should be ready for external assessment by the end of S4.
(Scottish Mathematical Council)
…the documents are unclear about the ways in which valid and fair measurement might be
carried out.
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
It was suggested that the phraseology used for subjects like Expressive Arts make
measurement, let alone understanding, a challenge:
The oft-repeated phrase ‘magic, wonder and power’ of the arts…the phrase suggests
something numinous and unfathomable, rather than something which can – and should –
be analysed and critically understood.
(Scottish Screen)
In this regard, the Scottish Mathematical Council asks the fundamental question:
Whose responsibility is it to prepare for assessment, to make sure that between all
the subjects the entire list of attainment targets is met?
(Scottish Mathematical Council)
Like assessment, the topic of progression generated a lot of strong feedback from various
professional bodies mainly arising from the tension caused by the ‘vagueness’ and/or
‘flexibility for teachers’ characterising Curriculum for Excellence, which, they argued, have
implications for a clear progression:
There is a danger that the curriculum could be seen by pupils as fragmented, with no clear
view being transmitted that a coherent body of understanding and capability was being
established.
(STEM-ED Scotland)
60
…failure to define markers of progression adequately across the 5 levels of proficiency
[and] the related uncertainties caused by the absence of any indication of how progress
and achievement of outcomes are to be identified and reported.
(Association for Scottish Literary Studies)
…some…welcome the flexibility that such open statements allowed although this was of
great concern to most. Several responses indicated there was no clear progression of
ideas or skills detailed in the Sci E&O.
(Association for Science Education)
…at times, there is insufficient detail to indicate how learning [will] progress within levels –
eg. from P2 to P4.
(Scottish Catholic Education Service)
Outcomes which span several stages need to be broken down and rewritten, particularly
where they span second to third level. How do receiving secondary schools know what
incoming pupils’ experiences have been if there is not a clear expectation for the end of the
primary school? It’s important that the progression through levels is clearly shown within
every strand.
(NHS Lothian Health Promotion Service)
The Scottish Mathematical Council explained that the issues relating to progression are not
restricted to the students, teachers and schools. It could potentially cause confusion and lack
of uniformity for the whole of Scotland:
The P7/S1 interface faces major confusion if this vagueness persists. A school with ten
associated primary schools runs the risk of having ten standards to pull together in S1
unless the consortium sets up a working party to agree on a common policy. This will
have to take place the length and breadth of Scotland, involving an enormous duplication
of effort, and will still not ensure a reasonably uniform approach across the country.
(Scottish Mathematical Council)
The Royal Society of Edinburgh provided a detailed explanation of what they believed the
proposed curriculum lacked:
…the proposals are not yet workable as a revised curriculum. The first problem that the
Society identifies is a lack of coherent architecture, either in the sense of a theory of how
children progress from level to level, or in the sense of over-arching themes that might give
coherence across diverse curricular areas. …The proposals offer no account of how
children progress through levels or kinds of learning, and offer no sense of learning as
cumulative. For example, the five levels of the curriculum are arbitrarily imposed, with no
rationale being offered for them or any definition of them other than as sequential stages.
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
The following accounts demonstrate how professional bodies were aware of the contribution
that they could make to the implementation of the new curriculum.
Firstly, they acknowledged that they could support in planning the curriculum. STEM-ED
believes that ‘inputs from science centres, industry and other external agencies needed to be
explicitly planned and integrated into the curriculum development’. Scottish Screen ‘would
welcome the opportunity to advise’ on the use of moving image and related media as critical
elements of’ the Curriculum for Excellence. Likewise, Archaeology Scotland offered to refine,
amend or develop further any of the learning outcomes for Social Studies, whilst the British
Red Cross would welcome the opportunity to continue the discussion with Learning and
Teaching Scotland regarding their submission. Likewise, the Scottish Council of Jewish
Communities would also ‘very much welcome the opportunity to work with LTS in the
development of a curriculum that truly engages with all the people of Scotland’.
Others think that their support would be more relevant to pupils and young people as they
begin to learn under the new curriculum. For example, The Sustainable Development
61
Education Liaison Group (SDELG) ‘recommends that pupils visit each of the sustainable
development priority areas twice in their school career’. Also, although there was a question
as to why the contribution of librarians in supporting Curriculum for Excellence was not
indicated, it was felt that libraries could directly support overall implementation:
Children and young people are natural explorers but they often need assistance so that
they read widely enough to develop their ideas, learn how to express their view articulately
and develop a love of language.
(Scottish Library and Information Council and Chartered Institute of Library and Information
Professionals)
Others see their role as something that could have an impact on Scotland’s future. The
BioIndustry Association Scotland explained how they engage informally with students ‘to
promote interest in science and…make recommendations regarding skills issues for the
industry’. This was believed to be crucial because failing to retain an interest in science as a
career will have ‘a damaging effect on the number of future graduates and seriously
undermine the knowledge economy and skills base’.
Finally, in order for Curriculum for Excellence to avoid the assessment-driven model of the
curriculum, as well as to work towards ‘the development of common understanding of the
structure and details of a curriculum’ but not ‘centralisation of control of the curriculum’, the
Royal Society of Edinburgh advocated a working partnership with the different stakeholders
in education:
To avoid an assessment-driven focus, developing the syllabus will require that teachers
work in partnership with each other and with people from universities, specialist highereducation colleges, and organisations with particular expertise in certain curricular areas.
A consensus could be reached by teachers of each specific subject, consulting with
disciplinary experts from other sectors such as universities, research institutes and
business. Government and its agencies…have a role in encouraging the development of
these common aims.
(Royal Society of Edinburgh)
6.3.
Voluntary groups
Only one session was held to gather the views of ten represented voluntary organisations
including: Christian Aid; the Duke of Edinburgh’s Award; the Firefly Arts Company; The
Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals; Callander Youth Project, Scottish
Muslim Parents’ Association; YMCA Scotland; the Red Cross; Barnardo’s Scotland; Glasgow
South West Regeneration Agency; and the World Wildlife Fund. There were twelve
participants in total.
The voluntary sector representatives demonstrated a sound understanding of Curriculum for
Excellence as well as very active involvement with both primary and secondary schools
(specifically with teachers, pupils and disengaged young people):
We do a lot of work around sustainability, citizenship and international issues so we did
have some input into the writing of the outcomes….
(Voluntary sector representative)
We provide a flexible curriculum and experience for young people…. We cater to the most
vulnerable young people in the school…we’re seen as a best practice example of working
directly with a high school.
(Voluntary sector representative)
We do quite a lot of work in schools, some of it is with disengaged young people…We’re
particularly interested in working in primary schools with teachers to develop their informal
education skills so that they can learn how to deliver the four capacities, and we work
62
especially with the [name of city] Council to develop new professional development
opportunities for primary school teachers.
(Voluntary sector representative)
The voluntary sector’s engagement is wide-ranging – from informal outreach engagement
work and ‘voluntary teacher schemes’ to writing and trialling Draft experiences and
outcomes, some of which received recognition.
It was pointed out that although only the four capacities are very prominent in the Curriculum
for Excellence, it is, in fact, more ‘holistic’ and ‘balanced’ than this might suggest, with many
other skills and values (e.g. employability) embedded in it. There was also a suggestion that
confidence is an essential element in developing all the other capacities further:
…across the four capacities, you’re looking for confident individuals. Unless you’re a
confident individual, you will not become a successful learner.
(Voluntary sector representative)
In a similar way, pupils’ performance, especially in literacy and numeracy, is considered
critical in their development of the four capacities:
… I have boys who are in fifth and sixth year who are on our programme because they can
barely write their name…If we haven’t paid enough attention to literacy and the numeracy
in primary school, and then as they’re going through high school, they’re never going to
become responsible citizens, effective contributors and confident individuals…unless their
numeracy and…literacy is sorted out first.
(Voluntary sector representative)
The representatives of different voluntary sector organisations also focussed their discussion
on ‘shared understanding’ and the measurement of these four capacities, arguing that until
an unambiguous and common understanding of the capacities is achieved, there will always
be concerns relating to measurement or assessment:
…we need to understand and to have a shared understanding of what we mean by a
confident individual…which is a very complex term, before people try to start measuring it
in some way and really get down to a certain set of skills or a certain set of attributes….
… our starting point is the four capacities…I think it’s really good language that youth work
can gather in underneath…but to be delivered, that obviously has to go somewhere a bit
more focussed. …that is still flexible and adaptable and…is measured under the four
capacities…rather than…specific outcomes.
(Voluntary sector representative)
Although they acknowledged that the four capacities needed further refinement and focus,
they felt it was important that the Curriculum for Excellence’s flexibility and adaptability be
retained. They also emphasised that ‘education is not just what happens in the school or in
the playground or the classroom’, and therefore, different stakeholders need to work together
to provide a comprehensive learning experience to pupils.
In terms of motivating school pupils, the representatives of the voluntary sector believed that
Curriculum for Excellence’s major impact will be on the low-achievers, the disaffected and
disengaged young people:
…it is only going to make a difference to the kind of young people, the disaffected,
disengaged young people….
(Voluntary sector representative)
The case was strongly argued that an individual pupil has a set of individual needs affecting
the kind of learning tasks and activities that can be regarded as motivating. This learning, as
was argued, was not restricted to what is taking place inside the classroom and poses a
63
challenge for how schools can accommodate various learning experiences in order to
encourage different types of pupils to learn:
…a classroom with a teacher and a blackboard does not work for every child.…It’s about
recognising that learning for every individual is individual and it has to be person-centred
and it has to recognise that some kids just don’t learn well in a classroom and the only way
you might be able to get them to learn is to take them outside and get them digging trees in
a forest or take them down to the harbour and teach them how to fish.…if it’s going to
motivate really disengaged young people, it has to be much more fundamental than just
‘how to we change things in a classroom?’. I agree, it’s not all about the classroom and
how do we recognise that other learning environments are as important as the classroom
setting?
(Voluntary sector representative)
Voluntary sector representatives view ‘institutional changes’ as vital to providing a range of
motivating experiences to pupils, for which they see greater ‘voluntary sector involvement’ as
a way forward.
In relation to the recognition of pupils’ wider achievement, voluntary sector representatives
believed that this is ‘something that good teachers have been doing for a long time’. What
they were very keen to know was how it would be rolled out – with the biggest question ‘How
is it going to be measured?’
…looking at how Curriculum for Excellence can help recognise the wider achievement of
young people…how schools are now going about doing that? ‘How are [schools] going to
recognise the achievements of young people beyond the traditional school curriculum?’
(Voluntary sector representative)
They anticipated that a lot of support for teachers through CPD as well as new ways of
assessment and the HMIe’s ‘inspection framework’ would be required. Other people in the
group, however, questioned whether the notion of measuring pupils’ wider achievement was
reasonable:
We have an education system whose assessment methodology is based on exams and
whose teaching methodology, although it’s changing and there are variations, mostly
involves the unit of a classroom, a class and a teacher. I think there is this very
fundamental question of ‘Can you measure these things and can you deliver and cultivate
these things in a structure that’s fundamentally designed for exams and classrooms and
one teacher per class?’ .
(Voluntary sector representative)
The voluntary sector argued that their experience of working with a range of different
professions gave them ‘massive skill’ that could indeed ‘help to move the Curriculum for
Excellence’ forward. Despite being seen as ‘second class providers’ when compared to
formal education, they have skills to offer and examples of good practice in working with
young people:
I see the implications for my role and my organisation along with the ideas network in
Scotland, which I think is a really good example of collaboration between voluntary
sectors… from a development education point of view but…in youth work sectors as
well…. I see a real opportunity for pedagogy, with regards to the content being skills-driven
and skills-focussed, and…being very values based and social justice being at the heart of
what we are as an organisation; I see a real opportunity.
(Voluntary sector representative)
I strongly believe that the point of Curriculum for Excellence is about it being a bit more
than teachers and schools. It’s about society. So it’s about all professionals who work with
young people in learning environments.
(Voluntary sector representative)
64
6.4.
Summary
A large number of participants from the professional associations, learned societies and
voluntary organisations demonstrated a deep awareness and understanding of the
Curriculum for Excellence, and many had had some involvement in its development.
From the perspectives of the professional associations and learned societies, the centrality of
the teachers’ role in the effective delivery of the curriculum was widely recognised. As one
professional body asserted, ‘the curriculum is important [but] an excellent cohort of teachers
is arguably more important’. This has implications for the continuing professional
development teachers will require in order to implement the new curriculum effectively. It is
suggested that CPD support might involve several aspects: a) interpretation and
exemplification of the guidelines in the proposed curriculum; b) in-depth knowledge of other
subject areas (for interdisciplinary learning and teaching); and c) a variety of teaching
approaches and techniques for effective delivery of the lessons.
Despite the challenges that interdisciplinary learning entails, professional associations and
learned societies welcomed it and saw it as a channel for expression of creative teaching.
However, an issue was raised relating to the more complex structure in secondary schools
where teaching is more highly compartmentalised.
Some participants also expressed reservations regarding progression and assessment due
to the ‘vagueness’ and ‘flexibility’ characterising the proposed curriculum, which, it was
asserted, would affect students, teachers, and schools, and could cause confusion. In this
regard, a voluntary sector representative emphasised the importance of having a ‘shared
understanding’ of the four capacities, which will have a positive impact on teaching and
learning across Scotland. Similarly, a voluntary sector representative asserted that issues
relating to assessment (e.g. summative assessment, HMIe’s inspection framework) need to
be addressed and clarified. The Curriculum for Excellence was generally commended for its
focus on skills, which they thought would be appropriate in meeting the needs of all learners.
One point that came across very strongly from both groups was the important role that
professional associations, learned societies and voluntary organisations felt they could play
during implementation of Curriculum for Excellence.
65
7. Parents’ and employers’ perspectives
7.1.
Introduction
This section reports on views expressed by parents and employers at focus groups
organised during the four regional events referred to earlier. As with the previous sections
the comments follow the same pattern of themes: awareness, understanding of, and
engagement with, Curriculum for Excellence; views of the four capacities; factors that
motivate learning; interdisciplinary learning; assessment, stakeholders’ roles in the
implementation of Curriculum for Excellence and other emerging issues.
7.2.
Parents
A total of 27 parents from Edinburgh, Glasgow, Aberdeen and Dundee provided their views
through focus group discussions held at the regional events organised by LTS.
Most parents across all the parent groups expressed the view that they only had a very
minimal knowledge of Curriculum for Excellence. Engagement events were taken as good
opportunities to get a better grasp of the new curriculum.
Some parents had access to information because of special roles they held (e.g. Chair of the
Parent Council) and were more aware of the issues affecting the new curriculum. Generally,
however, parents were not likely to be aware of the Curriculum for Excellence and all its
implications for their children’s learning.
In principle, most parents did not dispute the soundness of Curriculum for Excellence ideals,
the more rounded perspective given to education and its impact on all types of learners.
Parents contended that the Curriculum for Excellence’s four capacities constituted what ‘a
good teacher should be teaching in a classroom’ (Parent, Dundee). However, their lack of
knowledge about how the curriculum would be executed was a cause for concern:
I think nobody can really disagree with the four capacities, I think they’re absolutely
excellent, but it’s how that then goes into the subjects … what framework is there?
(Parent, Edinburgh)
…the four outcomes are a very good spread of things. What … is necessary … is further
discussion, continuing and everlasting discussion on the ways in which some of these
things can be opened up and unpacked.
(Parent, Aberdeen)
Many parents welcomed the broadening of the curriculum in order to accommodate a
balanced integration of knowledge, skills and attitudes, which they believe will be appropriate
for a greater number of children and young people. Nevertheless, they also questioned
whether more might, in fact, mean less when it comes to students’ learning:
…it is very important that although these are all things that we want to include in the
curriculum … the basic academic knowledge, at whatever level, must not suffer … the
school day is not going to get any longer, presumably, so quite how do you squash a
lot more things into the same timetable?
(Parent, Dundee)
According to some parents, the balance of the curriculum depends on the nature of the
subjects. They suggested that each curricular area has a different focal point and, thus,
requires a suitable approach:
66
…it might be a question of finding different sorts of balance in different sorts of curriculum
areas. It may well be that knowledge is more important in one, skill more important in
another, attitudes more important in a third.
(Parent, Aberdeen)
Most parents pointed out that a more balanced curriculum necessitates ‘a change of attitudes
… for instance, the assumption with parents and teachers and a lot of other people that
academic values are the more important or perhaps the only important thing’ (Parent,
Aberdeen). Parents recognised the way in which Curriculum for Excellence implicitly
promotes a parity of esteem between knowledge and skills.
There was recognition that the increased emphasis on skills and students’ greater
involvement in learning can be very motivating and assist student learning, especially of
those who are ‘not academically capable’ (Parent, Dundee). This also depends on ‘how
imaginative the schools are in providing activities or what they see as activities that are
worthwhile’ (Parent, Aberdeen). More importantly, parents acknowledged the teachers’
crucial role in making this happen:
…if there is a connection between the child and the teacher, it helps the learning.
It takes a quality teacher. A charismatic teacher.
All children are inquisitive and want to learn but if [teachers] don’t make the subject
interesting, the kids won’t want to know. They will turn their back on it.
(Parents, Glasgow)
Most parents across all the parent groups expressed their reservations about treating the
curriculum reform as a panacea for successful learning:
I just think that no matter what …., you are always going to have 1–-5% of children who are
not going to achieve anything. …children who bunk school … nine times out of ten …
children have problems at home.
(Parent, Glasgow)
Other parents were in agreement that home environment has a considerable impact on pupil
success. They intimated that stronger ‘parental partnership in devising activities’ and greater
‘parental involvement through the four capacities’ were to be encouraged. At the same time,
it was acknowledged that there are always parents whose low expectations of their children
and lack of adequate support lead pupils to be less motivated (Parent, Dundee).
Parents could see the value of ‘bridging knowledge and skills between different subjects’
acknowledging that some subject areas were more naturally linked than others.
…it encourages children to think away from the tramlines, ‘This is Geography, this is
History, this is English’, which, if you’re going to talk about children moving out into the
wider world, they really need to know that life isn’t divided into little boxes like that….
(Parent, Edinburgh)
It was also asserted that cross-curricular links were not entirely new. In the past, pupils
learned lessons across various curriculum areas; however, the connections were not actually
made explicit (Parents, Edinburgh and Dundee).
Cross-curricular links are perceived to be easier to achieve in the primary sector – where one
teacher delivers all the subjects – but it remains a challenge for the secondary sector.
Parents in the Edinburgh focus groups pointed out that the three fundamental reasons for the
difficulty were: a) insufficient knowledge of content; b) lack of inter-departmental links; and c)
short lesson periods. One of the perceived obstacles to progression is a lack of knowledge of
the content of the subject(s) being cross-referred to. Likewise, if an inter-departmental link is
67
not successfully established, teachers’ efforts may lead to duplication rather than connection.
Thirdly, since ‘a lot of projects…are concentrated in short periods of time’, this too works
against establishing cross-curricular links. Parents also viewed the timetabling in the
secondary sector as detrimental to the successful practice of making connections across
curriculum areas, and felt that this needs serious attention.
Parents also expressed the view that successfully making the transition from one sector to
another appeared challenging, especially if each sector achieved differing levels of success
in establishing cross-curricular links:
…there needs to be a bit of coordinated learning amongst primary teachers and secondary
teachers about the transition through … P5 to S2.
(Parent, Aberdeen)
…it’s stemming from the nursery years through the primary school to the transition at high
school … the fundamental part is leaving primary to go to high school.
(Parent, Edinburgh)
Having said that, they also recognised that if primary pupils were trained to learn in a crosscurricular way, the next generation of secondary pupils would be more skilled at it (Parent,
Glasgow).
In the past, some subjects were said ‘not [to] take real life into consideration’ (Parent,
Dundee) as lessons were not linked to application. Parents held positive views about the way
in which the development of employability skills in the Curriculum for Excellence was tied in
with their children’s education, as they felt that it is represents an important step towards
employment (Parent, Aberdeen):
I think it makes your learning much more relevant to what you experience outside in life
because life is not an English lesson or a Maths lesson, it’s all of them together.
(Parent, Glasgow)
What you find is that you need a bit of practicality in your life, when you go into the big bad
world to … work for an employer. Bringing in there you have your self-confidence, you
have a bit of pride in yourself, time-keeping – how do you bring that into the framework of
an education, to bring that type of life experience, for people who are leaving at the age of
16?
(Parent, Edinburgh)
Another parent expressed the view that Curriculum for Excellence is by-and-large more
relevant to those who are not inclined to pursue academic learning, and presented two
possible scenarios of how pupils might respond:
…for the vast majority of young people between now and 200 years in the future and 200
years in the past, you could stick them in front of a dominie in the village school, you could
st
stick them in front of a computer in the 21 century and they will learn…. This Curriculum
for Excellence has to address the non-vast majority – the ones who are not going to
respond … the pessimist in me wants to say that it doesn’t matter what you do, they are
not going to learn. The optimist in me wants to say … there must be a better way of doing
things and hopefully, this is a better way of doing it.
(Parent, Glasgow)
For parents across all the parent groups, the new curriculum is a positive move to establish a
strong connection between education and the world of work, and as a result, pupils would
realise for themselves how their overall school experiences are tailored for future living.
Parents were keen to understand ‘how the transitioning period will affect the qualifications
that [pupils] sit and also the way in which they are taught’ (Parent, Dundee). They disliked
the old system whereby teachers were merely ‘ticking the boxes and pushing the kids
68
through’ resulting in high attainment, but leaving ‘gaps in their knowledge’ (Parent,
Edinburgh):
…a lot of teachers now are under pressure with targets, targets, targets but they are too
busy rushing through the curriculum to get through what they have to do that they are
forgetting the child.
(Parent, Glasgow)
Parents also viewed ‘the influence of the HMI inspections … [as] detrimental to learning’.
They thought that the whole assessment system needed a review if teachers were expected
to have freedom to tailor their lessons under the new Curriculum for Excellence (Parent,
Aberdeen).
Parents agreed that pupils’ other achievements were important and were very concerned
that these should be recognised. Since to date they have neither been assessed nor lead to
any type of qualifications, parents expressed the fear that failure to recognise non-academic
achievement could eventually defeat the purpose of developing the four capacities:
…a young lady in sixth year who had five Higher A passes in her subjects said ‘Well, I
have done that but I have also done a lot of other things. How are you… going to recognise
these other achievements that I have had in other parts of my social life?’ It was a good
question….
(Parent, Aberdeen)
I am always taught…that if it is not measured, then it won’t get done, so unless we come
up with a way of actually measuring the confidence and the effectiveness and the
responsibility of our children, they will… still be seen as the second class part and it will still
be the ‘Successful Learners’ that get measured because it’s dead easy to mark an exam.
(Parent, Dundee)
Some parents also raised their concern that, if assessment processes were all to change, it
might affect their ability to support their children with their studies. Some felt that extra
support for parents might be needed (Parent, Edinburgh).
In general, parents thought that all stakeholders including employers, further education,
higher education, and parents themselves have a role to play to make Curriculum for
Excellence a success (Parents, Aberdeen, Edinburgh).
Parents felt that some guidance, through a booklet or posted on the school website, would
be useful for those who were keen to be involved in their children’s education, and that this
would assist them in maximising the parental support they provided:
…there should be a homework booklet and it says ‘This is what we expect of the parents’
and if there is a website or something like that, that would be good practice within a school
… it would be much easier if somebody was devising a course nationally … and tell all
parents, ‘Look, this is what….’
(Parent, Edinburgh)
Parents need to be informed as to what the plan is for that particular term or period and
what their objectives are and their educational aims are in that period of time….
(Parent, Glasgow)
Parents thought that they ought to be provided with specific information about their children’s
education, to ensure that they could lend a hand, if needed. For some, it is the parents’ duty
to ‘be involved in their child’s lives all around them and that includes their education…and life
is just about education, all of life is education’. They are convinced that they have a
69
contribution to make to help Curriculum for Excellence make the best possible impact on
their children’s lives.
7.3.
Employers
A very small group of employers’ representatives participated in the focus group discussions
(i.e. 22), partly due to the day/time chosen. On all occasions, some delegates who came as
‘parents’ joined the employer group whenever appropriate.
There were employers who demonstrated a very good understanding of Curriculum for
Excellence’s four capacities due to their secondment experiences,13 attendance at a few
presentations, and information provided by the education press. Several employer
representatives who took part in the discussions also admitted that it was only recently that
they developed their awareness of Curriculum for Excellence, emphasising that it was
restricted to ‘general awareness’ only (Employer, Aberdeen), and that it presented a ‘steep
learning curve’ for them (Employer, Dundee):
I am aware of the title. I am aware a little of some of the progress towards skills for work
qualifications, but I don’t really have much in-depth knowledge about what Curriculum for
Excellence really stands for.
(Employer, Dundee)
Yet, they believed that the curriculum revision is a timely initiative for Scottish education in
order to meet the needs of industry in the next few years:
Wearing an employer’s hat, I think it is the time for it. We are really looking for changes that are
going to impact five, six, eight, nine years down the road.
(Employer, Aberdeen)
Just like parents’ groups, employers in general supported the Curriculum for Excellence
principles. They conveyed their willingness to ‘support engagement between employers and
the school’ towards the realisation of a more relevant curriculum (Employer, Dundee).
What they tended to question, however, is the practicality of the whole process – how it
would be implemented and how realistic the delivery would be – as it would subsequently
impact on the learning experience of children and young people:
It all sounds like … ‘Motherhood and apple pie’…. It’s all good principles but I have
absolutely no appreciation … about how it is going to be implemented in the classroom and
what the effect is going to be on our children….
(Employer, Aberdeen)
I think on paper it looks excellent. …it’s a big change in the way teachers deliver and I think
the balance of it developing knowledge, skills and attitudes will depend very much on the
teacher that’s doing it and how they do it….
(Employer, Glasgow)
Several employers agreed that Curriculum for Excellence is bringing out the development of
attitudes and invaluable ‘soft skills’, which previously lacked adequate attention. These skills
are necessary in producing ‘confident individuals’ and ‘responsible citizens’, which an
Edinburgh employer regarded as key when interacting inside and outside one’s working life
and with the general community:
13
These provided employers with a range of different experiences and levels of engagement. Some of
them worked directly with the youngsters on the four capacities to develop these skills (Employer,
Edinburgh).
70
…if we manage to achieve even 50% of these things in a youngster coming out and
coming into retail, we would be more than happy with that. Particularly the confidence and
self-esteem aspects of it, we would then take them on board to train from there.
(Employer, Dundee)
The development of a more rounded individual was felt to make for someone who is more
employable than one who passed their exams but lacks a lot of employability skills (e.g.
communication) (Employer, Edinburgh). At the same time, Aberdeen employers expressed
concern that promotion of ‘the all round skills’ may lead to a scenario whereby schools lack
‘the ability to develop experts in an area’:
…are we trying to develop a similar bunch of people that are very similar and all very
capable of doing a single job but at the same time, we can’t all be the Chief Scientist or the
Chief Engineer? …we do have to have at the end of it a breadth of people and abilities.
(Employer, Aberdeen)
An employer from Glasgow commented on what he observed to be a gap: ‘the one word
that’s missing in probably all of [the four capacities] if we’re talking about equality or parity
between vocational and academic subjects, the word “skills” has to go through all of the four
areas’. Likewise, a Dundee employer suggested that ‘competitiveness and managing
disappointment is a very interesting and worthwhile contribution’ when developing pupils’
confidence.
Employers also cautiously pointed out the danger of losing good things that characterised the
previous curriculum in favour of offering a broader curriculum, and felt that although the
bases for developing the four capacities are equally sound, it is neither necessary nor
possible for students to progress in all areas:
I have concerns that we are going to be trying to do too much and it might affect some of
the things that we are good at, but there are all sorts of things … that are good and you
would think would be good from an employers’ point of view.
(Employer, Aberdeen)
I think it is also important to remember that everyone is different and it might not be
possible for everyone to be all of these things. Everyone has different strengths and
weaknesses and it is important to try to address the weaknesses but you have to
remember that sometimes people just can’t or won’t be able to.
(Employer, Aberdeen)
According to some employers, Curriculum for Excellence ‘will be particularly appropriate for
the ones that are requiring more motivation or that are disengaged’ (Employer, Aberdeen),
because when teachers ‘pinpoint individual skills, it should actually help disaffected young
people because, rather than seeing their shortfalls, they’ll see what skills they actually do
have and how they can progress with them’ (Employer, Glasgow). Employers also argued
that for the key to making the Curriculum for Excellence framework effective lies in pupils
having a very good grasp of the rationale behind what they are learning and how this can be
applied in the real world:
…it is important to get children to understand why they are learning and how to apply this
in the big bad world.
(Employer, Dundee)
The locus for realising the potential of the Curriculum for Excellence was attributed to the
teachers’ role, with complementary support from parents. In fact, employers strongly
suggested that there should be space for genuine partnership between teachers, parents,
careers advisers and schools to make the curriculum not only motivating but also relevant
(Employer, Dundee):
71
…the effective teachers were the ones who made you enjoy your lessons and got you
involved. …the framework itself won’t make it work. It’s going to be the quality of the
teaching, the quality of the parental support, and if you get those two things right … they’ll
become more engaged with the whole process.
…I think apprenticeship is very important. But it’s also again … due to the quality of
teaching, mentoring and coaching …. And parental involvement is a great one.
(Employer, Edinburgh)
With regard to the issue of motivating learners, there were employers who cautioned that the
new framework may, in fact, cause ‘more able pupils’ to become demotivated if their abilities
are not sufficiently stretched:
I have concerns that it will … demotivate the more able pupils who lose interest if they are
not sufficiently challenged and there is not enough for them to do.
(Employer, Aberdeen)
It’s not just about those who are under-achieving, it’s those who are over-achieving, so if
you’ve got a scenario where you want to deliver something that’s alive and kicking to make
it more available and understood. …the penny might not drop for a long time with other
youngsters … how do you then with the youngster that the penny has dropped keep them
motivated if it’s in a classroom situation where they’re all travelling at the same speed?
(Employer, Glasgow)
The concept of promoting cross-curricular links between subject areas was very positively
received by employers, because this approach to learning is likened to life beyond school,
where knowledge and skills are inherently interlinked and are applicable to different contexts:
I think that it is important because as they go out into the world, you can’t look at things in
isolation….
(Employer, Aberdeen)
…life is cross-curricular. Nothing when you leave school is in curricular areas, so why
should it be when you’re at school?
(Employer, Glasgow)
Another group of employers argued that only natural and appropriate links, as opposed to
contrived connections, should be pursued:
Where appropriate. Where reasonable. Where it makes sense to do it. … where there’s a
real relevance there … sometimes you wonder if its just being done to tick the box and
make sure, yes, we’re very cross-curricular. It should only be where it’s the right thing to
do.
It has to be reasonable, it has to be appropriate, has to be of benefit doing it. It’s like
anything, there should be a real benefit. If the benefit is only in the kids getting broad
experience, then that might be a big enough benefit….
(Employer, Edinburgh)
It was also suggested that teaching across the curriculum is inadequate. Instead, making the
links explicit was regarded as important, because some young people fail to see the links if
the explanation is unclear (Employer, Edinburgh).
Employers’ main criterion as to whether learning is relevant boils down to the question of
attitudes and employability skills rather than the qualifications achieved. Likewise, making
specific subject areas more applicable to daily life is perceived to be a very positive move:
…the thing that employers tend to want to know about is can young people communicate?
Will they fit into a team? Will they be able to learn? Will they be motivated? ...there’s more
than just being able to understand the qualifications, [this] isn’t necessarily a priority for the
employer who’s running a business and watching his bottom line.
(Employer, Glasgow)
72
…employers look for the attitudes. The willingness to learn, the right behaviours … it is
very important that from a very early age, from primary age that children develop and have
those instilled. That those types of behaviours and attitudes to do with time-keeping, team
working, compromise, communication … they know how to negotiate with one another ….
Employers usually, it’s not the qualifications they are looking for, it’s the right attitudes and
the work ethic
(Employer, Dundee)
Taking the future into consideration, employers were keen to point out the needs of industry.
They also contended that the curriculum might address the influence of the media, as it
obviously encourages certain careers more than others:
I think these are all general abilities that we want to encourage in people but we must not
forget … that we have a great shortage of … engineers and vocationally trained people….
We want rounded individuals but we need experts as well to develop our high tech
industries which is where Scotland is going to have to progress.
(Employer, Aberdeen)
…perhaps as a society, we don’t particularly value [low-profile jobs] and of course, that is
… reflected in our young people’s attitudes … there is an element of realism that has to be
in this curriculum … and that has to be managed.
(Employer, Dundee)
Employers raised various points in relation to assessment. Accordingly, the league tables
impact strongly on the whole notion of assessment, whereby the performance of the students
and of the schools are measured by the number of passes at certain grades, in certain years,
in certain schools and in certain local authorities (Employer, Edinburgh).
These employers also stated that more than the certificates gained, they were more
interested to know the ‘impact’ and skills that pupils acquired as a result. Therefore, when it
comes to statistics, they argued that there is more value to knowing ‘where have … pupils
gone’ after they have left school, as this can be a better measure of performance, attainment
and achievement:
…assessment on positive outcomes [or] positive destinations. To me, it’s every bit as
important as the number of standard grades achieved each year or the number of Highers
and … Advanced Highers. I think this would actually drive the standards throughout the
school system much more positively.
(Employer, Glasgow)
Secondly, employers stressed how important it was for them to ‘understand the whole
qualifications framework a bit better, and why they assess and what they assess and how
they assess and what it all means’ (Employer, Edinburgh). The same sentiment was
expressed by some employers from Glasgow:
…sometimes the assessment is currently overly confusing for employers as well. I appreciate things
like core skills were developed for industry with industry in mind, but that doesn’t necessarily mean
that employers in industry understand them and when kids come out of school with a sheaf of papers
instead of one certificate that’s baffling to most employers. They don’t have time to wade through all
that stuff. They need something simple.
(Employer, Glasgow)
The third point is linked to the employers’ concerns regarding the challenge of assessment at
a national level and its implications for assessing future employees (Employer, Aberdeen):
I was concerned that the assessment wasn’t going to be at a national level, that it was
going to be devolved locally because I was wondering how you were going to keep the
standard at a similar level? As an employer, how would you assess people who have come
from different assessments?
73
(Employer, Aberdeen)
Finally, employers from Dundee recognised the ‘lack of reporting procedure’ for pupils’ other
skills and achievements, which were not previously part of the assessment framework.
These achievements, they argued, could only compensate for a lack of other qualifications
during the application process, if there is a way of assessing and reporting them:
…if they are unsuccessful in [the] interview, the employer has nothing else to look back
on…it won’t be on their report card… It’s… something… that I would be concerned about if
I were starting to recruit again.
(Employer, Dundee)
An employer observed that there was more employer involvement recently than in the past
(Employer, Edinburgh), which was seen as a good thing, as pupils acquire other work skills
and get a better understanding of the world of work:
…employers are beginning to be more involved, because you now have in third year, you
get placements or work experience, which is great. ….
(Employer, Edinburgh)
Employers thought that there was scope for engaging employers in the enterprise-related
type of activities for both primary and secondary schools, which could be extended to include
partnerships with local authorities as well (Employer, Edinburgh):
…as an employer, I would like to be represented. There’s the CBI, there’s the Federation
of Small Businesses, there’s all the Chambers of Commerce, all these guys would be
willing to put folk up to be part of the thinking piece….
(Employer, Edinburgh)
We need to get out there and speak to these kids because they are the next generation of
businessmen and women and doctors and nurses and brickies and plumbers … we have
to get in there early and show these kids, ‘Yes … you may never be a Professor of AstroPhysics but you can be [a] good brick layer.
(Employer, Dundee)
Employers also believed that early engagement may especially help those who are not
academically inclined, to show that there are other non-academic routes in the world of work
that they could pursue. A very specific example on how partnership with employers could
help assist pupils’ skills was through the use of mock interviews:
…there have been some instances … where employers are involved in interview
processes for kids getting on the course which has proved very successful because very
often they are … recruiting … to take on an apprentice…. [Employers] often give resources
of time and materials to schools … it’s an ideal place to get industry involvement at an
early stage.
(Employer, Glasgow)
7.4.
Summary
Most, though not all, of the parents and employers felt they knew very little about the new
curriculum proposals. However, on hearing about the four capacities and the general
principles of A Curriculum for Excellence, both groups were generally very positive.
74
The parents expressed concern about how it might be possible for them to understand the
curriculum more fully but expressed support for balance and integration within the curriculum.
In relation to balance there was particular concern to achieve balance between academic
study and vocational learning, such that all pupils might be motivated and would genuinely
benefit from their time in school. They also recognised significant differences between the
primary and secondary sectors and saw transition from one to the other as a particularly
important consideration in curriculum planning. There were some concerns expressed about
assessment and about the effect of inspections on schools. There was support for the
recognition of wider achievement. Finally, those parents in the focus groups were generally
keen to play a greater role in supporting their children and their learning and would welcome
more detailed guidance on how to support the work of their children’s schools.
Among the employers there were some who had more detailed knowledge about the
curriculum proposals. As indicated above there was general enthusiasm for the ideas,
although some scepticism was expressed about the practicality of the current outlines. They
did welcome the increased emphasis on ‘soft skills’ which they saw as valuable in the world
of work and the aim to support cross-curricular developments. Some concerns were voiced
about the danger of losing some of the subject focused expertise of the existing curriculum
and that this might be a demotivating factor for the academically more successful pupils.
There were several views expressed about the role of assessment. Some employers felt
they had a poor understanding of the qualifications system and others felt that in any case
they were more interested in ‘employability’ than in qualifications achieved. There was a
general willingness to play an increased role in supporting schools and the development of
the curriculum, among those in the groups.
75
8. Pupils’ Perspectives
8.1.
Introduction
This section presents an overview of the perspectives provided by pupils who participated in
the engagement process, with the emphasis on the focus group data as this aspect was
originally part of the commissioned work on the ‘Collection, analysis and reporting of data on
Curriculum for Excellence Draft Experiences and Outcomes’. As noted in section 2, LTS also
commissioned some additional work on pupil perspectives and the bulk of this is reported in
a separate document. In this section a brief description of the focus groups and of the
additional engagement methods is provided. The key findings from the focus groups are
then presented under a number of thematic sub-headings. The section concludes with an
overall summary of key findings generated by all the different strands of the engagement
process.
8.2.
Focus group discussions
As part of LTS’s process of engagement with children and young people, four regional
events aimed at raising pupils’, parents’ and employers’ awareness of the Curriculum for
Excellence were organised. Through these events, the views were sought of 33 secondary
pupil delegates who participated in focus group discussions facilitated by a member of the
University of Glasgow team of researchers14. The focus groups ranged in size from 3 to 13
participants. LTS managed the overall organisation of the events, including selection and
invitation of focus group participants.
The pupil focus groups explored pupils’ broader understanding, opinions and experiences of
Curriculum for Excellence’s four capacities, what their needs were as learners, and what they
thought would characterise a curriculum that would address their needs both as pupils and
as adults. Additionally, somewhat like parents and employers, whose views were reported in
the previous section of this report, pupils showed a lack of awareness of the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes and therefore could not make any comment on them.
8.3.
Additional engagement methods
Due to LTS’s concerns with regard to the representation of the views of children and young
people, additional activities were also commissioned by LTS. This presented an additional
opportunity to explore pupils’ perspectives and their perceptions of how new ways of learning
could impact on their overall experience of education. Consequently, further methods of
engagement including an online questionnaire survey and group workshops with different
activities designed to engage participants were employed.
Note was also made of
references to pupil responses in the trialling proforma that were returned.
To undertake the online questionnaire survey, LTS collaborated with Young Scot, a national
youth information and citizenship charity, to gather young people’s views on the changes
resulting from the proposed Curriculum for Excellence. In addition to the focus group
discussions, group workshops were also conducted. This was supplemented by a review of
the Trialling proforma for the last four published Draft Experiences and Outcomes (i.e.
RERC, RME, Technologies, Health and Wellbeing). In the same way as the focus group
questions, the instruments used for the additional engagement methods also emphasised
awareness and purposes of the Curriculum for Excellence, activities that motivate learning
and the relevance of learning. Therefore, the data obtained from the whole Pupil
14 Other delegate groups, i.e. employers and parents who attended the four regional events also
participated in separate group discussions. These are reported in earlier sections of the report.
76
Engagement strand presented data of a different nature and emphasis compared to the rest
of the report. A summary of the methods of engagement and number of participants for the
whole pupil engagement strand is presented in Table 4 below, whilst a full report of the pupil
engagement strand is available as a supplementary report.
Table 4: Response rate for the pupil engagement strand
Methods of engagement/Types of data
collection
15
Number of
responses/participants
1. Online questionnaire
29
2. Group sessions
2.1 Focus group discussions
2.2 Group workshops
3. Trialling proforma (90 submissions)
33
143*
171*
Total
376
* Incomplete information on the number of participants
In part 8.4, below, only the emergent themes from the analysis of the data across the four
groups are presented and discussed. Part 8.5 combines this with the data from the
additional study (comprising findings from the online questionnaire survey, group workshops
and trialling proforma), to give a synthesis of all the key findings from pupils.
8.4.
Pupil focus groups - views and perceptions of learning
Pupils in one focus group demonstrated an excellent understanding of how Curriculum for
Excellence would change the school and the assessment structure, and the learning
approaches and processes, in order to make it more relevant for employment and life in
general.
…it’s all about sustained and deeper development for the future and it’s not just learning
things for exams, it’s learning things for your actual life.
(Pupil, Aberdeen)
Many pupils from two other focus groups had either some or no knowledge of Curriculum for
Excellence, whereas the majority of pupils from the fourth group were aware of Curriculum
for Excellence. However, the pupils in this latter group reported that prior to the event they
did not have an understanding of the links between some of the school-based activities they
had experienced and Curriculum for Excellence. As one pupil put it:
Having been here this morning, I realise now that we have actually been practising some
of the methods of the Curriculum for Excellence, although at the time, we were not aware
that [that] was its purpose.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
This raises an important question about whether learning through Curriculum for Excellence
is meant to make the approach known to young people explicitly, or if it is intended to remain
implicit in teachers’ practice.
Personal characteristics of Successful Learners
15
In order to present a complete picture of the participants in the entire pupil engagement strand, the
table includes the number of participants in the focus group discussion (see 2.1), broken down in
Table 4, above.
77
According to pupils, a successful learner is characterised by a deep and genuine
understanding of the subject, a constant desire to learn and improve oneself, a sense of
direction, a target/goal and the ability ‘to sustain that knowledge over a number of years’. In
addition, pupils also suggested that successful learning implies independence, leadership,
initiative, motivation, hard work, eagerness to acquire knowledge and taking responsibility for
one’s own learning. Most of all, pupils emphasised that successful learning includes both
academic learning and beyond.
…a successful learner has to be that not only just at school throughout your academic
grades, it’s not all about academic [learning], it has to be all round schools, but you still
have to be always willing to learn more as you progress.
(Pupil, Aberdeen)
As pupils suggested, a combination of factors contribute towards successful learning. Pupils
argued that having a genuine desire to learn leading to self-motivation and recognising one’s
strengths and weaknesses as a catalyst for improvement are essential. Checking one’s
understanding of what one has learned by communicating this understanding to other people
was claimed to be an example of effective practice (Pupil, Glasgow).
At the same time, several pupils also suggested that external factors played a significant part
in their capacity to learn. Teachers and their way of teaching had a lot of influence on pupils
and their response to learning. Pupil enthusiasm is directly affected by their teacher’s
enthusiasm. Additionally, ‘supportive study’, and pupil-led activities, amongst others were
regarded as helpful, as these enable pupils to take control of their own learning. As regards
pupil-led tasks, they suggested that it was critical that they are ‘taught how to learn’ (Pupil,
Edinburgh).
…about the teacher, I think that’s the main one … if you’ve got a teacher who’s motivated
and wants to do it, then … if you see that, then you also want to do it yourself, you’re
encouraged. If they’re putting the effort in, then you want to put the effort in as well.
(Pupil, Aberdeen)
Supportive study really helps me after school. It is just that extra hour – that’s all you need
to go over what you didn’t understand that day … going over something, it will make it
fresh in your mind the next day so you are not lagging behind the class.
…the teachers encouraging you to do more research yourself … makes you more
motivated to … study yourself and try new ways to learn things. … it stays in your head
because you found it out yourself rather than just being given it.
(Pupils, Dundee)
Pupils pointed out that determination to pursue a long-term goal is like an anchor that keeps
pupils focused on achieving something even when it becomes ‘unenjoyable’ (Pupil,
Edinburgh).
The importance of becoming a successful learner was strongly supported. One needs to
know ‘how to learn to be able to build on what [one has] learned to be successful in … life in
general’ (Pupil, Glasgow). Perceived benefits included:
•
•
•
•
•
•
academic success gives pupils more options in life;
learning skills gained are useful throughout life;
it is a means of providing a good example for peers, siblings and other people;
successful learners are more likely to carry on being successful;
successful learners tend to be more employable;
it enables pupils to solve problems they encounter in the future.
78
Personal characteristics of Confident Individuals
From the pupils’ responses, confidence is correlated with knowledge. Pupils easily associate
confidence with clear and effective communication or expression of one’s beliefs and ideas
as well as justification for one’s actions (Pupils, Aberdeen, Edinburgh and Glasgow). Others
linked it with resilience or being able ‘to shrug off’ what other people say (Pupil, Dundee).
One pupil suggested that confidence is a well-managed presentation of one’s self-image.
It’s not lacking fear, it’s being able to acknowledge fear and then control it.
(Pupil, Edinburgh)
Additionally, maturity, a positive lifestyle, healthy self-belief, encouragement, academic
success and open-mindedness to criticism, were all said to contribute to better selfconfidence.
…when you are in first year … you are not … happy in speaking out … but as you get
older, it feels more like something you have to do if you want your opinion to be heard. …I
think it comes with age as you get older.
(Pupil, Edinburgh)
You have to get over your self-doubts and worries and stuff and just go for it and that is
part of becoming a confident person.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
Apart from a good support network from parents and friends (Pupils, Glasgow and
Edinburgh), confidence is also strengthened by both positive and negative experiences. For
example, pupils believed that their achievements could serve as ‘benchmarks’ for assessing
how well they were faring. Tasks often require pupils to take risks and despite the possibility
of failing, their confidence is developed through the process, especially after achieving their
goal.
…if you’ve been able to reach that goal … that also makes you confident and it will
encourage you to do more and believe that you will just keep on getting better … [being]
able to reach these goals and targets … builds your confidence.
(Pupil, Dundee)
On the contrary, even negative experiences help build up pupil determination. A pupil
admitted that having ‘the lowest mark’ impacted on her confidence, but it was also a
challenge that prompted her to give her best in order to overcome her disappointment. On
another occasion, pupils were discouraged from sitting the exam due to ‘awful’ prelim results.
Likewise, this was seen as a challenge and the pupils made an effort to study hard and
eventually passed (Pupils, Dundee).
Looking forward to the future, pupils focused on the long-term importance of a healthy selfconfidence, especially when it comes to its practical application in a work scenario. A sense
of self-confidence tends to build one’s reputation and invites trust from other people.
If you’re a confident person, then … your employer is going to feel … they can put their
faith in you because if you’re confident then you’ve got the courage to … do things by
yourself….
(Pupil, Aberdeen)
79
Personal characteristics of Responsible Citizens
I think a responsible citizen … it’s not so much academic, it’s more what you do outwith
school.
(Pupil, Aberdeen)
Pupils described responsible citizens as people who think beyond school and contribute to
the community to which they belong. Responsibility as a trait was also considered to be a
contributing factor in relation to the other three capacities.
In essence, the descriptors used by pupils to characterise a responsible citizen consisted of:
•
•
•
looking after oneself and other people;
respecting and having a good attitude towards oneself, other people in the
community, and the environment;
actively participating and making decisions on issues that affect the whole
community.
In developing this capacity, the importance of ‘listening to other view points’, recognising
one’s role in society and following rules and abiding by them were emphasised (Pupils,
Glasgow and Edinburgh). This is linked with the idea that being a responsible citizen means
obtaining a good understanding of the issues in question whilst thinking about one’s own as
well as other people’s interests.
They need to look at all the angles … before … mak[ing] a decision. … You have to …
look at it from everyone’s point of view and … make the decision….
…you … reflect the needs of a wide range of people … you need to act in a way that’s
going to help everyone and not just your personal interests.
(Pupils, Aberdeen)
Pupils from Dundee also acknowledged that ‘having good role models’ is an effective method
of instilling this value into students. Some subjects and school practices (e.g. Citizenship,
Peer Mediation) also specifically promote responsibility amongst pupils. Finally, one pupil
emphasised the importance of developing flexibility and adaptability in relating to different
people in different contexts.
…you have to be … adaptable to different situations and different people whom you are
going to be interacting with.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
A display of responsible citizenship is deemed important for various reasons:
•
•
•
•
it is an expression of a genuine interest in what is going on in the community and
in the country;
it promotes a better school and a better community life;
it models respect between people and encourages similar practice;
it helps create a better society – a safer and stronger community – for succeeding
generations.
Personal characteristics of Effective Contributors
Being an effective contributor means actively taking part in beneficial endeavours whereby
pupils make the best use of both their physical and mental resources to help (Pupils,
Aberdeen). In pupils’ eyes, an effective contributor possesses the following characteristics:
80
•
•
•
•
•
having the right attitude and ‘standing by [one’s] convictions’;
the ability to ‘voice … opinions’, and participate in and encourage discussion;
a sense of leadership and commitment;
the ability to defend one’s thoughts and actions;
the ability to work within a team.
Developing oneself to become an effective contributor requires being adequately
knowledgeable of underlying arguments about an issue, nurturing an independent mind and
mastering a few traits (e.g. confidence, determination, and the ability to listen and consider
other views, especially when they contradict one’s own).
I think you have to be able to see problems from different people’s points of view or
different angles. You are not just narrow-minded and seeing what you see as a problem.
You need to be able to see what other people think.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
An effective contributor is ‘very strongly linked with a confident individual’ because the latter
is a pre-requisite of the former (Pupil, Aberdeen). Similarly, another pupil stated that ‘a
positive attitude’ matters as it prompts individuals to reflect and recognise their strengths and
subsequently, be involved.
If you really, really cared for what you were doing, that’s very important.
I think you need to have the attitude to say ‘Yes, I believe in this!’.
(Pupils, Edinburgh)
Life experiences were also viewed as something that widened pupils’ horizons and their
understanding of life issues. Pupils claimed that experiences not only helped promote
participation but also built up ‘passion’ and ‘dedication’ for a cause.
…people who have had certain experiences in their life … something has gone wrong,
like [someone] dying of cancer in the family, they’ve gone into research that … or in the
community they felt there hasn’t been enough activities.
(Pupil, Edinburgh)
Since school life is often viewed as a preparation for the world of work, being an effective
contributor enables pupils to have a foretaste of adult life.
…when … you get a job, you are going to have to contribute … any job that you do, you
are usually going to be working together to get an end result.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
I think within school and also in the wider world, if you’re going to work in a team, you
need to be able to be an effective contributor because you can’t just sit in the corner
and let other people do the work.
(Pupils, Aberdeen)
Finally, a pupil from Glasgow also argued that participation is not always about asserting
one’s own viewpoint: sometimes it is a means ‘to represent people who can’t contribute’ to
ensure that their views are also represented and listened to.
Learning and teaching
The idea that learners have their own personal learning styles means that different activities
will suit different types of learners. A few principles were suggested to encourage pupil
81
motivation to learn: classroom tasks underpinned by relevance, ‘friendly competitiveness’,
and ‘team work’.
Pupils also identified a number of specific strategies and learning activities that helped in
making learning more real and more meaningful, and thus effective in enticing pupils to be
involved. These included:
•
•
•
•
moving away from text-based resources and utilising a variety of learning
strategies and technology (e.g. interactive lessons);
the use of active learning (more suitable for younger learners);
learning the practical aspects of ‘the theory’ through field work;
using more visual techniques.
Pupils also emphasised that creative ways of teaching and teacher attitudes have the
capacity to transform a boring lesson into one that is interesting and motivating. This is
particularly pertinent with the least-liked sections of the course as it requires the teacher’s
skills to capture everyone’s interest and make them focus on the lesson (Pupil, Dundee).
I think not necessarily by activity but if you’ve got a teacher standing in front of you that’s
really passionate about the subject, …if a teacher has clearly lost any enthusiasm they
ever had for the subject, then you’re not going to be motivated to want to learn because it
just seems dull....
(Pupil, Edinburgh)
One of the students also argued that it makes a tremendous difference when pupils are
themselves self-motivated. Since not all teachers can be motivating, a pupil maintained that it
boils down to pupils’ accountability and determination to learn.
… I personally do have a couple of boring teachers but at the end of the day it’s my
choice if I want to listen to them or I don’t want to listen to them.
(Pupil, Edinburgh)
Pupils supported the idea that schools needed to incorporate more learning strategies where
pupils are involved in a dialogue and are actively engaged rather than merely being on the
receiving end.
…90% of what you learn is learnt from doing something, so I think that if you were actually
actively learning, it would be a lot easier to take in and it would be easier to remember as
well in the long run.
(Pupil, Aberdeen)
In encouraging ‘active learning’, pupils suggested that learning the fundamentals is essential.
For example, they need to learn specific effective learning strategies, starting with basic skills
(e.g. note-taking) through to efficient revising for exams. Pupils felt that teachers’ use of
different methods in explaining a topic was of great benefit in developing their understanding
of the core theory, and then building upon it.
… in my school … the teachers who organise learning best are the ones that make sure
you do the core theory work first. Maybe the things that others find more boring. You still
have to do that … it is really important to get the basic theory first.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
From first-hand experience, pupils also believed that a ‘supported study class after hours in
the school’ would help a number of school pupils: they find strength in knowing that they are
not alone in finding some lessons more difficult than others, but most of all, they appreciate
the opportunity to clarify doubts and ask questions. The resource and time implications for
study support were also acknowledged.
82
…I know it is not very practical in school but one-on-one tuition is a lot better because you
get a lot more time … to ask questions whereas you only have … a 50-minute period
when the teacher is talking to the whole class.
When a teacher sets time aside for you to ask them questions. …I think it is so much
better when you can just say, ‘How does this work?’ or ‘I don’t understand this bit… I like
lessons when you … actually have time to ask.’
If there has been a problem that many of us have faced within the course, they will take it
much slower and take it step-by-step and you don’t feel as intimidated at that point
because there is a group of you all trying to re-learn….
(Pupils, Glasgow)
Finally, the learning atmosphere is a vital motivating factor, according to several pupils. Class
atmosphere must not only be conducive for learning but must also promote healthy
competition amongst pupils. It was also implied that an effective learning environment is one
where diverse abilities and interests are considered.
It is about creating the right atmosphere for learning as well because if you’re in a
situation where … you’re not actually being encouraged to learn … just to keep your head
down and not appear too much of a swot and that’s not going to encourage you to give
your best.
… that’s when a competitive atmosphere comes into it and that really works well because
people who maybe normally wouldn’t … work very hard in school will think, ‘I don’t want to
be seen as stupid’ … that’s what motivates them to work.
(Pupils, Edinburgh)
In connection with this, a teacher’s ‘personal’ touch in teaching is highlighted, which
according to pupils ‘comes down to the teacher’s understanding of every pupil’ and is tailored
to suit pupils’ abilities (Pupil, Glasgow).
Cross-curricular approaches
…I think if they did link the subjects together, you would see the point of why you have to
learn that subject and why you maybe need to know that subject because if they link
together, surely for what I want to do in life, things do all link together so I may as well
learn it anyway, which would be more positive for people to understand why they need to
do something.
(Pupil, Dundee)
As highlighted above, a number of pupils believe that cross-curricular connections are a way
of making learning more relevant. This may assist pupils to ‘see more applications’ of what
was learned and, thus, directly motivate them to value each lesson regardless of the subject.
More importantly, learning across the curriculum is a reflection of the real world – the world of
work.
…this bit connected back to motivation … if you’re in a classroom and you think this is
totally irrelevant to the rest of my life, it’s going to be a lot more difficult to engage with
what you’re doing as opposed to thinking I’m going to learn this and then at some point in
my next period of life, I will have to be able to do it.
(Pupil, Edinburgh)
I think it is really important because when you go out into the world of work, then whatever
you are asked to do isn’t going to be divided into the five compartments of the five
subjects you did at Higher level. So, it’s the idea of being able to use all your knowledge
and put it together and come out with some outcomes, so I think everything does overlap
quite a lot.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
83
It was also suggested that natural links between subject areas could be promoted almost
spontaneously when teachers make an effort to comment explicitly on how lessons can be
applied to another area or a different subject, to show pupils the connections or how subjects
overlap.
Five learners from Aberdeen raised their concerns about the challenges associated with
implementing cross-curricular connections as they do not come automatically. As a result,
achieving balance between subjects and seamless working between teachers might present
real challenges.
… they would have to get the balance exactly right and that could be quite difficult. They
would also have to get the subjects that were put together right as well because if you put
two subjects that you thought would work and they actually don’t work, that could cause
problems for the teachers as well as the pupils.
I think it’s a great idea but when it comes to putting it into practice, I don’t think it really
would work. There will be certain departments it will work with and certain it won’t. … I
think that certain people will not like certain subjects and if you start putting people into
another one, then it’s going to be a detriment to the other one.
(Pupils, Aberdeen)
These pupils thought that similar criteria/standards would be employed for connected
subjects and that they might be ‘penalised’ as a result. A pupil would rather have their
teachers as specialists even for one subject alone, rather than requiring them to re-learn
other subject areas.
Academic and vocational learning
…it is important to show the relevance of everyday life situations. In my Higher Maths
class, I had a really good teacher. Everything we were learning in Higher Maths, he
related to something outside of it…related it to the construction of buildings and other stuff
and it really helped me understand because I was really interested in Maths and wanted
to do something with it so it gave me a help in where I could use it after school.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
Pupils welcomed the idea of linking academic learning to its application in the ‘adult world’.
This also helps to make the overall school experience a lot more positive and, consequently,
motivating. The strong connection between demonstrating the relevance of learning and
motivating learners is very evident. The following comments are typical.
You’ve got to have…areas and interaction with people and things like this because it’s all
very well to be a smart academic but then, when you get into the workforce, you would be
able to make connections with people and to work with people.
(Pupil, Aberdeen)
…it goes back to…if you’re not seeing the relevance, you will not want to learn it. You will
not be motivated to learn it at all because it’s…pointless, this is just here to help me pass
my exams, so that’s basically like relevance of if you have your mind set on a certain
career and you think, ‘This is not in any way helping me get that career that I want’, you’re
not wanting to do it at all.
(Pupil, Edinburgh)
…it is basically the motivation to actually learn the thing.…when I was taking Higher
Maths last year, some of my friends … would say, ‘What is the point of us actually
learning this?’ That mental block stopped them learning. If it shows the actual relevance,
then they might see some point in trying to learn it.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
One pupil, on the other hand, was adamant that it is not only the subject learned per se that
84
is important but the skills acquired during the learning process. It was made explicit that
usage and transfer of such skills to a different context would be valuable and useful in later
life.
It’s…inevitable that you’ll learn things at school that you won’t use in the future. It’s not the
learning, in fact, it’s being able to learn how to learn and how you transfer the skills you
learn in applying knowledge that you might not necessarily use later, but when we get to
develop skills, it will be useful. It’s not necessarily the knowledge that will be useful; it’s
the skill that you develop from being taught that knowledge.
(Pupil, Edinburgh)
Pupils advocated a more balanced curriculum as a way forward in making the curriculum
relevant to their life in the future. Suggestions were made for a promotion of parity of esteem
between academic and vocational learning as well as between qualifications and life skills.
…it’s important…for schools… [to] focus…less on academia. If they show you what
education has done for people who start up their own business to show that … even some
key grades can’t help you to get into the wider world of business. I think that can be very
beneficial to people who have got that like mind and who think ‘Oh well, university is not
for me…’
I think schools do focus too much on qualifications rather than life skills and they should
maybe focus a bit more on life skills rather than just the whole qualification idea.
(Pupils, Aberdeen)
In this regard, a pupil from Edinburgh asserted that ‘schools should have a much stronger
partnership with local business and community organisations’. Another student also
mentioned how learning could be made more relevant through a change in the assessment
process.
…it would be better if instead of the exam staying quite constant every year, if the exams
started changing and the teaching started changing so it was things that are moving into
more relevance.
(Pupil, Glasgow)
Learning and assessment
Pupils highlighted the tension between ‘real learning’ and ‘learning for assessment’ – how the
emphasis and pressure brought about by the exams could be a real hindrance to genuine
learning. To an extent, this tension is related to the unequal weighting given to academic and
vocational learning, where qualifications appear to be all that matter.
We are always taught how to pass the exam but are we taught about the subject? If we
are taught about the subject, removing all the pressure of the exam then, maybe we are
able to take more of it in because I think the stigma of exams is what puts a lot of people
off as well and that is why people get bored of school because they can’t deal with the
pressure.
…I do understand how important … exams are, but I was just trying to get across that we
have to stop being conditioned to think that exams are the be-all and end-all and there are
no other routes to take if you fail an exam. It’s not the end of the world. The pressure of
that, we are conditioned to think that.
(Pupils, Glasgow)
I think schools, especially with Highers, [teachers] are so pressured to get us to a final
exam bit, they’re only concentrating on us trying to pass the exams instead of letting us
understand the subject….
(Pupil, Edinburgh)
For a few others, examinations can also be ‘a real motivation’ to learn and revise what one
85
has learned. The pressure of exams urges learners to deepen their knowledge and
understanding of the lessons, which would not have been achieved through other means.
Knowing I have an exam motivates me to study or else I would just be like, ‘Oh well, I can
do it another day. It doesn’t matter.’ I know I am like that and I would just be lazy about it
and just put it away till another time. If I know I have a test, then I will revise for it.
(Pupil, Aberdeen)
8.5.
Summary
In this section, as well as summarising insights from the pupil focus groups, we also draw on
insights from the additional pupil engagement work which is more fully reported in the
additional report.
•
Awareness of Curriculum for Excellence varied. Whereas online questionnaire
respondents and students in one focus group showed a high awareness of
Curriculum for Excellence, it was a more mixed picture or even ‘limited’ for the other
groups who were consulted in this study. The level of engagement tended to vary
across schools and local authorities.
•
In the development of the four capacities, pupils highlighted the need to have a good
understanding of their ‘strengths and weaknesses’, develop certain skills (e.g.
communication skills), and be determined to achieve a goal they themselves set.
Pupils also stressed that ‘successful learning’ involves more than ‘academic
performance’. Their teachers’ knowledge and enthusiasm affected them not only in
creating a learning atmosphere that is conducive for learning but also one which
encourages pupils to be enthusiastic in their learning.
•
Amongst the four capacities, developing responsible citizenship was viewed as an
aspect where the influence of significant others, e.g. parents and family members,
was stronger than that of the teachers and other school staff members. As for being
an effective contributor, pupils stressed that everybody plays a role. Therefore, no
contribution is too small to receive recognition.
•
There was strong agreement amongst pupils that these four capacities are ‘all
connected’ and that taken together, they are a ‘good preparation for life’ as they help
mould more valuable pupils – the type of people that society needs. In addition, the
four capacities aim to bring about a better and more positive mindset, commitment,
personal goals and achievements in young people as well as brighter future
opportunities.
•
According to pupils (including disaffected ones), some of the activities they find
motivating are tasks involving active, first-hand exploration and problem-solving (e.g.
research, field work) and use of a wide range of learning strategies and technology.
This makes learning diverse, fun, creative, relevant and interesting. Similarly,
teachers’ understanding of pupils’ abilities informs choice of appropriate learning
strategies and creation of a motivating learning environment.
•
Although there were pupils who had difficulty seeing the links between subjects, it
was generally agreed that connections across curriculum areas could make learning
more relevant, help with the primary–secondary transition, and perhaps most
importantly, reflect the ‘cross-curricular’ nature of the world of work and life in general.
•
A more relevant education is more motivating for all learners. The balanced
curriculum where both academic and vocational learning are promoted is seen to
86
cater not only for the requirements of the academically-inclined pupils, but also for the
needs of disaffected young people in obtaining skills that will help them to find
employment and achieve their goals in life in the future.
•
Children and young people also expressed their concern that in the past, their
examination performance was the main driver of what and how they learned, which
hindered their opportunity to learn lessons for the sake of learning.
•
Although the number of responses received was small, there appeared to be a
marked consistency in the trialling experiences of pupils across the schools. In short,
pupils appear to have enjoyed taking part in the trialling, and were often aware of how
such activities and opportunities could benefit their learning generally and also
support their learning in other subjects. They particularly enjoyed working as part of a
team and being given responsibility for their own learning. There was an indication
from secondary pupils that they welcomed the proposed changes in the curriculum.
They anticipate that this would lead to ‘more subject choice’ and ‘more active learning
opportunities’.
87
9. Review of the data
9.1.
Introduction
In the previous two sections, the perspectives of pupils, parents and employers were
addressed, drawing on focus group data generated at four regional events (SeptemberOctober 2008) convened by LTS. In contrast, this section of the report offers a review of the
key messages to emerge through consultation with key providers of education services
through the year-long engagement process. It is organised in five parts. First, a brief
summary is offered of teachers’ feedback in relation to each of the fourteen sets of Draft
Experiences and Outcomes (detailed reports based on questionnaire, trialling and focus
group feedback are presented in the Interim and Supplementary reports (University of
Glasgow, 2008)). In the second part, the key issues identified by local authority officers,
further education lecturers, representatives of the voluntary sector and universities, including
faculties of teacher education, are contrasted with the messages emerging from consultation
with the teaching profession. The section concludes with identification of a series of common
cross-cutting themes.
9.2.
Teachers’ feedback in relation to draft sets of Experiences and Outcomes
Science: The feedback from the Science focus group was generally supportive of the
aspirations for Curriculum for Excellence but there were significant misgivings about the
capacity of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes to support conceptual development,
continuity and progression. From the range of trialling feedback it is clear that the majority of
respondents welcomed opportunities for cross-sector and interdisciplinary work. To capitalise
on these opportunities, teachers identified a need for dedicated time to support sustained
planning discussions and resource development. Teachers identified a specific need for
support in differentiating expectations at different levels. Questionnaire responses contained
contra-indications that both welcomed increased flexibility in the curriculum and requested
greater direction. Across data sources, respondents indicated a strong desire for additional
high quality support to prepare for implementation of the revised science curriculum,
especially for non-specialists in primary schools.
Numeracy: The numeracy focus groups welcomed opportunities to ‘review methodology’ and
to liaise more closely with colleagues to improve transition. The main concerns related to
strengthening consistency in interpretation and building effective systems for monitoring
cross-curricular provision and pupil progress. Trialling feedback and responses to online
questionnaires reiterated this concern, requesting that time be given through CPD and whole
school planning to the development of wider awareness and understanding of numeracy
across the curriculum. There was a widely expressed view that many of the draft statements
were vague and that more detailed guidance will be needed to support full implementation.
Attempts to bring the numeracy curriculum closer to ‘real life’ were widely welcomed.
Modern Languages: Focus group participants were generally enthusiastic about the
proposed changes and saw potential for stronger cross-curricular links, especially in terms of
an integrated approach to literacy. Across the sources of data there was a commitment to
the development of a broader range of innovative approaches and methodologies and
recognition of the possible role of technology in enhancing learning. There were not calls for
substantial re-writing of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. Respondents were keen to
ground developments within the context of the particular status and challenges of Modern
Languages teaching. The Draft Experiences and Outcomes were seen as an opportunity to
revitalise this area within the school curriculum. The most prominent themes across data
sources were a concern for further elaboration and exemplification to ensure consistency in
interpretation and to support the further development of cross-curricular links.
88
Mathematics: The focus group was supportive of efforts to extend the range of teaching and
learning methodologies employed in mathematics education and particularly welcomed the
emphasis on problem solving. The highest level of concern was expressed in relation to the
level of detail provided in the Draft Experiences and Outcomes to support teachers’ planning
and the accurate measurement of standards, especially at transition points. The provision of
nationally coordinated CPD with exemplification, and opportunities for teachers to work
together in schools were recommended as important steps in taking developments forward.
Overall, the trialling and questionnaire responses emphasised a wish for the document to
offer considerably more detail, with greater specificity and fuller elaboration.
Classical Languages: The focus group generally welcomed the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes as promoting enhanced opportunities for teachers to think about their practice and
for pupils to reflect on their learning. Participants did not raise specific issues about clarity or
content, focusing instead on general issues relating to assessment and the capacity of pupils
to engage in self-assessment/reflective dialogue. In taking forward developments,
participants expressed a need for continuing professional development involving
exemplification and appropriate ICT training to support the development of a wider range of
teaching methodologies. Teachers involved in trialling were very keen to share experiences,
exemplars and ideas with other teachers. In order to use the outcomes with full confidence,
questionnaire respondents anticipated further support in the form of CPD and exemplars.
Charting progression was acknowledged to be a key challenge.
Gaelic Learners: The focus group and trialling feedback identified a need for initial and
continuing language training for teachers to support this area of the curriculum. Within the
focus group a lack of ‘child friendly’ resources was identified as a potential barrier to
development. Across the three data sources, participants were generally keen to assert that
a strong relationship between age and level did not necessarily apply for Gaelic Learners
and that variation in progression routes/rates was to be expected. All of the responses to the
trialling questionnaire were enthusiastic about the inclusion of Gaelic culture within the
curriculum and the opportunity this presented for making connections across the curriculum.
This was reiterated in the online questionnaire submissions.
Expressive Arts: The focus group was strongly opposed to the use of the terms ‘magic,
wonder and power’ in the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, which they felt was not
appropriate to the creative and expressive arts. Whilst participants sought further detail to
support planning, they acknowledged the impact an over-emphasis on assessment might
have on the principles of the Curriculum for Excellence. Trialling feedback highlighted a need
for further guidance and support through CPD, exemplification and further elaboration. It was
noted that the Draft Experiences and Outcomes might pose a significant challenge for some
teachers, especially non-specialists delivering expressive arts within primary schools. In
order for teachers to work confidently with the revised curriculum, they would welcome
continuing support. Questionnaire responses expressed concern about a general lack of
clarity and guidance.
Social Studies: The focus group was generally very positive about the values, principles and
purposes of Curriculum for Excellence, especially for children and young people with
additional support needs. The draft document has the potential to support critical reflection
on current practice and act as a catalyst for improvement. Where concerns were raised,
these were primarily related to assessment and this is where greater clarification was sought.
The trialling feedback suggested that the success of Curriculum for Excellence depends on
teachers’ professional engagement and active participation, including cross-sector
collaboration. Nationally coordinated CPD was identified as important in supporting the
implementation process. Questionnaire respondents sought clarification on progression,
transition and subject-specific issues within this area of the curriculum.
89
Literacy and English: The focus group participants welcomed the flexibility within the revised
framework and the enhanced professionality that this implies. Opportunities for joint planning
and the sharing of good practice at school, regional and national levels were identified as
important in supporting plans for implementation. Some concern was expressed about
variation in interpretation across the profession. The most pressing concern expressed
across the four focus groups was a lack of confidence in using the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes to assess progress within and between the wider levels. Some concern was
expressed about the positioning of the Literacy Experiences and Outcomes within the
Literacy and English framework only. It was argued that if literacy was indeed the
responsibility of all teachers then the Experiences and Outcomes should be embedded
across curriculum areas. Concern was noted regarding the relative value attached to the
promotion of critical literacy, compared with functional literacy.
Literacy and Gaidhlig: Respondents welcomed the opportunities presented in the revised
curriculum for tailoring learning experiences to real life contexts and the promotion of
connections across the curriculum. The focus group, in particular, valued opportunities to
reflect on current practice and the scope afforded to teachers to respond creatively in taking
developments forward; this endorsement of greater flexibility, within a clear framework, was
repeated in the questionnaire data. Where further guidance was requested, this was
primarily in relation to planning and assessment. Respondents were keen to ensure
consistency in interpretation and close monitoring of progression within and across levels.
Health and Well Being: The focus group emphasised the need for continuing professional
development to support non-specialist and less experienced teachers with responsibility for
particular areas, such as food related activity and physical education in primary schools.
Some aspects of health and wellbeing are the responsibility of all teachers. Some concern
was expressed around a ‘lack of confidence’ in approaching sensitive areas, particularly
those relating to substance abuse, relationships and sexual health. Participants welcomed
new opportunities for professional dialogue and collaborative work with external partners,
such as health professionals, Active Sports Coordinators and the voluntary sector. External
agencies who participated in the consultation emphasised significant aspects that they felt
were missing from the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, notably contraception, abortion,
sexual health screening (reproductive health), intimacy, sexual diversity and sexual
exploitation and abuse.
Religious and Moral Education: Participants in the RME focus group offered generally
positive comments about the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. Teachers welcomed
opportunities for the promotion of active learning and increased ‘scope for creativity’. Most
participants felt that the revised curriculum offered an appropriate balance of content and
skills and would support the identification of inter-disciplinary themes. Some concerns were
raised, particularly the issue of progression between stages. Some teachers felt that the
cover paper and the content of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes could be more closely
aligned. Concerns were also raised about the balance of religious and non-religious content,
specifically a perceived privileging of Christianity. Formal submissions from a number of faith
groups challenged the emphasis placed on Christianity in the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes. Other contributors hoped for a stronger emphasis on the challenge of philosophy,
greater emphasis on the personal search dimension and the inclusion of non-faith stances.
Religious Education in Roman Catholic Schools: The Draft Experiences and Outcomes were
warmly received by the majority of focus group participants who appreciated the emphasis
placed on methodology and the stronger focus on the personal search element in the
strands. Trialling schools noted that RE had become more ‘expansive’ and welcomed this
development. Responses to the online questionnaire welcomed the opportunities created by
the openness or flexibility of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. Across the sources of
90
data, respondents were divided on the place of other world religions in the revised
curriculum. Participants drew attention to the considerable demands placed on generalist
teachers of Religious Education in Catholic Schools and the need to support colleagues for
whom RE is an additional subject, or who are not Roman Catholics themselves. Several
contributors noted possibilities for an enhanced role for school chaplains. Overall, the tone of
responses was very positive, with relatively few criticisms. Respondents requested additional
support materials such as teaching packs and resource materials and valued the
supplementary guidance being developed by the Scottish Catholic Education Service.
Technologies: Focus group participants were generally positive, especially when describing
their experiences of cross-sector and cross-curricular working. However, there was some
indication that such links could be inconsistent. Technologies is a curriculum area to which
teachers with a range of subject backgrounds may be contributing. Across the data sources
respondents reported a need and/or desire for further network opportunities and dedicated
time to support planning and resource development. Some responses suggested there would
be a need for significant training in ICT. Most frequently participants raised questions
regarding pupil progression and attainment, a number of these comments being linked to a
perceived vagueness in the documentation or a lack of information in relation to assessment.
A significant proportion of questionnaire respondents did not feel that the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes were clearly worded or provided a good basis for planning. Concerns arising
from the speed of technological change were also raised. Whilst clearly not the sole preserve
of Curriculum for Excellence, participants felt that if Curriculum for Excellence was to be
successfully implemented this issue needed consideration.
9.3.
Comparison of perspectives
9.3.1. Local authorities
In describing the opportunities and challenges presented by Curriculum for Excellence
school professionals and local authority officers voiced similar concerns and aspirations.
Data gathered during the engagement process indicates strong support for the values,
purposes and principles of Curriculum for Excellence. This section of the report directs
attention to areas of concern that were identified by teachers, school managers and local
authority officers. The issues identified for consideration below are those that featured most
strongly across the various strands of data gathering – focus groups, trialling feedback,
questionnaires and telephone interviews. These relate to questions concerning assessment,
the issue of providing adequate support though exemplification without undue prescription,
and the organisational and cultural challenges of promoting interdisciplinary and joint work
across subject/stage demarcations and professional boundaries.
Across the data sources a need for greater alignment between curriculum, pedagogy and
assessment was apparent. Tensions were identified between summative assessment and
systems for monitoring and reporting attainment and the intentions of Curriculum for
Excellence. This was more marked in relation to secondary schools, but was not restricted to
secondary education. A small minority of primary headteachers and local authority officers
noted a similar influence on primary education.
The stress on attainment is hampering the development of Curriculum for Excellence
particularly in the secondary but also in the primary. That is a major mindset that has to be
addressed. What we are not developing is a deeper understanding; living to learn capability in
youngsters and that is the real challenge that faces us. A challenge that Curriculum for
Excellence can address, but one that we are failing to get across to the workforce.
(LA interviewee 3)
91
Teachers and local authority officers reported difficulties in making sense of what are
perceived to be mixed messages or competing demands placed on the profession. There
were familiar tensions reported between defensible pedagogical practice and ‘the attainment
agenda’. Whilst generated through the engagement process, these themes are not new and
are not exclusive to Curriculum for Excellence. There was also a sense of dislocation of
pedagogy from assessment. In part, this can be explained by timing. The engagement
schedule followed the phased publication of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. In phase
two of the engagement strategy the consultation on the next generation of national
qualifications in Scotland was undertaken. On the one hand, teachers welcomed the
encouragement to focus on pedagogy and to address national priorities broadly defined. On
the other, there was widespread concern over a proposed implementation schedule
(subsequently extended) that moved developments forward for the 3-15 age range, without
full knowledge of future changes to the senior phase. The sequence of developments
contributed to reported uncertainty among the profession, which produced strong calls for
further information.
The whole point about this is that it is supposed to be curriculum-driven and exam-supported.
This is potentially a radical change and people can’t get their heads round it. It is not the fact
that they don’t want radical change but they can’t get the picture of where we are going in their
heads. They don’t know what the end of the journey is.
(LA interviewee 12)
There was a tendency to separate instruction – frequently referred to as the ‘how’ of the
curriculum - from processes of assessment. Many teachers welcomed the suggested
emphasis on ‘methodologies’ in the Draft Experiences and Outcomes and requested further
support in developing strategies to support ‘active learning’, ‘critical thinking’, ‘cooperative’
and ‘collaborative learning’ and technology supported learning. In some cases an emphasis
on techniques appears to run ahead of deliberation on assessment. As one local authority
interviewee commented, ‘We’ll get to assessment later’. Another interviewee noted
inconsistency between previous commitments and progress made in relation to assessment
for learning and the emphasis placed on the published Draft Experiences and Outcomes as
‘curriculum’ narrowly defined. Responses from teachers and local authority personnel
suggest attention is needed to weave together different policy threads and in particular to
develop a shared and more expansive understanding of curriculum.
If the Assessment is for Learning programme meant anything it is that assessment is integral
to the learning and teaching process. In a sense what we have done this year is separate
them out again and that has been a wee bit unhelpful.
(LA interviewee 15)
Local authority officers were supportive of the re-professionalising tenets of Curriculum for
Excellence. In common with many of the teachers who participated in focus groups and
submitted questionnaires, the emphasis on enhanced professional judgement was welcome.
Local authority personnel reported challenges involved in encouraging flexible and creative
local responses to the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, whilst monitoring provision across
schools and providing adequate support to schools for implementation.
People are saying, ‘Tell me what you want me to do and I will do it.’ We don’t want to go back
to the teaching rote and lack of creativity, innovation and flexibility. It is a problem in that
people do want and are used to having exemplification, especially in subject areas like Science
where if they want a new course they get someone to write it for them. People are used to
having off the shelf courses and they want benchmarking and standards that they should
follow. So it’s quite a difficult situation. How do we not stifle creativity and flexibility but at the
same time maintain standards?
(LA interviewee 9)
92
Finally, school professionals and local authority officers identified similar contextual
challenges influencing implementation. These included a perception of more favourable
conditions in early years settings and primary schools; where it is suggested that ways of
working are more conducive to the kinds of reform suggested in Curriculum for Excellence
e.g. making links across the curriculum and embedding core themes and skills. Although
hardly a new challenge, the existence of strong demarcations between ‘subjects’, the
affiliation of secondary teachers to particular subject identities, and the organisational and
logistical issues presented by the school timetable and assessment calendar, were all
identified as key challenges facing secondary schools by both teachers and local authority
personnel. In addition, local authority officers noted the support needs of school leaders in
building curriculum structures that would support actualisation of the intentions of Curriculum
for Excellence.
9.3.2. Further education
In comparing the perspectives of further education lecturers and school teachers a number of
areas of commonality emerge. These relate to support for the four capacities, the promotion
of links across the curriculum, and a desire for greater collaboration. Both groups shared
concerns around monitoring progression and resisting assessment-driven pedagogy. Where
differences exist, these were in relation to the relative capacity of colleges to support higher
levels of personalisation within existing learning pathways, particularly opportunities for early
presentation.
Both groups of educators expressed broad support for the four capacities. Representatives
of the further education sector, drawing on experience in meeting a diverse range of learner
needs, were quick to assert a non-hierarchical relation between the four capacities. In
promoting additional opportunities for young adults and mature students through postcompulsory education, participants identified with the capacities and attributes, suggesting
‘that is pretty much our ethos, the ethos of any college at present’ (Further education focus
group participant 9).
I meet students who are confident individuals, very responsible citizens but have no
qualifications...I would be scared that it’s seen as successful learners as the first criteria, then
confident people that we can employ…There’s a need within many students to be able to shift
that balance so that it’s not seen as one, two, three, four.
(Further education focus group participant 7)
In common with school professionals, further education lecturers expressed some concern
regarding the monitoring and encouragement of connections across the curriculum and the
development of ‘core skills’ or ‘soft skills’. The embedding of numeracy and literacy across
the curriculum was regarded as a very positive development. It was hoped that, rather than
resulting in the labelling of learners who demonstrated lower levels of recorded attainment at
an earlier age in schools, greater attention to numeracy and literacy would support shared
efforts to promote more choices, more chances. A need to promote critical literacy was also
noted by a participant in a further education focus group. It was suggested that within
programmes of study for existing college courses, tutors find space to address these areas
but not necessarily in any systematic or transparent manner.
Responsibility for all these soft skills just somehow disappears into any other duties and
there’s nobody actually monitoring what we’re doing to encourage these things. It’s just
something that happens. Because it is part of your duties you will encourage people to become
volunteers. You will encourage them to think about business but how you do that? How it’s
actually brought to fruition?...The core skills just happen.
(Further education focus group participant 7)
93
Further education lecturers expressed support for the promotion of links across the
curriculum in the Draft Experiences and Outcomes and suggested that this would support
similar efforts within college provision. Responses confirm that strong demarcations between
courses/subjects exist in both school and post compulsory settings and efforts to unsettle
such divisions were welcomed in principle.
Students don’t make connections because they come out of a school system where they see
one subject as very much pigeon-holed against another and they don’t see that there is
anything that crosses over. When they come into college from school they find it extremely
difficult to see the relevance of one unit to another and how it actually fits into the course.
(Further education focus group participant 11)
School and college educators shared a common concern about the value currently attached
to interdisciplinary learning and the importance of maintaining a high profile for such
developments among students and staff, including senior staff. It was noted that students
following further education courses are strategic learners, constantly engaged in deliberation
of where to invest effort to greatest effect. Older learners, schooled to play the attainment
game, resist additional activities that they do not identify as core to their immediate
educational goals. Within this context it would be important to embed interdisciplinary
learning, rather than ‘add on’ topics.
Quite often these cross-curricular activities are the first to go where there’s pressure to reduce
the number of units…Students are most confident about telling you when there’s something in
a programme that they do not think is relevant. The idea of building elements into a
programme that are not directly vocationally relevant is quite a difficult thing to give students.
(Further education focus group participant 10)
School teachers and college lecturers reported negative consequences of attainment
pressures on teaching and learning. In common with many of the teachers who participated
in the curriculum area focus groups, some college lecturers felt constrained by the
expectations of students and managers and made compromises to satisfy competing
professional commitments.
A lot of students, all they are interested in is, ‘Is there going to be an exam and are we going to
be tested on it? If it’s anything extra I don’t want to know’. We are trying to give them this
additionality…The attitude towards assessment is that it’s the ‘be all’ and ‘end all’ and it
shouldn’t be. If we have time to do a lot more formative assessment, students can actually use
it as a learning experience.
(Further education focus group participant 9)
I think it’s good that assessment at the moment is in the background of this [Curriculum for
Excellence] and it is about the learning experience…It’s the pressure of achievement, retention
and performance indicators that stops us doing things the way we would really like to.
(Further education focus group participant 5)
College lecturers identified similar challenges as school teachers when describing
developments needed to take Curriculum for Excellence forward. Continuing professional
development opportunities were identified as important in promoting higher levels of active
learning in college settings. The ‘methodological shift’ identified by teachers is perhaps even
greater for tutors whose professional preparation is informed by an andragogic approach.
You still have lecturers who think that they teach a subject and not a group of students and I
think this [Curriculum for Excellence] is going to have to be embedded in learning and teaching
approaches if it’s going to make a difference. You still have people who are mainly teaching
from the front of the class with limited amount of group work or who sit somebody in front of a
computer for a big part of the lesson. There’s definitely training needed for learning and
teaching to highlight how you can develop some of these skills across subjects.
94
(Further education focus group participant 3)
In common with school teachers, college lecturers expressed an interest in working
collaboratively to meet the challenges and opportunities presented by Curriculum for
Excellence. Whilst noting that ‘there’s going to be no additional funding’ (Further education
focus group participant 11), participants stressed the importance of time for joint work for
planning and resource development. This was regarded as important in eroding the ‘privacy’
of teaching cultures in both schools and colleges and as an effective way of sharing and
developing good practice at a local level.
If anything really good was to come out of this we’d all stop reinventing the wheel in our own
wee corners and that we would genuinely be able to get together, share existing materials,
make the best use of them, develop new materials but do so in a group rather than every
individuals away off in their own wee corners doing their own thing. That would be one of the
biggest benefits for teachers that could come out of this. That kind of preciousness over what
we’re doing would disappear.
(Further education focus group participant 7)
One difference between the two groups was the relative capacity of colleges to support
personalisation and choice within existing pathways in terms of the point of summative
assessment. Early presentation was not regarded as viable within the context of colleges of
further education, beyond existing provision that enabled students to sit AQA examination
modules in the winter.
It’s going to disadvantage people in FE colleges. If people are going to be brought through the
school system with this idea of flexibility and being at one level in one thing and another level
in another and just slowly making this kind of linear progression. Then they go into FE and you
say, ‘Sorry, you can’t do that here. You’ve got to do all that in one year’.
(Further education focus group participant 9)
Our college set-up has a cycle, a data management cycle about course set up, enrolment,
assessment, reporting of results – so that flexibility isn’t there to assess at different times.
(Further education focus group participant 6)
Focus group participants representing the further education sector indicated that there were
not always strong shared understandings between schools and post-compulsory education,
even where there were reasonably effective, formal school-college links. In order to prepare
for full implementation, especially in coordinating provision across the 14 to 19 age range,
participants recommended joint staff development for mutual benefit.
9.3.3. Voluntary sector
Representatives of voluntary sector organisations welcomed involvement in the engagement
process. Contributions made by participants at a focus group resonated with teachers’ calls
for more support through collaboration with other agencies and stronger partnership working.
Among the focus group participants it was evident that voluntary sector organisations had
different levels of involvement with Curriculum for Excellence. Some groups, such as the
World Wildlife Fund, reported some involvement in the writing of the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes. Others, such as Barnardo’s Scotland and the YMCA, had involvement in the
trialling process. Other groups had struggled to find an opportunity to have a voice: ‘it was
actually seen that teachers were the conduit and we didn’t have that much to say unless we
went directly through teachers’ (voluntary sector focus group participant 11). A comparison of
teacher and voluntary sector perspectives reveals several potential areas for constructive
joint work.
95
Participants from the voluntary sector welcomed the broader orientation of the four capacities
and were keen to avoid any diminution of the purposes and principles of Curriculum for
Excellence as they are translated into sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes. In common
with some of the teachers who participated in the curriculum area focus groups, it was
suggested that the cover papers and broad intentions of Curriculum for Excellence were not
explicitly aligned with the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. Concern was expressed about
an overly prescriptive approach.
The four capacities clash with the draft outcomes and experiences. If you give a teacher a list
of things that their students have to achieve, then that’s what they’ll focus on. There’s an
element of that process that could be disempowering for students, which then undermines
some of the things in the four capacities. What Curriculum for Excellence hasn’t addressed for
me is how these two sit together.
(Voluntary sector focus group participant 6)
In looking toward refinement of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes and full implementation,
it was hoped that the revised curriculum, ‘is still flexible and adaptable and ultimately is
measured under the four capacities generally, rather than measured under specific
outcomes….that’s where partnership with youth work is particularly important, to establish a
foundation on which we might grow into the four capacities’ (Voluntary sector focus group
participant 2).
Representatives from the voluntary sector emphasised the added value their involvement
would bring to school responses to the challenges of Curriculum for Excellence. This
included bringing a fresh perspective to teaching approaches, especially targeting the
development of core attributes such as confidence.
We have a teaching profession a large percentage of whom have been taught and trained in a
way that is about delivering knowledge and skills, and now we have a whole curriculum that is
about delivering attitudes and attributes. If you ask a teacher, ‘Can you teach children the
capitals of Europe?’ they’ll say, ‘Yes, no problem’. ‘Can you teach them the skills of being able
to read a map?’ ‘Yes of course, no problem’. ‘Can you teach them the confidence to get on a
train and travel across Europe by themselves?’ You have no training of how you would teach
confidence. It will take a great deal of teacher training and new pedagogies to deliver this,
regardless of what the outcomes say.
(Voluntary sector focus group participant 5)
Participants emphasised their experience of supporting informal learning within learning
environments other than formal classroom settings, especially in relation to motivating and
supporting children and young people who may be disengaged and disaffected. It was
suggested that the ‘fundamental shift’ necessary for the successful enactment of Curriculum
of Excellence may require new approaches to delivering teacher development.
The system is maintained because teachers train new teachers. LTS is full of teachers. This is
how all professions work of course, but if you want to make a fundamental shift like this, then
somebody somewhere needs to start to say, ‘Actually value these people over here, because
they have a lot to offer’ and teach the teaching profession to start to come to us, whoever
holds the budget. That will make the shift.
(Voluntary sector focus group participant 6)
Recognition of wider achievement was an area of complementary expertise cited by focus
group participants. It was noted that both schools and the voluntary sector have a shared
commitment to the provision of education that recognises ‘distance travelled’ as well as endpoint achievement in the sense of ‘being past the post’. Members of the voluntary sector
reported constructive involvement with SQA and commended recent developments related to
skills for work (voluntary sector focus group participant 7).
96
It’s not so much saying to schools, ‘We’re going to talk to you about the Duke of Edinburgh’s
award’, but saying, ‘How are you going to recognise the achievements of young people beyond
the traditional school curriculum?’ and looking at ways to build capacity to do that, which
involves CPD for staff and partnership working and looking at the new inspection framework
with HMIE.
(Voluntary sector focus group participant 9)
Teachers’ feedback on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes for Health and Wellbeing
identified a lack of confidence and professional preparation in approaching sensitive areas
such as sexual health and substance misuse. In addition to the provision of specialist
training, voluntary sector representatives acknowledged, ‘we all work to help young people
increase their capacity to manage life better and give them transferable skills that help them
to cope in a time of adversity’ (voluntary sector focus group participant 7). The development
of high quality resources by those with specialist expertise was also cited as a valuable
contribution made by the voluntary sector. Examples cited included resources to promote
critical thinking in relation to values education, media constructions, poverty, climate change
and citizenship education.
This review of data from the engagement process suggests that educators, youth workers
and NGOs might form productive partnerships to address areas of key policy concern,
drawing a broader range of skills, abilities and methodologies to address common national
priorities. It was noted that voluntary sector organisations were actively responding to the
wider government focus on early intervention and prevention, adjusting intervention
strategies for work with younger children from late primary onwards. One group, working in
partnership with a local authority More Choices, More Chances team, was extending its
target group from S4 to include P7 and S1. Voluntary sector organisations were keen to
offer specialist expertise in resource development, consultancy and CPD provision. It was
suggested that a formal forum would be beneficial in promoting ‘joined up’ thinking to
capitalise on the full range of resources available to support Curriculum for Excellence
(including informal and alternative provision, as well as classroom-based learning
environments). It was suggested that the experience of the voluntary sector in working
across professional boundaries would be useful in supporting the aspirations for Curriculum
for Excellence. The sector would welcome further opportunities to ‘contribute to the
conversation’ (voluntary sector focus group participant 3).
It’s quite interesting that we’re sitting round a table as the voluntary sector talking about being
more collaborative and people who are specifically in education are talking about it, so at some
point there needs to be a bigger table, doesn’t there?
(Voluntary sector focus group participant 7)
9.3.4. Universities
This section draws on the perspectives offered by representatives of university Teaching and
Learning committees who participated in a focus group. Participants were able to see
potential alignment between the development of Curriculum of Excellence and activities
taking place in universities and were keen to pursue further involvement, although aware of
practical constraints and limitations of resource. There was concern that universities had
joined the engagement process at a late stage. As one participant commented, ‘there is
opportunity for resonance but you only get resonance if people know what is being put down’
(University focus group participant 6)
Issues of common concern that were identified included admissions, transition and the
development of employability skills and the recognition of achievement. University
participants made associations between the attributes at the centre of Curriculum for
Excellence and the consideration given to graduate attributes by higher education
97
institutions. In responding to feedback from employers and in considering the case for further
differentiation of degree classifications, some universities were considering ways to
recognise wider achievement. As one participant noted, ‘that’s an interesting thread that
goes through the sectors in many senses’ (University focus group participant 2). It was
suggested that improvements to transition would require stronger communication between
schools, further education colleges and universities. It was, however, acknowledged by
several members of the university focus group that although wider qualities and attributes
were important, grades remained the primary determinant of admission to university.
The sheer volume of students we consider squeezes us, like employers, down to some very
brutal decisions.
(University focus group participant 6)
Unless you’re going to go back to the days of interviews, you’re not really going to have a
particularly reliable way of getting access to their wider qualities. I think although it’s a nice
idea I’m not quite sure if you could actually put it into practice.
(University focus group participant 4)
The emphasis placed on interdisciplinary learning was welcomed. Expressions of concern
about the influence of discipline ‘silos’ on university courses paralleled teacher and local
authority concerns about secondary school subject ‘silos’. Support was expressed for the
promotion of literacy, numeracy and communication skills across the curriculum.
Representatives from university admissions’ teams had been involved in the consultation on
new assessment proposals. In common with feedback from some teachers and local
authority officers, concern was expressed regarding a perceived emphasis on end-point
qualifications rather than the purposes of assessment for and of learning that might better
support the intentions of Curriculum for Excellence.
There was a lot made about qualifications and maybe not as much on the uses and purposes
of assessment which I think actually sits better with Curriculum for Excellence but I don’t think
it featured all that strongly.
(University focus group participant 7)
The assessment scheme will undermine it because it’s not talking about the purposes of
assessment. We’re talking about now about the names for the new certificate and I think that’s
really dangerous.
(University focus group participant 4)
In examining examples of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, university participants
voiced similar reservations to many teachers regarding a lack of clarity to support
judgements about progression. Clarity was regarded to be important so that university tutors
might better understand the skills and prior learning that undergraduates bring with them
from their school experience.
When you try to distinguish what’s a third or a fourth level of performance you find the word
‘independent’, but what exactly does that mean? It’s that kind of detail that requires careful
consideration and isn’t happening...It would be very useful to have a clear handle on what
skills we are expecting students to have when they come in so that we can design our
activities to try and build on these skills.
(University focus group participant 8)
University participants, in common with representatives from the voluntary sector, expressed
a request for stronger linkage between different elements in the curriculum puzzle. This
included strengthening internal organisational links between faculties of education,
admissions offices, teaching and learning committees and QA enhancement teams; as well
as local links with schools, colleges of further education and local authorities.
98
QA enhancement teams are one of the main drivers for academic development in universities.
They don’t seem to be joined up with what’s being done for Curriculum for Excellence,
although there are a number of parallels.
(University focus group participant 7)
Given the relative size of the university sector in Scotland, it was suggested that
collaboration between organisations such as SQA, LTS, HMIE and University Scotland was
feasible and desirable. There was general agreement within the university focus group that
higher education needed to be much more involved in meaningful collaboration to develop
areas of commonality and improve the continuity and progression of young people’s
education in Scotland.
9.3.5. Teacher education
The following section reports common areas of concern between Deans of Education who
participated in a focus group and other key stakeholders. There was some concern that
providers of teacher education were participating in the engagement process ‘after the event’
(post-publication of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes) and on-going opportunities for
involvement were sought.
Across the various focus groups, including those held in relation to curriculum areas with
teachers, there was general support for the purposes of Curriculum for Excellence. The
Deans of Education went further and requested deeper, critical engagement with the design
principles that inform the revised curriculum framework. The Deans’ group made a distinction
between presentation of the four capacities (which would be difficult to contest), the
publication of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, and the philosophy of Curriculum for
Excellence. Support for the development of critically reflective practitioners required
something in addition to receipt of a new framework. In common with some local authority
officers and many teachers, Deans were cautious of any slippage towards prescription.
If you produce something on paper people think this is what they should be doing and I had
hoped that the aim of Curriculum for Excellence was to unleash the bonds of paperwork which
we’ve had for many years…We’ve already seen examples in local authorities of people taking
the paperwork and going through the same process as they did with 5-14, which is to produce
a pack for teachers on how to teach. What change is Curriculum for Excellence going to
produce if we’re going down this prescriptive ‘this is what you do’ route?
(Deans of Education focus group)
Participants in the Deans’ group were careful to stress that changes to the curriculum that
might ‘really reach down for the benefit of every child’ would entail intensive school-level
engagement. Such engagement would be characterised by school-based collaborative
enquiry leading to cycles of improvement action and deeper understanding. Care was taken
to emphasis that professional learning entails change in ‘people’s beliefs’, as well as the
production of documentation. It was acknowledged that ultimately teachers would enact
change and act as mediators of policy intentions.
The philosophy of Curriculum for Excellence is not a national approach. It’s not a national
implementation. It’s a local implementation based within schools and what’s appropriate for
them and so it requires teachers in the school to be thinking holistically about how we are
going to do it in this school rather than looking for external advice on this is how you do it.
(Deans of Education focus group)
Teachers will provide the opportunities, not the curriculum, not the outcomes, not the
experiences. It’s the teachers that have to provide them.
(Deans of Education focus group)
99
Influences on teachers’ responses to Curriculum for Excellence identified by participants in
the Deans’ group echoed issues raised in feedback from teachers and local authority
officers. These included subject positionality in secondary schools, the powerful influence on
HMIE in shaping understandings of effectiveness and tensions between demands for
measurable student attainment and alternative constructs of ‘being a good teacher’.
Faculties of Education were currently engaged in developments that were supportive of the
intentions of Curriculum for Excellence. These included harmonising primary and secondary
teacher education courses, providing opportunities for primary and secondary student
teachers to work together, and opportunities for shared curriculum areas with secondary
students in some areas, as well as a stronger commitment to collaborative enquiry as an
integral aspect of teacher professionalism.
In taking developments further, building on an expanded notion of the curriculum,
participants in the Deans’ group advocated sustained partnership work; possibly through
formal consortia involving regional networks of schools and universities, with the close
involvement of partners from integrated children’s services. It was noted that teacher
educators are well placed to support schools as they plan for full implementation. In teacher
education networks, visiting tutors engage with schools on a regular basis across a wide
geographic area. Such visits offer new opportunities for reciprocal engagement around
Curriculum for Excellence and would involve a ‘shift from going in to see our students and
assess our student to much more going in to work with staff’.
9.4.
Summary
This section has offered an overview of the main messages to emerge from each strand of
the data gathered throughout the year-long engagement process. A number of strong cross
cutting themes are identifiable, which are summarised below.
In feedback across all fourteen areas of the curriculum, participants welcomed the
‘openness’ or ‘flexibility’ of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. Teachers, school leaders
and local authority officers identified moves towards greater flexibility as potentially ‘reprofessionalising’, within the context of further guidance. The ‘strength’ of the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes was concurrently perceived as a ‘weakness’. Teachers
welcomed opportunities to exercise professional judgement but within a supportive
framework of clear expectations. Concern was repeatedly expressed by many teachers that
the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, in general, were ‘vague’, ‘woolly’, ‘unclear’ on their first
attempts at interpretation. Levels of concern expressed by teachers involved in the formal
trialling process were substantially lower, perhaps indicating the benefits of enhanced
support in periods of sustained engagement.
The teaching profession expressed greatest concern in relation to progression. Across the
focus group transcripts and questionnaire datasets, teachers requested further information to
support assessment decisions. A lack of confidence was expressed in the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes as ‘the basis of planning how children and young people will progress in their
learning’. This was particularly marked in relation to mathematics, science, numeracy,
technologies and RME. Teachers sought further detail to support professional judgments
about pupil progress within and between the wider levels in the draft documents. Concern
was expressed regarding consistency in teachers’ interpretation of standards in the same
department/faculty/stage or school and across schools, regionally and nationally. School
professionals anticipated a need to develop robust systems to effectively monitor
progression. This was often expressed in relation to providing reliable information at key
transition points. A concern with progression was frequently associated with, and
100
compounded by, uncertainty about future assessment arrangements following the
consultation on the next generation of national qualifications in Scotland.
In terms of professional development needs, additional training was frequently requested to
support non-specialist or less experienced teachers in primary schools, especially in relation
to science, expressive arts and physical education. Additional support and opportunities for
collaboration were requested to prepare teachers to address core areas of the curriculum
that are the responsibility of all teachers: literacy, numeracy and aspects of health and wellbeing (and Religious Education in Catholic Schools). School professionals and local authority
officers identified a need for dedicated time to develop greater awareness and to support
systematic whole school planning. In addition, it was suggested that school leaders needed
continuing support in building curriculum structures to realise the principles of Curriculum for
Excellence.
Some questions remained in relation to specific areas of the curriculum. These included: the
positioning of literacy within the literacy and English framework only; suggested significant
omissions in the health and wellbeing Draft Experiences and Outcomes (identified by health
improvement agencies); concern about the privileging of Christianity in RME; and the place
afforded to the study of other world religions within Religious Education for Catholic Schools.
Teachers and other informed stakeholders expressed serious misgivings about the capacity
of the draft science Experiences and Outcomes to support conceptual development.
Feedback from other providers of education services indicates areas of shared interest and
some shared areas of concern. Accounts from local authority officers brought into sharp
focus some of the key tensions and challenges involved in preparing for full implementation.
Significant amongst these challenges is the issue of providing additional support without
constraining creativity and professional responsibility for local interpretation. Feedback from
officers across the 32 local authorities suggests a need for further explanation as well as
detailed exemplification (that is, explanation that would support local deliberation by
teachers). From a position of oversight of a range of different settings, local authority officers
identified a need to weave together different policy threads to present a coherent narrative
for the profession. This included efforts to align expectations of attainment with expectations
of methodologies conducive to the development of critical thinking and problem solving
capabilities.
The perspectives of representatives from further education colleges, universities and the
voluntary sector affirmed a need for integrated approaches within the extended engagement
process. Common threads for colleges and universities included a focus on improved
transition across sectors, the recognition of wider achievement, a shared emphasis on
literacy, numeracy and communication skills and the promotion of enhanced choice for
learners. Representatives from further education colleges were supportive of the need to
provide opportunities to support the development of learners who are not only successful but
also confident. Educators within the post-compulsory sector identified clear links with the
More Choices, More Chances policy agenda and welcomed the attention afforded to literacy
and numeracy across the school curriculum. It was acknowledged that further and higher
education faced comparable challenges in coordinating support for the development of
core/transferable or employability skills across existing course provision. It was noted that
opportunities for personalisation within post-compulsory education revolved around course
selection, rather than different rates of progression through assessed courses.
Contributions from further and higher education brought to the fore the issue of personal
agency when approaching curriculum reform. College representatives noted that strong
subject demarcations could be drawn by both tutors and learners and that learners made
strategic choices in assigning priorities, irrespective of principles expressed in curriculum
papers. University tutors reflected on the persistence of discipline ‘silos’ in higher education
101
as a potential inhibitor of interdisciplinary learning. These accounts emphasised the
importance of consistent approaches across the curriculum and across sectors of education
(3-18 plus) and the importance of communicating intentions to learners. Participants in the
Deans’ focus group emphasised the role of teachers as mediators of policy intentions,
enacting the Curriculum for Excellence in the context of day-to-day classroom practice.
The voluntary sector emphasised considerable experience in working across professional
boundaries and in providing alternative opportunities outside formal classroom settings for
learners whose needs are not currently met within conventional education settings. Several
voluntary sector organisations were responding to national priorities for early intervention and
prevention in working with children and young people at an earlier stage (from late primary
onwards). The voluntary sector offered specialist expertise in resource development and
through consultancy and CPD provision; and sought further opportunities for constructive
engagement.
This review of data has identified a number of core issues and cross-cutting themes.
Uppermost among these is a concern with progression and the need to achieve an
appropriate balance between explanation and exemplification; one that does not strip out the
‘re-professionalising’ potential contained in the emphasis placed on professional judgement
in the proposed curriculum framework. A concern with improved transition, the promotion of
connections across the curriculum and the development of methodologies to promote active
learning, collaborative work and critical thinking were welcomed by teachers across the
sectors of education. The feedback from stakeholders reviewed in this section,
acknowledges the benefits of closer cooperation between sectors in addressing national
policy priorities. The following section considers in more detail the lessons suggested by the
engagement process following the release and trialling of the draft sets of Experiences and
Outcomes for Curriculum for Excellence.
102
10. Review of the process
10.1.
Introduction
This section reviews the progress of engagement with key stakeholders about a . The views
presented in this section have been collated from the data collected. Views about the
engagement process were not a specific focus of this research. However, a number of
comments were expressed about the engagement process during the research and they are
reported here. A brief summary of the background to the engagement process is provided
followed by a review of progress, views of some of the key stakeholders, local authority
officers, practitioners, LTS Team Leaders and a selection of comments collated from
additional supporting documentation received.
10.2.
The Engagement Process
Engagement with key stakeholders concerning the Draft Experiences and Outcomes was
led by Learning and Teaching Scotland and aimed to:
•
•
•
Provide a broad range of stakeholders with knowledge and understanding of
Curriculum for Excellence Draft Experiences and Outcomes;
Provide opportunities for practitioners and other stakeholders to feedback their views
about Curriculum for Excellence generally and the Draft Experiences and Outcomes
particularly in order to shape the curriculum development;
Develop and identify examples of good practice to disseminate.
The process of engagement has involved education authority contact meetings, information
on LTS website, seminars, focus groups and events to promote Curriculum for Excellence
and gather feedback from the education community and practitioners in all sectors. This
engagement process began before and has continued through the phased release of the 14
draft sets of curriculum Experiences and Outcomes. The purpose of publishing all the
Experiences and Outcomes initially in draft form was to allow for engagement with the
education profession generally, subject specialists and other stakeholders before refinement
and finalisation. Feedback about the Draft Experiences and Outcomes has been gathered
through online questionnaires, trialling, CPD events and focus groups organised by LTS and
by the University of Glasgow’s research.
The online questionnaire was designed by LTS in order to provide the opportunity for any
individual or group to feedback their views on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes in all 14
areas. The school trialling process, which involved practitioners in trying out the Experiences
and Outcomes and providing feedback, formed a key part of the engagement process. This
trialling process was launched in January 2008 with an event in Inverurie. Further events
have taken place following the release of each set of Draft Experiences and Outcomes. The
LTS Curriculum for Excellence Team and the LTS Area Advisers have liaised regularly with
the local authorities organising and supporting events aimed at sharing the purposes,
principles and practicalities of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. LTS has also engaged
with a wide range of stakeholders (e.g. higher and further education personnel, employers,
parents, subject specialist groups) in order to seek feedback to enable refinement,
amendment or expansion of the draft guidance.
10.3.
Review of Progress
103
The Engagement Process has been gaining momentum since the initial communication
events and the number of people involved in the process has increased over time
(practitioners and other stakeholders). The amount of feedback received about the first ten
sets of Experiences and Outcomes released was in some cases relatively limited. However,
with the release of each set of Experiences and Outcomes the engagement process
extended and improved with an increase in feedback (see section 2). The increase in the
amount of feedback and the range of individuals and groups involved indicates increased
awareness of and interest in the Draft Experiences and Outcomes from the profession and
other key stakeholders.
The research that is presented here in this report in itself played a part in the engagement
process. The telephone interviews conducted with local authority officers provided an
opportunity for them to share their reflections on lessons learned from the trialling of the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes in different environments. Different stakeholder groups including
parents, employers, further and higher education, voluntary sector and pupils were invited to
participate in a series of focus groups in order to provide them with an opportunity to express
their views on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes. The focus groups were not only a
means of collecting data but offered an opportunity for the members of the various groups to
develop their understanding and engage with Curriculum for Excellence. In some cases (e.g.
parents and employee focus groups) information was provided to the focus group members
prior to the data collection by the LTS Team either through oral presentations or using the
DVD produced in the summer of 2008. Where the LTS Team were not present members of
the University of Glasgow research team used the DVD (e.g. Further Education and
Voluntary Organisation focus groups) to provide information about Curriculum for Excellence.
The Interim Report (University of Glasgow, 2008) which collated and analysed the feedback
from the first 10 sets of Experiences and Outcomes became a working document for the
writing teams as the views of the profession and other key stakeholders were used to edit
and refine the draft guidance. For example, in response to the feedback presented in the
Interim Report concerning science, the Draft Experiences and Outcomes have been
considered by a group of academics, science specialists and classroom practitioners and
changes have been made as appropriate. This has included the development of further
explanation to clarify for teachers what is expected and give educationalists a guide for
classroom practice. This process of using the feedback from profession and other key
stakeholders contributed to the engagement process as it demonstrated that views were
being considered in shaping the curriculum guidance. The awareness that views were being
considered and impacting on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes from the first 10 sets of
guidance released may have contributed to the increase in feedback in the later stages of the
engagement process. Practitioners and other stakeholders may have been aware that the
provision of feedback was playing a key part in refining and finalising the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes.
10.4.
Views on engagement process drawn from stakeholder focus groups
The level of feedback about the Draft Experiences and Outcomes has increased since the
release of the first set in January 2008. A stated intention of the engagement strategy was to
involve all those who have an interest in the education of Scotland’s children and young
people. However, some of the stakeholders interviewed have not felt particularly involved in
the engagement process. This view was particularly evident in the college sector. According
to the majority of the college staff representatives who participated in the focus group there is
a lack of awareness of Curriculum for Excellence in the colleges.
I don’t think colleges are very far at all with . In my experience, they don’t know a lot about it at
all. …
(College staff, Glasgow)
104
…We don’t know anything about it (Curriculum for Excellence).
(College staff, Stirling)
Staff in Higher Education Institutions indicated that they had limited involvement in the
engagement process. However, despite limited involvement the HEI representatives
expressed the view that they were fairly knowledgeable and were ‘keeping up to date’ with
Curriculum for Excellence and the four capacities. It is not clear if this extends to an
understanding of the Experiences and Outcomes.
Most parents across all the parent focus groups expressed the view that they only had very
minimal knowledge of Curriculum for Excellence. They viewed the engagement events as an
important opportunity to gain a better understanding of the new curriculum. However, these
events involved a relatively small number of parents from across Scotland.
Over the last few years, I have heard so much about Curriculum for Excellence but I haven’t
actually been able to set eyes on or get to grips with what it actually means and today, I feel
that I am beginning and only beginning (to know) … the rest is still unknown.
(Parent, Edinburgh)
Employers were invited to events and focus groups but numbers present were low. Several
employer representatives who did take part said they had only recently developed an
awareness of Curriculum for Excellence and emphasised they had only a general
awareness.
…I don’t really have much in-depth knowledge about what Curriculum for Excellence really
stands for.
(Employer, Dundee)
I was struck by the fact today that there are so few employers here at this employer
consultation event although I understand that quite a number of them were invited but … I
think there is going to be a real challenge on the part of the government and schools in getting
employers more involved with schools than they are at the present time. I think that could
possibly affect the success of Curriculum for Excellence.
(Employer, Aberdeen)
The representatives of the Voluntary Groups at the focus group were more positive and
demonstrated a sound understanding of Curriculum for Excellence. This appears to have
come about through contributions made to the writing teams and through involvement with
curriculum development activities in primary and secondary schools around the Curriculum
for Excellence four capacities.
A range of views were offered concerning the nature of the engagement process itself. The
concern appeared to be that the focus had been on collecting feedback about the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes rather than a wider process of engagement about curriculum
and pedagogy. A number of stakeholder groups suggested that engagement around what
they termed the ‘paperwork’ would not lead to successful implementation. Instead of focusing
on engagement around what is written about Draft Experiences and Outcomes a number of
stakeholders emphasised it should have been about the involvement of teachers thinking
about how to put it in practice.
how they think that’s actually going to be turned into practice for teachers and into practice in
classrooms … the jury is out in the sense that the papers in themselves will not lead to
success.
(Dean of Education)
105
the paperwork imposes a restrictive approach because people think that this is how you do it
... If you produce something on paper people think this is what we should be doing and I had
hoped that the aim of was to sort of unleash the bonds to paperwork which we’ve had for
many years.
(Dean of Education)
Similarly, some of the parents expressed concern that the engagement process was focusing
on feedback about the Draft Experiences and Outcomes.
People seem to think that it [Curriculum for Excellence] probably is well engaged and has the
potential to engage but what I am getting so far is that these other things such as the quality of
teaching and other factors will be key here.
(Parent Aberdeen)
The views highlighted that engagement with teachers was essential for Curriculum for
Excellence to be effective.
For this to work we need the best educators the education system could give us and if it is not
there then this will go along the same route as what we have already got.
(Parent, Dundee)
… the actual curriculum, the whole theory, it sounds great and it does, you know, if it works it
will be great, but if the teachers are not completely behind it or not so much that but don’t
quite know where they’re going with it, then it really isn’t going to work properly … I feel a little
bit confused about everything myself, as a parent, but if the teachers are like that, then that is
a worry.
(Parent, Edinburgh)
The concern over lack of engagement around pedagogy was also apparent in the views of
the stakeholders representing the Voluntary Sector.
So, that would be my main point that it will take a great deal of teacher training and new
pedagogies to deliver this, regardless of what the outcomes say.
(Voluntary Sector)
The importance of partnership working was also raised as an issue that needed greater
attention. In general, parents thought that all stakeholders including employers, further
education, higher education and parents themselves have a role to play in making
Curriculum for Excellence a success. (Parents, Aberdeen, Edinburgh). They suggested that
more information about Curriculum for Excellence could be placed on schools own websites
to help parents maximise their support.
Employers also raised the importance of partnership through greater engagement. They
suggested that there should be space for genuine partnership between teachers, parents,
career people and schools to make the curriculum not only motivating but also relevant
(Employer, Dundee).
The representatives from the Voluntary Sector emphasised during the focus group
discussion that a continuum was needed to link learning in schools to learning in other sites.
This again signals the need for partnership working to enable a 3–18 curriculum to be
successful.
… one of the things that strikes me is that the needs to be a continuum. It needs to be
carried into lifelong learning and it needs to take those core skills, put them into that person’s
employment … if you put them into work and you give them all those citizenship aspects of
turning up to work and the self-esteem, they will learn better and that’s where sometimes the
literacy and numeracy kicks in really well. I don’t think there’s enough focus on that…
106
(Voluntary Sector)
One of the representatives from the Voluntary Sector indicated that there was no opportunity
for them to engage formally in dialogue with the key agencies concerning their views about
Curriculum for Excellence.
There is no official forum of any kind that I’m aware of for those who shape formal education,
Learning and Teaching Scotland, Scottish Qualifications Authority, HMIE, to meet with the
voluntary sector. I’m aware that individual advisory liaison and various other named groups
exist around specific subjects but there is no formal forum by which you can input, and I think
that’s a really big missing piece of the puzzle.
(Voluntary Sector)
Generally, the various stakeholder groups indicated they were unclear about the assessment
processes associated with the new curriculum. It was acknowledged that taking account of
wider achievement was commendable but there was concern that this stage of the
engagement process had not clarified how Curriculum for Excellence would be assessed to
ensure a good standard of learning for all pupils.
10.5.
Local authority views of engagement process drawn from telephone interviews
The telephone interviews conducted during this research with the 32 local authority officers
(and a representative of the Scottish Council of Independent Schools, SCiS) provided a
vehicle for them to feedback their views. The sense of active engagement through dialogue
is important. Opportunities for people to have a voice in any change process need to be
facilitated at local and national levels. The local authority officers who took part in the
telephone interviews were keen to reflect on lessons learned from the trialling of the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes. Schools and pre-school establishments were selected for
involvement in liaison with headteachers and Quality Improvement Officers and were drawn
from a wide range of socio-economic, demographic and geographic settings. Engagement of
personnel at school and local authority level is another important element of the development
of a sense of ownership of Curriculum for Excellence through partnership working. This is
enhanced by enabling decision-making according to local contexts. The choice of school for
trialling was influenced by different factors in different authorities and curriculum areas. In
some cases schools were selected because they had a strong local reputation for effective
teaching and learning, sometimes in relation to Assessment is for Learning (AifL) or
cooperative learning. In other cases, schools or department were selected on the basis that
the trialling presented a development opportunity that might act as a stimulus for change. In
one local authority schools were recruited that (a) were ‘keen’ and (b) had ‘the capacity to
actually do the trialling properly’ (LA interviewee19).
Schools, supported by local authority link personnel, were encouraged to select a small
number of Draft Experiences and Outcomes to trial and were advised to select outcomes that
would sit within normal planning for the time of year. A limited number of teachers in each
trialling school participated in the trials. The trialling process in a minority of schools was
disrupted by moving into new buildings during the trialling process (two schools), extended
periods of unavoidable absence among lead personnel and, in one case, by an HMIE
inspection. These circumstances are the reality of school life and it is part of the process of
trialling the Draft Experiences and Outcomes in authentic contexts
From the analysis of the transcripts of the telephone interviews with the local authority
education officers, three main messages emerged concerning engagement with Curriculum
for Excellence through the trialling process. First, greater understanding comes from
engaging with the Experiences and Outcomes and through discussion of strategies, designs
107
and activities with peers in a mutually supportive environment. This is a key point in
considering the way forward for the next phase of Curriculum for Excellence.
The local authority officers indicated that trialling provided opportunities for initial reservations
to be worked through and teachers were able to adapt the guidance within specific applied
contexts: ‘The more they use them, the more they like them’ (LA interviewee 11)
Over the year I have definitely seen a shift. There was more anxiety expressed by secondary
teachers earlier in the year. As they have gone through the year, we have had more and more
positive remarks being made. We have a lot of good work done by people, some really
interesting work. We have had wonderful professional discussion and I think that people have
been quite enthused, not across the board. I am not going to claim that everyone has been
enthused but generally speaking I think we have had a lot of success with good work being
done.
(LA interviewee 16)
People need time to engage with the outcomes; to look at them in the way that the trialling
schools did and to share the practice. What worked well at the early stages in the primary
school and why it worked well as opposed to the difficulties that those working in isolation in
the upper school experienced. It’s about having an interface where you could have that kind of
discussion. Once people become more confident in using the broader outcomes, they will
actually appreciate it more. To have the freedom to develop creativity in their teaching.
(LA interviewee 6)
In order to trial, this school actually developed some collegiate working so from nursery to P3
they took the same context and applied the outcomes across that range and that was the most
positive thing that came out the trialling for them, the collegiate working and the common
understanding. They said that it would help in terms of transition from nursery to primary and
also from class to class.
(LA interviewee 6)
Second, the local authority officers indicated that the scope of the trialling process had
limitations which impacted on the effectiveness of the engagement process. Some of them
said where a small number of teachers worked with a small number of outcomes the wider
value of trialling to the school community was limited. As one interviewee noted, ‘I am sure
some schools are doing bits of this and are doing very well but it’s all in pockets’ (LA
interviewee 3). A number of interviewees noted that trialling participants were more likely to be
committed ‘volunteers’ who were ‘more enthusiastic’ open to change and experimentation. It
should be noted that one interviewee (LA interviewee 10) reported an explicit attempt to
involve all school teaching staff in primary trialling schools and most of the department in
secondary trialling schools. However, this was not typical across the interviews.
The danger is that you have a small group of pilot schools and teachers who are up to a
certain level now but you have got the vast majority of the teaching staff who have had nothing
to do with the pilot. I suspect there are a lot of teachers who have done nothing more than
have a quick look over the learning experience outcomes. They are finding it difficult to just do
more than they are doing.
(LA interviewee 3)
These comments have implications for the next stage of Curriculum for Excellence when all
schools and all teachers are expected to engage with the Experiences and Outcomes. The
insight of the local authority officers in relation to local contexts for implementation will be
important in making the transition to all school involvement.
It was also pointed out that when teachers focused on a small number of outcomes then an
understanding of the whole curriculum area and an understanding of progression through
levels was not easily attained.
108
Discussing magnetism in a particular outcome from Science, one teacher described something
she had done in two hours inside one day whilst someone else is doing quite an extensive
range of science experiments and investigations. It’s not until they start to talk to one another
that they realise that there might be more to it. When they do get round the table, they are
actually identifying the different aspects that might relate to a different outcome. The problem
is when this goes wider into all schools, the opportunities that are available to those involved in
the trialling will not be made available more generally and that I think is a real problem.
(LA interviewee 3)
This comment indicates the need for teachers to understand the big picture in relation to and
the development of pupils’ learning in a holistic way not just their within their own area of
expertise.
Third, several local authority interviewees commented on what they perceived to be limited
investment in the trials. Comments addressed: (a) the time available to provide support to
schools; (b) the time period in which the trials were to be completed; and (c) the lack of
advance notice to recruit schools. It was suggested that it would have been beneficial to
recruit schools whilst improvement plans for the forthcoming session were in development. A
number of interviewees commented on the impact of the limited and shifting timescale for the
trialling, which as one interviewee commented ‘included an Easter holiday and a period of
time for exam leave in secondary’. Working with Draft Experiences and Outcomes in different
curriculum areas in quick succession was also cited as a limiting factor: ‘It’s been a bit of a
machine gun approach.’ (LA interviewee 25).
The teachers involved felt a sense of responsibility in testing the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes and some felt the pressure of this when feeding back comments in a short
timescale. One of the local authority officers summed up the feeling describing teachers’
responses to the early stages of the trialling process as characterised by ‘fear and
trepidation’ (LA interviewee 25).
Because the trialling was done in such a short timescale it’s been quite stressful for [teachers].
They have been responsible for giving us the responses on behalf of the Authority, so they felt
quite a high degree of responsibility and it was a very short timescale to really enable them to
familiarise themselves properly with the outcomes and give good quality feedback. So they
worked really, really hard and now they’re glad they did it, but at the beginning and up to about
half way through it they were very, very worried about the whole process.
(LA interviewee 25)
The amount of time that was required and the relatively short amount of time in which to get
through an awful lot was hard. The timescale that was issued was quite tight and I think that
made some people quite uncomfortable….
(LA interviewee 1)
The need to ensure that timescale did not constrain opportunities for reflection or cause
added stress was raised during the telephone interviews.
It’s more important that we get this right than we get this on time. I think that we have to make
sure that we continue to focus on learning and teaching methodology because that is what this
is about rather than the outcomes and it’s been very exciting to see that.
(LA interviewee 15)
The time factor was also linked to ensuring the timescale for implementation would give
teachers time to think through the implications of the new curriculum and that the
engagement process should include time for CPD. One interviewee reflected favourably on
the development of Higher Still and the scope afforded for extended feedback and
development.
109
As soon as there is any exemplification delivered, even if it is rough draft, there should be
national CPD meetings were teachers who are going to be delivering this, get a chance to see
it and feedback. Now we did this with the Higher Still and it was extremely effective in its
delivery and its uptake because people then knew what they were required to do and they saw
it two to three years before they were asked to implement it and they were able to influence
that national debate, they were able to influence the policy that was taking place and the
quality and content of the courses themselves.
(LA interviewee 10)
It was pointed out that the engagement process should have enabled more opportunities for
teachers to discuss and reflect on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes with each other. One
interviewee (LA interviewee 8) suggested that resource constraints influenced the trialling
process by limiting possibilities for teachers to meet with peers and local authority officers
outside school. It was also suggested that headteachers have an increasing expectation that
replacement teaching costs will be provided for teachers who are involved in development
activities outwith the school e.g. joint meetings to design trialling materials and provide
feedback. In one authority short-term contracts of up to twenty-five hours were awarded to
teachers to enable them to participate fully in the trialling and feedback process, including
attending meetings after school.
These comments suggest that the trialling process was viewed by some teachers as
separate from their everyday reflection and development of learning and teaching. An
engagement approach that involves teachers in an ongoing process of reflection about
curriculum development will require an embedded culture of enquiry though opportunities for
professional dialogue between peers in and between schools on a regular basis.
The interviews with the local authority officers highlighted the variations in the method of
trialling for the different sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes. Some of the trialling visit
proforma received contained general reports on discussions with school staff, others were
observations of lessons. For example, in relation to Health and Well Being a key focus of the
formal trialling appears to have been mapping existing provision against the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes. A proforma from an early years/primary school notes, ‘staff
leading trialling took the school planner and crossed off where Health and Well Being is
covered’. A primary school described the process as an ‘audit’ organised according to two
guiding questions: ‘What are we doing? Are there gaps?’ A secondary school developed an
‘audit tool’ to support a systematic review of the delivery of Sexual Health Education (SHE).
The headteacher picked out the relevant outcomes, photocopied them for staff and asked staff
to highlight what they were already doing to deliver the outcomes in their class.
(Trialling visit proforma, early years/ primary school)
The feedback received during the engagement process was also provided in different ways.
In some cases one proforma was submitted by a local authority for a large number of
schools. For example, one local authority submitted one proforma on behalf of nineteen
primary schools. In other cases, trialling was carried out and reported by one teacher. Some
local authority officers commented that although they were involved in setting up the trials,
they felt removed from the feedback process: ‘The reporting has gone to LTS and any
responses that have gone to them haven’t gone through me’. Another interviewee asked LTS
for information on which schools had responded to the trialling questionnaire as they did not
have authority level records of submissions.
We haven’t asked for teachers who have been doing the trialling to send their responses to us.
LTS made it very clear that they would like the responses direct. This removes us a little bit
from knowing first hand how teachers feel. I sat in on many of the sessions and the feedback I
am giving you is from those sessions. The teachers have always been encouraged to provide
their own feedback to the questionnaires and we haven’t asked for them.
110
(LA interviewee 17)
The variations in methods used for feeding back comments were further highlighted by two
interviewees from different local authorities indicated that the schools involved in the trialling
had experienced problems in accessing and saving the online forms. In one authority it was
reported that local authority officers had produced responses on behalf of the teachers
involved in the trials. The justification offered for the mediation of responses was prevention
of additional demands on participating teachers.
I had to make schools aware of how to complete the forms and how to find the forms. They
had to register on the online community to get access to the forms. I think there was a little bit
of confusion as to what forms to complete because there were the general public
questionnaires that were available on the website for each of the curriculum areas but there
were also the specific trialling questionnaires that were only available on the online community.
Of course to have a copy of that they had to make sure they printed it. They couldn’t save it on
their own computers. Due to that and because of the timescale and schools then going
straight on holiday … feedback has been minimal at the moment.
(LA interviewee 17)
You cannot expect people to sit and complete an online survey when they have put weeks into
trialling them. What they want is to be able to complete something, go away, add a few more
comments, come back. You can’t do that with the online survey. Neither are they going to
submit a written hard copy to LTS so we have had to re-create the word documents. We have
not had any intention of diluting or editing what the responses are. We purely wanted to make
things easier for people involved.
(LA interviewee 11)
A local authority officer coordinating the trialling of Health and Well-Being Draft Outcomes
also commented on the limitations of the online feedback process, saying that the online
trialling forum did not encourage partnership work with external agencies. Participants
needed a school-based or government email address to log in, excluding potentially
significant NHS and voluntary sector partners.
These comments highlight technical issues which are important and should be considered to
make it as easy as possible for people to provide their views. A key element of the
engagement is giving as many people as possible a way of feeling part of the process. The
comments also indicate the local authority variations in approach which are essential to
ensuring relevancy to local needs and contexts. However, the views raise questions about
the balance between enabling local development and variation and working within a national
framework of curriculum guidance.
10.6.
Teacher views on the engagement process drawn from the questionnaires
In general, teachers who responded to the invitation to submit questionnaires and trialling
feedback or take part in focus groups welcomed the opportunity to contribute to the
engagement process. Across the sources of data there was a strong desire for the
practitioner perspective to be ‘taken seriously’, for the views of the many participants to be
valued and their questions addressed. It was hoped that contributions made by teachers
might inform an appropriate national response. In giving their time to contribute to the
engagement process, teachers looked forward to continued dialogue as the Draft
Experiences and Outcome are subject to further refinement.
Please can this consultation be taken seriously and not just be ignored and the draft become
a reality. Please do not consult then ignore. This happens too often in teaching.
(Maths online questionnaire)
111
It is hoped that this is a genuine consultation and that views of respondents are listened to
and acted on.
(Numeracy online questionnaire)
There is concern about whether these comments will be considered and acted on at national
level.
(Science online questionnaire)
I would like to know how the draft outcomes were made and whether faith communities were
consulted about them. I hope that comments from practitioners will be taken into account
before the final outcomes are published.
(Religious and Moral Education online questionnaire)
In common with local authority respondents, a minority of teachers expressed some concern
about technical and logistical aspects of the feedback process. The questionnaires provided
opportunities to respond to statements by selecting from a fixed range of responses (using a
Likert scale) and in addition offered the opportunity to provide comments in relation to each
question and further open comment at the end of the set of questions. Some respondents felt
constrained by the framing of the questions, the format of the questionnaires and the process
for accessing paper and electronic copies of the document.
It is not a good idea to expect teachers / interested parties to respond to consultation without
sending a paper copy of the proposals. Publishing such an important document on a website
only, might restrict the number of responses. Producing a “standard” form for responses might
restrict stakeholders’ ability to make the comments they want to make.
(English and Literacy online questionnaire)
Teachers are clearly concerned with the timescale of the engagement process. There is a
strong feeling that the questionnaire method of feedback which has been used is formulated
to give an expected outcome. There is also a cautionary suspicion that their views will not be
fully taken into account.
(Science online questionnaire)
Some concern was expressed about the sequence of developments within the engagement
calendar. This was expressed in terms of a perceived ‘delay’ in the publication of the draft
documents, the impact of phased release on a sense of coherence across the areas of the
curriculum at early stage in the engagement calendar and, in particular, the relationship
between the Draft Experiences and Outcomes and future assessment arrangements for the
senior phase in secondary schools.
The phased release of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes in the year-long engagement
period was felt by some practitioners to be detrimental to the promotion of connections
across the curriculum. Sets of Draft Experiences and Outcomes released at an early point in
the engagement strategy were initially approached in isolation. Health and Well-Being, parts
of which apply to all professionals, was among the last four sets to be released.
The disjointed unveiling of the experiences and outcomes has not aided the cross-curricular
process.
(Maths online questionnaire)
A key area of concern was the publication of the draft sets of Experiences and Outcomes in
advance of the outcomes of the consultation on future arrangements for national
qualifications. A number of responses noted a sense of anxiety associated with uncertainty
around the future assessment framework.
Without knowing the details of any syllabus proposed in light of the probable merging of
Intermediate 2/Credit it is impossible to comment on the transition from Fourth Level to any
new/amended courses.
112
(Maths online questionnaire)
Coverage to S3 does not fit the current pattern in secondary schools; this causes confusion.
Simply saying "Ignore the fourth stage just now" is simply not good enough. The SQA must
speak before this goes any further. Ultimately what we do will be affected by the undiminished
demand for pupils to pass examinations.
(Science online questionnaire)
As a teacher and Head of Department, I am interested in how this will change the approach
we currently take to feedback and assessment. Until there is a unified approach to creating
an excellent curriculum which marries the unarguably good principles of with the assessment
and exam process I don't think I can cope with implementing another layer of
outcomes/criteria /experiences etc. Apart from the sheer despondency of this there is a
workload issue. I feel we are being asked to comment on a half decided venture.
(English and Literacy online questionnaire)
It is generally thought that the consultation period is too short. The discussions surrounding
National qualifications are similarly too short. The consultation period runs from June to
October. Realistically the profession has not been able to actively engage during this period.
Schools are not in session. Until teachers have had the opportunity to collaborate and
respond to concerns regarding qualifications they cannot realistically be asked to answer
questions on progression.
(Religious and Moral Education online questionnaire)
Other contributors noted the positive impact of their participation in the engagement process.
Comments focused on how the publication of the Draft Experiences and Outcomes had
acted as a stimulus for discussion, collaboration and sharing within local networks. Many
respondents reflected positively on participation in area events, twilight ‘in-service’ sessions
and opportunities to strengthen links across stages in school clusters.
The group was pleased to note that the Experiences and Outcomes are evolutionary rather
that revolutionary and that they are very open, with the emphasis on skills rather than content.
The release of the Modern Languages Experiences and Outcomes has promoted dialogue
across sectors and more sharing of practice already.
(Modern Languages online questionnaire)
Teachers who participated in the formal trialling process commented on the contribution of
trialling to their professional development and suggested that this had contributed to
improved classroom practice. This was especially marked in the comments relating to
Religious Education (in Roman Catholic schools). This highlights the value of teachers
engaging in curriculum development. It suggests that reflection on curriculum development
has a positive impact on learning and teaching.
Similar to the comments made by the local authority officers some concern was expressed
by teachers about the time available to commit to trialling within busy teaching and
assessment calendars. The intended optimal period for trialling was six months – one month
for preparation and planning, four months working with a selection of Draft Experiences and
Outcomes which could be accommodated within existing curriculum plans (implementation),
and one month for reviewing and reporting. This did not prove feasible for many of the
teachers who were involved in the formal trialling process, who nevertheless felt they derived
benefit from their participation.
I really enjoyed the RE trialling lessons and will continue to take a more active approach in
my religious lessons.
(RE (RC) online questionnaire)
113
I have enjoyed taking part in the RE Trials. Made me think carefully about making lessons
more meaningful for the pupils and has been good for my own spiritual development as a
Catholic school teacher.
(RE (RC) online questionnaire)
Trialling has been a worthwhile experience and has allowed me a degree of autonomy in
terms of how I deliver the RE programme.
(RE (RC) online questionnaire)
Responses to the online questionnaires indicated that teachers who had not yet had the
opportunity to be involved in formal and informal trialling were looking for further guidance. In
general, feedback from teachers suggests that in addition to the production of documents
more active and participatory forms of engagement are desirable.
I have been awaiting anything of substance to give me advice of how to put material together
and so far nothing appears to be happening. The "Building the Curriculum" publications only
seem to be telling us that there is a need for change and that the change will be great but
nothing of how we are to actually achieve this change.
(Science online questionnaire)
It was also acknowledged that new opportunities for enhanced partnership work, especially
home-school links, were presented as schools responded positively to Curriculum for
Excellence.
Awareness-raising for parents should be considered to support schools in developing literacy
(across curriculum).
(English and Literacy online questionnaire)
We need to think through how far this framework of Experiences and Outcomes can also be
an important point of reference for parents, parishes, Church organisations (e.g. SCIAF,
SVDP), and of Diocesan and national youth services. We need to develop leaflets.
(RE (RC) online questionnaire)
10.7.
LTS Team Leaders views on engagement drawn from focus group data
The LTS Team Leaders participated in a focus group which provided them with the
opportunity to express their views about the engagement process. They indicated that as
well as specific engagement events they undertook engagement visits. This allowed them to
engage with practitioners and ask questions directly about the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes and about the impact on learning and teaching approaches.
In looking at this outcome and trying to unpack it, what do you think you do already that would
help you to meet this, what sorts of layers of learning do you build up with children and young
people in order to help them achieve these outcomes, and what kinds of practical experiences
do you already provide in the classroom to ensure that young people can achieve this?
(LTS Team Leader)
I support the region as well, we involve participants in activities which led them towards
thinking about their practice, so, for example, from looking at how to bring experiences and
outcomes together, in an integrated way, and so the activities built around the learning and
teaching approaches, it would support the experiences and outcomes as we felt that that was
very important to the learning and teaching rather than just the nitty gritty of the wording or the
content of the experiences and outcomes.
(LTS Team Leader)
114
The Team Leaders emphasised that during their engagement visits they asked teachers to
think about the Draft Experiences and Outcomes in relation to existing practice. Part of this
process was indicating to practitioners that their views about current practice were important
in thinking about curriculum development.
… when we were looking at the engagement with practitioners, we were trying to get them to
identify what they knew was good from the already existing frameworks, so that they weren’t
seeing this as being something which was going to be very new to them, but to actually
identify their good practice, what was good about those particular frameworks and actually
begin to see where it could be developed with the new approaches that we were suggesting
within the draft framework, so we were building at all times on the best practice that was out
there …
(LTS Team Leader)
… we reassured practitioners that we were taking their views into account as well, you know,
that we really valued their feedback and that their feedback would react upon, you know, that
we would act upon any feedback that they did give us and we’d really emphasise that these
were draft experiences and outcomes, and we would take in any feedback that was given to
us.
(LTS Team Leader)
The comments made during the focus group made reference to additional guidance that was
provided during the engagement process to support understanding of the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes. For example, in relation to Literacy three additional guidance papers were
provided.
… when we did go out to engage we also provided support papers to go along with the
Experiences and Outcomes. They came in three forms. One was to explain or to provide a
definition of the word “text” and the word “text” appeared right throughout the framework, and
it was to ensure that people understood that we’re looking at a very broad, wide definition of
text. We also provided a paper that explained what we meant by “reading strategies”, and
there was also a paper about early reading. So those were all made available to help support
practitioners when they were looking at the Experiences and Outcomes.
(LTS Team Leader)
The importance of inter-disciplinary working was noted by the Team Leaders as a key part of
the engagement process. They explained that planning for inter-disciplinary work has been
raised as an issue during engagement visits. Positive comments were also noted by the
Team Leaders about the value of cross discipline and cross sector working in the
development of Curriculum for Excellence.
We’ve also been looking at ways of planning for the inter-disciplinary working and when we’ve
been out on engagement, that’s really been one of the big questions, how are we going to
plan for that?
(LTS Team Leader)
… one of the things we’ve tried to do is bring together working groups and people from across
the curriculum, but also from across the sectors, and the comments that we’ve had about
evaluation, we get very few that criticise having had to work through people in other sectors,
you know, working with colleagues from other sectors, and people mainly say how much
they’ve learned from that experience, both from the generalist approach of nursery and
primary practitioners and from the very specialist approach of the secondary person, they
learn from each other, and I think we do have to think about how we organise CPD in the
future to reflect that, so that people have more opportunities to work across curriculum areas
and across sectors.
(LTS Team Leader)
115
The comment above raised the issue of CPD and many of the comments made during the
LTS Team Leader focus group related to the importance of CPD. They indicated that during
engagement visits the need for CPD was a regular request.
… the kind of things that are coming up for us is please, please, can we have more CPD?
(LTS Team Leader)
However, differences in confidence and expertise of the teachers were noted by the Team
Leaders and they were in accord with the views of other stakeholders who emphasised the
role and expertise of the teacher. One of the Team Leaders pointed out ‘… it is very much
down to the interpretation by the teacher’. The importance of the engagement process in
supporting teachers’ understanding was highlighted.
where they’re saying, “I want clarification”, sometimes what they really mean is, “I want
reassurance that what I’m doing …” and once they get that within an engagement procedure,
or presentations that we’re doing, they’re a lot happier with that.
(LTS Team Leader)
The Team Leaders made the link between CPD and the need for leadership at all levels.
CPD that’s going to be well programmed needs leadership at all levels and I think the two of
them need to go hand in hand (LTS Team Leader).
In some cases the Team Leaders pointed out that there was a lack of teacher engagement
with the Draft Experiences and Outcomes because they did not know that they were
available on the LTS website or there was an unwillingness of lack of time to download them.
This hampered teacher engagement, particularly in secondary schools with the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes in their own area and interdisciplinary development.
… in some of the engagement events we’ve been to, had people say to us things like, “We
didn’t realise we could only get them from the website, we were waiting for the hard copy to be
delivered”
(LTS Team Leader)
… when I’m going out on engagement, teachers are not reading the documentation and I’m
not down on them for that, I know how busy they are, but they haven’t time to read big wads of
information
(LTS Team Leader)
…from a secondary teacher’s perspective, they’re not particularly keen at the thought of
having to go in, download their own framework, print out a copy and then also print out the
Literacy and English framework and score out the English Outcomes and Experiences that
don’t apply to them, and then to go and get the Numeracy ones, which are nicely printed on
their own, but also bring in Health and Well-being and also the framework for Technologies
where it’s the Outcomes which actually relate to all. So there’s going to have to be some work
done on that, whether there’s an easier way for the profession to actually access the
frameworks.
(LTS Team Leader)
10.8.
Views on engagement provided in additional supporting documentation
LTS made a range of supplementary material received from, for example, professional
bodies and subject associations available to the Research Team. Some of this
supplementary material included comments about the engagement process.
116
The technical difficulty of feeding back echoed some of the comments from the local
authority officers. In some cases the online questionnaires were not felt to be appropriate to
convey their views and this was the reason given for submitting additional supporting
documentation.
It was concluded that the survey forms provided as a vehicle for responses were not suitable
to convey our views in a coherent or suitably balanced way
(STEM ED Scotland)
…several respondents stating that they did not feel that the LTS questionnaire allowed them
to make the comments on the consultation that they wished to make and/or they could not
provide suitable answers for the questions they asked.
(The Association for Science Education Scotland)
Similar to comments made by the Deans of Education concern was expressed that the
engagement process (particularly the collection of feedback from trialling) focused on the
Draft Experiences and Outcomes. The view expressed in this case was that the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes should have been considered in relation to the overarching
Curriculum for Excellence vision.
It is regrettable that the request for feedback only asked questions about the Draft Outcomes
and Experiences. These, read without an understanding of the vision outlined in the Cover
paper, are meaningless. As a result, some respondents may have misunderstood the purpose
of the Draft Outcomes and Experiences. This oversight highlights the significance of the vital
connection between the Cover paper and the Outcomes and Experiences and may suggest
that these should be two parts of one document, rather than separate documents as they
currently are.
(Scottish Catholic Education Service)
Views expressed in another supplementary document indicated that it would have been
helpful to ‘identify and clearly state what the precursors for change were. Explain what's
wrong with the previous paradigm so we don't repeat the same mistakes and it would have
been useful to have understood why it was decided necessary to change from the 5-14
program in order to avoid "repeating its mistakes" ’(Technology Teachers Association).
A number of documents provided lengthy examples relating to the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes but added comments indicating a willingness to engage in the development of
Curriculum for Excellence. For example,
Archaeology Scotland would be happy to refine or amend any of the learning outcomes listed,
or develop s further set … as the develops.
(Archaeology Scotland)
We are very willing to be part of any future developments or support which would benefit the
teaching profession in implementing .
(The Association for Science Education Scotland)
The issue of sufficient time being given to the engagement process was also raised in the
additional supporting documentation and echoed the views of some of the local authority
officers interviewed.
We have concerns that insufficient time has been provided for teachers to become familiar
with the vision and to trial outcomes and experiences at this stage. Thus, it is possible that
responses to consultation will be based on very limited consideration and reflection.
(Scottish Catholic Education Service)
117
Active engagement with extended networks of stakeholders was emphasised in some of the
additional documentation. For example,
…this is a major and important undertaking and that success requires active engagement and
input of the stakeholder community.
(STEM ED Scotland)
The documentation emphasised the need for input from external agencies (e.g. universities,
science centres, industry) to be explicitly planned and integrated into curriculum
development.
Significant reference was made to the need to embed CPD within the engagement process.
The suggestions stressed the need for expanded and ongoing CPD including active
networking opportunities involving teachers in their own discipline with teachers in other
schools and with teachers in other disciplines in their own school. Similar to the comments
made during the interviews with stakeholder groups the quality of teaching was emphasised.
For example,
A great deal will depend on the experience, skills and motivation of the practitioner on whether
the possibilities embraced within the science Experiences and Outcomes are fully explored.
The amount and quality of science a pupil will experience, particularly primary pupils, will
depend largely on the confidence of their teacher to teach any outcome to a particular depth.
This will only be improved with much further guidance and CPD.
(The Association for Science Education Scotland)
The challenges of balancing local authority and school freedom to develop and support
Curriculum for Excellence within a national framework of guidance were also raised in some
of the supporting documentation.
It is critical that supporting explanation and guidance is developed centrally as the task is far
too complicated and important to be attempted separately by each local authority or school.
(STEM ED Scotland)
The need for supplementary guidance has been expressed by most parties considering these
draft materials. It is vital that, at the time of final publication, teachers will be aware that the
supplementary guidance is an essential component for anyone trying to understand the
outcomes and experiences.
(Scottish Catholic Education Service)
10.9.
Summary
The engagement process did not form part of the research brief, however, a number of views
were expressed about it during the data collection and this section presented a selection of
them.
Responses to the various engagement activities increased in volume, as the process
progressed and actual involvement in the trialling of the reforms tended to lead to much more
positive engagement. LTS has responded to practitioners and stakeholders’ comments and
the engagement process has developed and expanded since its inception. However, some
stakeholders felt that they had not been sufficiently involved in the process, particularly the
colleges and the faculties of education. The engagement process did provide individuals and
groups with the opportunity to feedback views about the Draft Experiences and Outcomes
but it was suggested that engagement needs to involve more than feedback about Draft
Experiences and Outcomes. A number of views were expressed indicating that thinking,
118
discussion, trialling and reflection also needs to include pedagogy and that teachers should
be engaging in testing the ‘how’ and not just providing feedback about the ‘what’. It was also
suggested that CPD should have been a key part of the engagement process. Teachers
should have had opportunities to think about and try out new ways of working and exchange
ideas and practice with colleagues from the outset of the engagement process. Use could be
made of GLOW to provide opportunity for teachers to work in communities of practice and
reflect together on how they realise the four capacities and the contribution the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes make. The views of stakeholders indicated a willingness and
desire to be involved in curriculum development and more opportunities could be made
available for partnership working across stakeholder groups to discuss, share and extend the
contribution of different groups to Curriculum for Excellence. The feedback from the local
authorities indicated that the engagement process had differed across the authorities. The
methods used to trial the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, support the teachers in the
process and provide feedback was different. It was not suggested that differences in
approaches in the local authorities were problematic but it highlighted the need to find a
balance between freedom to develop and interpret curriculum guidance according to local
needs and a national framework to maintain an excellent system of education across
Scotland.
119
11. The Way Forward: implementation of Curriculum for Excellence
11.1. Introduction
In this report we have reviewed an enormous amount of data that has been generated
through the engagement process managed by LTS over the past year. Drawing on all of this
data and on the interim and supplementary reports on the fourteen sets of Draft Experiences
and Outcomes, this final section of the report sets out to summarise the key themes, issues
and challenges that have emerged from this review. The purpose is not to set out
recommendations for LTS or other stakeholders, but rather to provide a balanced summary,
based on the views and responses that have been analysed, in the hope that this will be
helpful to those, including LTS, who do have responsibility for making decisions about
procedures and processes for the further development and implementation of Curriculum for
Excellence. The remarks that follow are grouped under six major headings, although these
themes do have strong inter-relationships.
11.2. The alignment of curriculum, pedagogy and assessment
The considerable enthusiasm for the underlying philosophy and principles of Curriculum for
Excellence was closely related to a desire on the part of many teachers and other education
professionals to take increased responsibility for the determination of the detail of the
curriculum. This was coupled with an enthusiasm for being imaginative and innovative in
relation to pedagogical approaches. However, these enthusiasms were often coupled with
concern about ensuring continuity and progression in pupils’ learning and also with concerns
about the need for a close correspondence to the approach taken to the assessment of pupil
learning. Enthusiasm for the formative approaches of Assessment is for Learning was also
frequently expressed, but there was also recognition that a national assessment system is an
essential requirement and has to include summative elements. While teachers and others
were determined that the curriculum should not be led by assessment, the need to relate
assessment reform and specifically the Review of National Qualifications to the Curriculum
for Excellence was frequently expressed.
11.3. CPD for teachers and others
As has been seen, many teachers, local authorities and others are very enthusiastic about
what is perceived to be a more flexible and professionally led approach set out in the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes. However, many of those who are positive, as well as a large
number of those who are less enthusiastic, expressed concern about the ‘vagueness’ of
many statements. Frequently the use of terms such as this was accompanied by a call for
significant opportunities for teachers to undertake CPD.
Across the three strands of data gathering – focus groups, trialling feedback and
questionnaires – teachers consistently identified a need for significant investment in a range
of different types of CPD, as well as further exemplification through the production of
resources and illustrative planners, perhaps arising from formal and informal trialling.
Teachers would welcome the development of communities to provide support for curriculum
review and development planning: online and face-to-face, inter-departmental, cross-school
and between schools and sectors/stages. The involvement of other education and healthrelated professionals, as well as the voluntary sector, was frequently identified as potentially
constructive in supporting local preparation of plans for full implementation. The support
needs of non-specialist and less experienced teachers were particularly emphasised. The
challenge presented in working with sensitive areas, especially those related to substance
misuse, relationships and sexual health were noted. In both phases of the engagement
120
process, there were strong calls for high quality, nationally coordinated CPD delivered locally
to promote engagement with the profession and the involvement of the profession in the
formulation of local responses. Teachers repeatedly identified a need for time and space to
support professional dialogue and school-based development informed by the anticipated
provision of further guidance.
Some key questions about CPD provision that emerged would include the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
At what levels and by whom should CPD activity be organised?
What purposes should CPD seek to achieve?
What forms should it take?
How can CPD address the need to align curriculum, pedagogy and assessment?
Should there be opportunities for primary and secondary teachers to work together, in
order to address concerns about continuity and progression through transitions?
Should there be a significant focus on inter-curricular relationships as well as on core
cross-curricularity (e.g. literacy, numeracy, health and well-being)?
11.4. Local support
It was clear from the responses of local authority staff that the majority welcome the
opportunity to provide greater local influence on the curriculum. Indeed, many of them, in
recognising the opportunity for greater professional judgement by teachers, also took the
view that local authorities would gain greater scope for local determination of aspects of the
curriculum. These generally positive views were derived not only from working in trialling
Curriculum for Excellence in some of their schools, but also from experiences most of them
had had in relation to the Assessment is for Learning programme. There was recognition of
a possible tension between local authority, school and teacher decision making, with a need
to redefine the scope for decision making at each of these ‘levels’. The extent to which
developments can be organized through clustering of schools and the facilitation of sharing
successful experiences is a matter for those working at a local level.
11.5. National support
Given that Curriculum for Excellence is a national programme of reform, there is a need for
support also to be available at this level. Many at local authority level would anticipate that
national level activity should be largely of a strategic nature. In considering how to respond
to the range of advice offered by the thousands of respondents who have contributed in this
process so far, it would seem important
that all key stakeholders with relevant
responsibilities work even more closely together and that connections between these
curriculum developments and other current policy developments in Scottish education are
taken into consideration.
On the first of these points, the key organisations that teachers and others, including parents
and employers, will expect to see collaborating on the developments will include The Scottish
Government, LTS, SQA and HMIe. The current developments around national qualifications,
for example, must be seen to relate closely to the development of Curriculum for Excellence.
Similarly, the increased responsibility for curriculum implementation at school and teacher
level, that is so much a part of the curriculum proposals, will need to be reflected in the
evolution of inspection procedures. Such parallel developments are already very much in the
minds of those who are leading on these developments, but there is likely to be a need for
continuing demonstration of such cooperation and collaboration in order to give teachers
confidence in the way in which policies are currently being developed.
121
On the second point, judging from the nature of the responses summarised in this report, the
key aspects of parallel policy development that might be considered, relate to developing
notions of teacher professionalism. There are several other examples of current policies
where teachers are being offered – and taking – increased opportunities for decision making
and judgement, for becoming more reflective practitioners. Examples would include
programmes such as SQH and Chartered Teacher, developments such as Assessment is for
Learning and the teacher-led action research associated with Schools of Ambition. The
development and implementation of Curriculum for Excellence would appear to provide a
nationwide opportunity for extending such enquiry-oriented and enquiry-based models of
teacher development across the profession as a whole. This could well be a key strand in the
programme of CPD activity that was referred to above.
11.6. Leadership
Many of those responding demonstrate an awareness that the success of the development
and implementation of a Curriculum for Excellence will be very dependent on a wide range of
professionals accepting a significant leadership responsibility.
Clearly those with
management posts in local authorities, schools and teacher education institutions – as well
as those in national agencies – will recognise that they have significant responsibilities in
providing leadership for curriculum development, but it was also widely recognised that there
is an opportunity, indeed a need, for all teachers to demonstrate leadership in the context of
the new curriculum, given the flexible and open nature of the plans, by comparison with
earlier curricular forms.
11.7. Ongoing review and development
A key feature of Curriculum for Excellence is that it is not to be ‘set in stone’, but rather it is
anticipated that it will be continuously developing, through the engagement of teachers, other
professionals and other stakeholders. The process of engagement itself, which has been the
subject of this report, and was reviewed in Section 10, has demonstrated how these kinds of
activities can take a considerable time to gain momentum. Thus it was noted that responses
to the various engagement activities increased in volume, the longer the process went on
and that actual involvement in the trialling of the reforms tended to lead to much more
positive engagement.
In the interests of maintaining professional dialogues and development it would seem highly
desirable to ensure that discussion fora are established at national, local and institutional
level. It may be anticipated that much of this may be facilitated through GLOW.
11.8. Conclusion
In collecting, analysing and reporting the data that have been generated over the past year in
relation to the Draft Experiences and Outcomes, it is apparent that there is a wide range of
views concerning the development of a Curriculum for Excellence. The process of
engagement itself has demonstrated how those charged with developing the statements
have been able to learn from each other and to respond to the feedback that has been
generated. Throughout the process there does appear to have been a growing sense of
confidence that the increased flexibility and openness of the approach taken is seen as an
opportunity for increasing professional engagement by all concerned. There is also
recognition that pupils themselves can play a part in curriculum development.
122
In identifying the five broad themes in this section, the authors of this report have sought to
prioritise what amount to key principles for ongoing successful implementation and
development of a Curriculum for Excellence. Teachers will be at the centre of the process
and so must be provided with the professional development support that will give them
confidence in taking increased responsibility. This support will need to be provided at local
and national levels and by providers of teacher education. Leadership in curriculum
development becomes a responsibility for all and it is very important that discussions and
debate continue as part of the process of continuing development of the curriculum.
123
References
Alexander, R. J. (2001). Border Crossings: towards a comparative pedagogy. Comparative
Education, 37(4), 507-523.
Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1978). Organisational Learning in Action: A Theory in Action
Perspective. Boston: Addison-Wesley
Christie, D. and Boyd, B. (2005) Overview of recent research-based literature for the
curriculum review. University of Strathclyde, Glasgow.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2001). Beyond Certainty: Taking an Inquiry Stance on
Practice. In A. Leiberman & L. Miller (Eds.), Teachers Caught in the Action: Professional
Development that Matters (pp. 45-60). New York: Teachers' College Press.
Dadds, M. (2001). The politics of pedagogy. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice,
7(1), 43-58.
Farrell, C., & Morris, J. (2004). Resigned Compliance: Teacher Attitudes Towards
Performance Related Pay. Educational Management, Administration and Leadership,
32(1) 81-104.
Hargreaves, D. (2003). Education epidemic: transforming secondary schooling through
innovation. London: Demos.
Hayward, L. (2007). Curriculum, pedagogies and assessment in Scotland: the quest for
social justice. 'Ah kent yir faither'. Assessment in Education, 14(2), 251-268.
Hayward, L., Priestley, M., & Young, M. (2004). Ruffling the calm of the ocean floor: merging,
practice, policy and research in assessment in Scotland. Oxford Review of Education, 30(3),
397-416.
Hutchinson, C., & Hayward, L. (2005). The journey so far: assessment for learning in
Scotland. The Curriculum Journal, 16(2), 225-248.
Reid, A., & Scott, A. (2008). Cross-curricularity in the national curriculum. Pedagogy, Culture
and Society, 13(2), 181-204.
Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: foundations of the new reform. Harvard
Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
Seligman, M. (1992). Learned Optimism: Butler-Bowden Books.
Troman, G., Jeffrey, B., & Raggl, A. (2007). Creativity and performativity policies in primary
school cultures. Journal of Education Policy, 22(5), 549-572.
124
Appendix One: Online and Trialling Questionnaires by Curriculum Area
Q1. The draft [subject] Experiences and Outcomes are clearly worded. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Subject
n=
Online questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know
(%)
50
1
Disagree (%)
n=
49
47
Trialling questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know
(%)
87
2
Disagree (%)
Science
316
Numeracy
135
46
4
50
20
90
5
5
Modern Languages
101
72
2
26
5
80
0
20
Mathematics
132
38
3
59
7
85
0
14
Classical Languages
8
88
0
13
3
100
0
0
Gaelic Learners
5
40
0
60
7
85
0
14
Expressive Arts
116
54
5
41
8
88
0
13
Social Studies
162
68
2
30
4
100
0
0
Literacy and English
125
69
4
28
39
92
0
8
Gaidhlig and Literacy
4
75
25
0
7
72
0
29
Health and Wellbeing
200
75
1
24
40
83
0
18
Religious and Moral
Education
55
76
2
22
7
100
0
0
RE (Roman Catholic
schools)
111
90
2
8
49
79
0
20
Technologies
289
45
2
54
7
100
0
0
11
Q2. The expectations of the draft [subject] Experiences and Outcomes at each level are suitably challenging. To what extent do you agree or disagree
with this statement?
Subject
Online questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know (%)
50
14
Science
Numeracy
134
46
19
35
20
85
5
10
99
69
12
19
5
80
20
0
130
51
15
33
7
71
0
29
Classical Languages
8
88
0
13
3
100
0
0
Gaelic Learners
5
60
0
40
7
86
0
14
Expressive Arts
116
56
13
31
8
88
0
13
Social Studies
161
60
9
31
4
100
0
0
Literacy and English
124
69
10
21
41
81
7
12
Gaidhlig and Literacy
4
75
0
25
7
100
0
0
Health and Wellbeing
199
78
4
19
40
80
8
13
Religious and Moral
Education
55
64
7
29
7
100
0
0
RE (Roman Catholic
schools)
110
90
2
8
47
87
6
6
Technologies
289
52
11
37
8
100
0
0
Modern Languages
Mathematics
Disagree (%)
26
n=
46
Trialling questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know (%)
80
9
n=
315
Disagree (%)
11
126
Q3. Overall, the draft [subject] Experiences and Outcomes provide a good basis for planning how children and young people will progress in their
learning in [subject]. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Subject
Online questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know (%)
39
5
Disagree (%)
57
n=
47
Trialling questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know (%)
75
4
Disagree (%)
21
Science
n=
314
Numeracy
135
38
8
53
20
50
0
50
Modern Languages
100
62
9
29
5
100
0
0
Mathematics
130
29
6
65
7
57
14
29
Classical Languages
8
76
0
26
3
100
0
0
Gaelic Learners
5
40
0
60
7
100
0
0
Expressive Arts
114
51
6
43
8
100
0
0
Social Studies
159
56
10
33
4
75
0
25
Literacy and English
124
54
6
40
40
83
10
8
Gaidhlig and Literacy
4
50
0
50
7
86
0
14
Health and Wellbeing
200
78
3
20
40
81
5
16
Religious and Moral
Education
54
41
6
54
7
100
0
0
RE (Roman Catholic
schools)
111
88
1
12
47
92
4
4
Technologies
289
42
5
52
8
88
0
13
127
Q4. The draft [subject] Experiences and Outcomes provide opportunities to promote good teaching approaches and deep learning. To what extent do
you agree or disagree with this statement?
Subject
Online questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know (%)
64
8
Science
Numeracy
134
58
7
35
20
85
10
5
99
84
7
9
5
100
0
0
129
51
9
41
7
72
14
14
Classical Languages
8
75
0
25
3
100
0
0
Gaelic Learners
5
60
40
0
7
86
0
14
Expressive Arts
114
64
11
25
7
100
0
0
Social Studies
160
74
6
20
4
100
0
0
Literacy and English
124
69
9
23
40
90
3
8
Gaidhlig and Literacy
4
50
0
50
7
100
0
0
Health and Wellbeing
198
81
6
13
40
88
8
5
Religious and Moral
Education
55
58
7
35
7
100
0
0
RE (Roman Catholic
schools)
109
94
1
6
49
100
0
0
Technologies
288
61
9
30
8
100
0
0
Modern Languages
Mathematics
Disagree (%)
29
n=
47
Trialling questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know (%)
96
2
n=
315
Disagree (%)
2
128
Q5. The draft [subject] Experiences and Outcomes provide opportunities for effective links with other areas of the curriculum. To what extent do you
agree or disagree with this statement?
Subject
n=
Online questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know
(%)
71
8
Disagree (%)
n=
20
47
Trialling questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know
(%)
89
9
Disagree (%)
Science
315
2
Numeracy
134
71
7
22
20
90
5
5
Modern Languages
102
82
8
10
5
100
0
0
Mathematics
131
60
13
27
7
100
0
0
Classical Languages
8
100
0
0
3
100
0
0
Gaelic Learners
5
80
20
0
7
100
0
0
Expressive Arts
115
81
7
12
7
86
14
0
Social Studies
161
78
7
15
4
100
0
0
Literacy and English
125
80
8
13
38
95
0
5
Gaidhlig and Literacy
4
100
0
0
7
100
0
0
Health and Wellbeing
200
88
3
10
40
93
5
3
Religious and Moral
Education
55
78
4
18
7
86
0
14
RE (Roman Catholic
schools)
110
97
3
1
49
92
4
4
Technologies
289
79
7
14
7
86
0
14
129
Q6. Taken together, the draft [subject] Experiences and Outcomes provide opportunities for development of the four capacities (successful learners,
confident individuals, responsible citizens, effective contributors). To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Subject
n=
Online questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know
(%)
78
7
Disagree (%)
n=
15
48
Trialling questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know
(%)
94
6
Disagree (%)
Science
315
0
Numeracy
134
66
12
21
20
95
0
5
Modern Languages
102
91
6
3
5
100
0
0
Mathematics
130
61
16
23
7
72
14
14
Classical Languages
8
100
0
0
3
100
0
0
Gaelic Learners
5
60
20
20
7
100
0
0
Expressive Arts
116
78
7
14
8
100
0
0
Social Studies
160
82
3
15
4
100
0
0
Literacy and English
124
77
11
12
39
100
0
0
Gaidhlig and Literacy
4
100
0
0
7
100
0
0
Health and Wellbeing
200
93
2
6
40
98
0
3
Religious and Moral
Education
55
71
5
24
7
100
0
0
RE (Roman Catholic
schools)
111
98
1
1
48
100
0
0
Technologies
288
76
9
15
8
100
0
0
130
Q7. The draft [subject] Experiences and Outcomes provide opportunities for children and young people to develop an understanding of how their
learning will help them in their future lives. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement?
Subject
n=
Online questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know
(%)
59
15
Disagree (%)
n=
26
47
Trialling questionnaires
Agree (%)
Don't know
(%)
89
6
Disagree (%)
Science
316
4
Numeracy
133
70
9
21
20
95
0
5
Modern Languages
100
76
9
15
5
100
0
0
Mathematics
131
59
9
32
7
100
0
0
Classical Languages
8
100
0
0
3
100
0
0
Gaelic Learners
5
60
20
20
7
71
14
14
Expressive Arts
116
58
11
31
8
100
0
0
Social Studies
159
60
14
26
3
67
0
33
Literacy and English
124
70
11
18
39
85
5
10
Gaidhlig and Literacy
4
100
0
0
7
100
0
0
Health and Wellbeing
199
87
4
9
40
96
5
0
Religious and Moral
Education
55
67
7
26
7
100
0
0
RE (Roman Catholic
schools)
109
89
6
6
48
83
6
10
Technologies
288
66
11
24
8
88
0
13
131
Appendix Two: Sources of data
Total responses to the Draft Experiences and Outcomes and the trialling
questionnaires
Sets of Draft Experiences
and Outcomes
Questionnaire on the
Draft Experiences and
Outcomes
Total
316
135
102
133
8
Trialling Feedback
questionnaire on the Draft
Experiences and
Outcomes
48
20
5
8
3
1. Science
2. Numeracy
3. Modern Languages
4. Mathematics
5. Classical Languages
6. Gaelic Learners
5
7
12
7. Expressive Arts
117
8
125
8. Social Studies
9. English and Literacy
10. Gaidhlig and Literacy
162
125
4
4
42
7
166
167
11
11. RME
55
7
62
12. RE (RC)
111
49
160
13. Technologies
289
8
297
14. Health and Wellbeing
200
40
240
*Total
1762
256
2018
364
155
107
141
11
*Total number of questionnaires on the Draft Experiences and Outcomes is the total
number of submissions received (online and paper copies). Total number of Trialling
questionnaires is the total number of submissions received (online and paper copies).
132
Composition of focus groups: Draft sets of Experiences and Outcomes
Focus Group
Science: Glasgow
Early Years /
Nursery
Primary
Secondary
SEN
Independent
LA
SSN/
others
1
4
3
1
1
1
2
Total
13
Numeracy: Edinburgh
0
5
7
0
1
2
0
15
Numeracy: Glasgow
Numeracy: Aberdeen
1
0
2
3
4
8
1
0
1
1
2
1
0
1
11
14
Numeracy: Ayr
1
7
6
1
1
0
0
16
Modern Languages: Glasgow
Mathematics: Glasgow
0
1
2
2
8
5
0
0
1
1
3
1
1
0
15
10
Classical Languages: Glasgow
Gaelic Learners: Glasgow
0
1
0
2
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
4
Expressive Arts: Glasgow
0
1
4
0
0
1
0
6
Social Studies: Glasgow
1
1
7
1
2
0
1
13
Literacy and English: Edinburgh
0
4
4
0
1
1
0
10
Literacy and English: Glasgow
1
2
3
1
0
2
0
9
Literacy and English: Aberdeen
Literacy and English: Ayr
1
3
2
0
1
2
0
1
4
5
0
0
1
1
9
12
Technologies: Glasgow
0
1
5
4
9
6
0
3
1
1
4
0
1
0
0
3
10
1
0
1
1
0
0
4
5
5
12
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
10
10
63
112
9
15
23
9
241
Health and Wellbeing: Glasgow
RME: Glasgow
Gaidhlig and Literacy: Stornoway
RE (RC): Glasgow
20
15
16
19
133
Focus group composition: Stakeholder engagement
Regional events for parents, pupils and employers
Four regional events were convened by LTS in Dundee (15/09/08), Edinburgh (22/09/08),
Aberdeen (06/10/08) and Glasgow (08/10/08). The following total number of participants who
contributed to focus groups at these events is as follows:
•
•
•
33 Pupils
27 Parents
22 Employers
Higher Education
9 representatives from the Teaching and Learning Committees of the following universities
participated in a focus group convened in Glasgow (13/10/08):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Napier University
The Glasgow School of Art
The Royal Scottish Academy of Music and Drama (RSAMD)
University of Aberdeen
University of Edinburgh
University of Glasgow
University of Stirling
University of Strathclyde
Teacher Education
Senior figures with responsibility for teacher education in the following universities
participated in a focus group convened in Glasgow (27/11/08):
•
•
•
University of Aberdeen
University of Dundee
University of Strathclyde
Voluntary Sector
12 representatives from the following organisations participated in a focus group convened in
Glasgow (04/11/08):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Barnardo’s Scotland
Callander Youth Project
Christian Aid
Firefly Arts Company
Glasgow South West Regeneration Agency
Scottish Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Scottish SPCA)
The British Red Cross
The Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme
The Scottish Muslim Parents’ Association
•
•
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF)
YMCA Scotland
Further Education Colleges
12 representatives from the following colleges participated in focus groups convened in
Stirling (06/11/08) and Glasgow (07/11/08):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Borders College, Galashiels
Clydebank College
Elmwood College, Cupar, Fife
Glasgow Metropolitan College
Jewel and Esk College, Midlothian
Langside College, Glasgow
Moray College, Elgin
South Lanarkshire College
Learning and Teaching Scotland
10 representatives from Learning and Teaching Scotland with involvement in the following
areas participated in a focus group (16/07/08):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Curriculum for Excellence National Team
Early Years
Expressive Arts
Gaelic
Literacy and English
Modern Languages
Numeracy and Mathematics
Science
135
Appendix Three: Log of non-standard documents submitted for consideration
Organisations n=113
SCIENCE
Code
Title
Curriculum for Excellence: Science and
GR003-1
Numeracy Experiences and Outcomes.
Comments on the Science, Numeracy and
GR004-1
Mathematics Guidelines in CfE.
GR005-1
Association for Science Education
Scotland CfE Science Questionnaire.
GR006-1
Interim feedback on Science Learning Outcomes.
GR007-1
GR008-1
GR009-1
GR010-1
GR011-1
GR012-1
(ASE)
Compiled by
Physics
Department,
Gordon's College.
Robert
The Royal Society of Edinburgh.
Source
Robert Gordon's College,
Aberdeen.
The
Royal
Society
of
Edinburgh.
Brief description
3 page document.
16/08/08.
7 page document
A ‘Curriculum for Excellence’
Inter-Authority Project Officer.
14/03/08.
Edinburgh City.
A
Development
Officer,
Learning
and
Teaching
Scotland.
08/04/08.
N/A.
12 page document.
29/04/08.
7 page document.
04/08/08.
39 page document.
04/06/08.
7 page document.
26/03/08.
3 page document.
N/A.
15 page document
11/06/08.
5 page document.
Annex A: Pages 5-6.
STEM-ED Scotland.
The Consultations Officer of The
Royal Society of Edinburgh.
SDELG: Report 1, Draft Science Experiences and
Outcomes.
Sustainable
Development
Education Liaison Group (SDELG).
The
Royal
Society
of
Edinburgh.
SDELG; also a copy of
identical
report
with
a
compliments slip from RSPB
Scotland.
Member's feedback based on
LTS Questionnaire.
The Director, BIA Scotland.
Beeslack Community High
School Science Departments.
Scottish Science Advisory
Group (SSAG). Membership
includes QIOs, Reps from
HMIe, LTS, SSERC.
The Chair(person) of ASE Scotland.
BIA Scotland.
A
contact
from
Community High School.
Beeslack
GR016-1
Feedback on Science Experiences and Outcomes
A QIO and the Strategic Leader (518) on behalf of the Scottish
Science Advisory Group (SSAG).
GR017-1
CfE: Response to the Draft Outcomes: Part 1.
Draft Outcomes Consultation.
The Chairperson, The Scottish
Muslim Parents Association.
The Scottish Muslim Parents
Association.
30/06/08.
GR018-1
Collated
responses
to
questionnaire for Science.
A ‘Curriculum for Excellence’ InterAuthority Project Officer.
A CfE Inter-Authority Project
Officer.
28/03/08.
GR021-1
Response to the Draft Science Experiences and
Outcomes.
A contact on behalf of a Group of 8
Science teachers within a Science /
Technology Faculty.
GR024-1
CfE: Feedback on the Draft Science Experiences
and Outcomes.
The Institute of Physics (IOP): An
Institute of Physics response.
generic
online
Completed
InterAuthority
Questionnaire
by
ASE Scotland.
4 page document + 2
pages of e-mails
attached.
A contact from the Association for
Science Education (ASE) Scotland
A response to the Consultation from Science
Technology Engineering and Mathematics
Education STEM-ED Scotland.
CfE - Numeracy, Science and Mathematics, and
wider issues, 29/04/08.
Association for Science Education (ASE)
Scotland: CfE Science.
“Bio Industry Association Scotland.”
CfE: Feedback questions on the Draft Science
Experiences and Outcomes.
Date
18/03/08.
On behalf of a group of 8
Science
teachers
within
Science
/
Technology
Faculty. (Only info provided).
The Director of Education and
Science. The Institute of
12 page feedback;
collated response to
the draft outcomes
questionnaires.
Email
with
2
appendices; 7 pages
in total.
N/A.
5 page document.
30/06/08.
Letter
questionnaire
and
on
Physics (IOP).
GR 0281
Scottish Screen response to Draft Science
Experiences and Outcomes.
GR032-1
Feedback questions on the
Experiences and Outcomes.
GRO451
A detailed response from the ‘Engineering the
Future’ project Team on the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes in Science.
GRO591
GR064-1
Draft
Science
Collated summary of comments on the Draft
Science Outcomes and Experiences from the 6
Midlothian Secondary Schools.
Science and Engineering Experiences and
Outcomes
Scottish
SCREEN,
the
nonDepartmental Public body for all
aspects of screen culture and
industry.
A contact on behalf of Tayside
Chemistry Teachers.
behalf of the IOP. 4
page commentary. 11
pages in total.
SCOTTISH SCREEN.
N/A.
7 page document.
Tayside Chemistry Teachers
N/A.
7 page questionnaire.
Engineering the Future Research
Team.
The ‘Engineering the Future’
Research Team.
N/A.
Detailed
response
document. 10 page
document.
Midlothian Council.
An
Education
(Midlothian Council).
Officer
09/04/08.
Engineering
Project.
Future
Engineering
Team.
the
Future
Project
the
N/A.
Page
of
detailed
feedback on the Draft
Science E & O.
8 pages of detailed
response.
17 pages of detailed
response.
GR068-1
Comments from Staff on CfE Outcomes: Science.
St. David’s Primary School.
St. David’s Primary School.
N/A.
GR070-1
Response to Draft Experiences & Outcomes in
Science.
An ‘Angus’ Secondary School.
Individual Teachers. Physics,
Chemistry, Biology, Science
Departments.
N/A.
1 page response.
GR071-1
Science “Final Report. ”
East Renfrewshire Council.
The St. Luke’s (High School)
Cluster response.
06/08/08.
14 pages of detailed
response.
GR079-1
ASE Scotland CfE Science Questionnaire.
A contact on behalf of Tayside
Chemistry Teachers.
Tayside Chemistry Teachers.
N/A.
4 page response.
The Royal Society of Edinburgh
The
Royal
Edinburgh.
N/A.
7 page response.
A contact from the University of
Strathclyde on behalf of The
Scottish Maths Recovery Network..
University of Strathclyde.
31/03/08.
5 page document.
Stockbridge Primary School.
Stockbridge Primary School.
02/08/08.
In service feedback;
3 page document.
SCOTTISH SCREEN.
N/A.
1 page document.
SDELG.
01/06/08.
8 page document.
SDELG.
01/06/08.
4 page document.
Comments on the Science, Numeracy and
Mathematics Guidelines in CfE.
NUMERACY
GR084-1
GR001-1
Response to CfE Draft
Experiences and Outcomes.
GR039-1
CfE Numeracy feedback.
Maths/
Numeracy
Society
of
MODERN LANGUAGES
GR027-1
Scottish Screen on Draft Modern Languages
Experiences and Outcomes.
GR029-1
SDELG: Report 3, Draft Modern Languages
Experiences and Outcomes
Scottish
SCREEN,
the
nonDepartmental Public body for all
aspects of screen culture and
industry.
SDELG
Sustainable
Development
Education Liaison Group.
MATHEMATICS
GR026-1
SDELG:
Report
5,
Draft
Experiences and Outcomes.
Mathematics
SDELG
Sustainable
Development
Education Liaison Group.
137
Response to the Mathematics and Numeracy
Outcomes and Experiences
CLASSICAL LANGUAGES: none
GR038-1
The Scottish Mathematical Council
The Chair of The Scottish
Mathematical Council.
30/6/08.
6
page
response.
narrative
A contact from “VAGA
Scotland” and a contact from
“Engage Scotland.”
N/A.
4 page document.
GAELIC LEARNERS: none
EXPRESSIVE ARTS
GR002-1
Curriculum for Excellence: Draft Expressive Arts
Outcomes Consultation.
VAGA
Scotland
Scotland.
GR031-1
SDELG: Report 4, Draft
Experiences and Outcomes.
SDELG
Sustainable
Development
Education Liaison Group.
SDELG.
01/06/08.
9 page document.
Scottish SCREEN
SCOTTISH SCREEN.
N/A.
7 page document.
A contact on behalf of The Scottish
Local History Forum.
Scottish
History
Response.
01/04/08.
Committee endorsed
comments
on
2
sheets.
05/08/08.
1 page double sided
document.
N/A.
2 page document.
Expressive
Arts
Scottish Screen feedback on Draft Expressive
Arts Experiences and Outcomes.
SOCIAL STUDIES
GR043-1
&
Engage
Forum
GR013-1
The Scottish Local History Forum.
GR022-1
Comment on the Draft
Experiences & Outcomes.
GR023-1
CfE and the History Learning Outcomes
A Teacher from the History
Department of Portobello High
School, Edinburgh City.
On behalf of the History
Department
of
Lenzie
Academy.
A Teacher on behalf of the
History
Department,
Portobello High School.
GR033-1
CfE: Response from the History and Modern
Studies Department, Douglas Academy (East
Dunbartonshire) to the Draft Social Studies
Outcomes.
A Principal Teacher of History and
Modern Studies.
A Principal Teacher of History
and Modern Studies.
26/06/2008.
5 pages of detailed
feedback on the Draft
Outcomes in Social
Studies.
SDELG Sustainable Development
Education Liaison Group.
SDELG; also a copy of
identical
report
with
a
compliments slip from (Royal
Society for the Protection of
Birds: RSPB Scotland).
06/08/08.
43 page document.
N/A.
N/A.
4 page document.
SCOTTISH SCREEN.
N/A.
5 page response.
St. David’s Primary School.
N/A.
“Angus”
(Council)
Social
Studies Local Support Group.
01/07/08.
Social
Social
Studies
Studies
A Principal Teacher of History
GR035-1
SDELG: Report 2, Draft
Experiences and Outcomes.
GR037-1
Response to the Social Subjects Experiences and
Outcomes Business Education.
GR061-1
Feedback from Scottish Screen on Draft Social
experiences & outcomes
GR069-1
Comments from Staff on CfE Outcomes- Social
Studies.
No author or source:
file
description
in
footer
reads:
R\BE\ACfE\Q's SS Experiences and
Outcomes.
Scottish
SCREEN,
the
nonDepartmental Public body for all
aspects of screen culture and
industry.
A contact from St. David’s Primary
School.
GR072-1
CfE Social Studies Draft Outcomes response.
A Quality Improvement Officer.
15 pages of detailed
response.
Organisation’s
response
to
questionnaire.
138
Response to the CfE Draft Social Studies
Experiences and Outcomes.
ENGLISH AND LITERACY
The Association for Scottish Literary Studies
GR014-1 response to Draft Experiences and Outcomes in
English and Literacy.
GR077-1
A contact
Scotland.’
from
‘Archaeology
22/05/08.
14 pages of detailed
response
11/06/2008.
5 page questionnaire.
27/06/08.
6 page document.
Education
Resources
Learning Centre, Blantyre.
27/06/2008.
17 page document.
Principal Teachers of English
(North Lanarkshire).
N/A.
4 page document.
SDELG.
01/06/08.
7 page document.
SCOTTISH SCREEN.
N/A.
3 page document.
Archaeology Scotland.
The Convener of the Education
Committee. Association for Scottish
Literary Studies.
The
Convener
of
Education Committee.
The Consultations Officer of The
Royal Society of Edinburgh.
The
Royal
Edinburgh.
GR015-1
CfE - Literacy & English, Expressive Arts and
Social Studies.
GR019-1
Response to the Draft Literacy and English
Experiences and Outcomes (South Lanarkshire).
GR020-1
Response to the Draft Literacy and English
Outcomes (North Lanarkshire).
GR030-1
SDELG: Report 6, Draft Literacy and English
Experiences and Outcomes.
GR036-1
Scottish Screen on Draft Literacy and English
Experiences and Outcomes.
GR040-1
Response to the Draft Learning Outcomes
Literacy (& English).
GR041-1
Feedback from staff Trialling Literacy Outcomes.
Dundee - feedback on Literacy
outcomes.
A
Learning
Teaching
Scotland Contact (Dundee).
N/A.
GR042-1
Response to CfE Literacy & English Draft
Outcomes.
The Association for Scottish Literary
Studies.
The Association for Scottish
Literary Studies.
30/06/08.
Response to the Draft Literacy and English
Outcomes – ACE.
The English Department,
Urquhart
High
School,
Highland Council.
Draft Literacy
Experiences.
Scottish Library and Information
Council and CILIP in Scotland.
A Principal Teacher of
English - Glen Urquhart High
School.
Scottish
Library
and
Information
Council
and
CILIP in Scotland.
GR044-1
GR062-1
and
English
Outcomes
and
Response to the Draft Outcomes for English and
Literacy.
GAIDHLIG AND LITERACY
GR063-1
GR034-1
Scottish Screen on Draft Gaidhlig and Literacy
Experiences and Outcomes.
HEALTH AND WELLBEING
Response from West Dunbartonshire Council on
GRO47the Draft Health and Well-being Experiences and
1
Outcomes.
A contact on behalf of 500 Teaching
Practitioners, all Sectors, in South
Lanarkshire.
Collective response from Principal
Teachers of English across North
Lanarkshire.
The
SDELG
Sustainable
Development Education Liaison
Group.
Scottish
SCREEN,
the
nonDepartmental Public body for all
aspects of screen culture and
industry.
A Principal Teacher of Literacy and
Performing Arts.
Glen
The
Society
the
English Department,
High School.
of
Islay
18/06/08.
2 pages of feedback
via email.
2 page feedback/
summary document
from a Meeting
An
organisation
response
to
the
questionnaire. 3 page
document.
N/A.
2 page response.
N/A.
3 pages of detailed
response.
“AEAS.”
23/06/08.
4 page response.
Scottish
SCREEN,
the
nonDepartmental Public body for all
aspects of screen culture and
industry.
SCOTTISH SCREEN.
N/A.
1 page document.
Quality Improvement Officer.
West Dunbartonshire Council.
12/11/08.
15 page response.
A Quality Improvement
English Language.
Officer,
139
GRO491
GR050-1
Oral Health and Wellbeing Specialist Interest
Group and Childsmile Response to Draft Health
and Wellbeing Experiences and Outcomes
Curriculum for Excellence.
Scottish Oral Health Promoters Action Group
(SOHPAG) Response to Draft Health and Well
being experiences and Outcomes Curriculum for
Excellence.
Childsmile National Programme.
Oral Health Co-ordinator
04/11/08.
4 page response.
Scottish Oral Health Promoters
Action Group (SOHPAG) SOHPAG.
Oral Health Co-ordinator
04/11/08.
3 page response.
6/11/08.
Transcript of Flipchart pages. 9 pages
in total.
GRO541
Health and Well being feedback from Dundee
23/06/08 Event.
Has general feedback points among
comments expressed.
Health
and
Tranche Launch.
GRO551
Craigroyston Cluster Schools CfE Health and
Well being Report Dated 27/10/08.
Two Groups from the
Craigroyston Cluster Schools.
LTS led event feedback
prepared
by
the
CfE
Craigroyston Cluster Groups.
17/11/08.
10 pages of detailed
feedback.
GR065-1
Evaluation of CfE project in Our Lady of Peace
Primary in Linwood.
Health Development Worker
and Home Link Worker.
Our Lady of Peace Primary,
Linwood.
05/06/08.
5 page response.
GR066-1
Feedback on the experiences and outcomes for
Health and Wellbeing: Secondary Physical
Education.
Edinburgh City Principal Teachers
of Physical Education.
N/A.
15 pages of detailed
response.
GR067-1
InverClyde,
Renfrewshire
and
West
Dunbartonshire
Inter-authority
Health
and
Wellbeing Engagement Seminars.
InverClyde, Renfrewshire and West
Dunbartonshire
Inter-authority
Health and Wellbeing Engagement
Seminars.
10/10/08.
6 pages of detailed
response.
GR073-1
Feedback questions on the Draft Health and
Wellbeing Experiences and Outcomes.
East
Renfrewshire
Education Department.
East Renfrewshire Council
Education Department.
05/11/08.
Organisation’s
response
questionnaire.
GR074-1
Feedback on Early Level Learning Outcomes.
Castleview Primary School.
27/10/08.
1 page response.
GR080-1
CfE- Health and Wellbeing Draft Experiences and
Outcomes: Commentary on Relationships, Sexual
Health and Parenthood.
Greater Glasgow and Clyde
Sexual Health Planning and
Implementation Group.
15/10/08.
7 page response.
GR082-1
CfE:
Health
and
Wellbeing
Outcomes:
Relationships, Sexual Health and Parenthood.
Senior Health Promotion Officer.
24/11/08.
2 page response.
GR085-1
Feedback on the Health and Wellbeing Draft
Experiences and Outcomes.
A contact from Health Promotion
Services.
03/12/08.
10 page response.
GR086-1
Feedback on Draft Outcomes and Experiences in
Health and Wellbeing to Learning and Teaching
Scotland.
Forres Associated School Group
(ASG).
Forres ASG (Moray).
03/12/08.
1 page response.
GR087-1
Feedback on the Draft Health and Wellbeing
Experiences and Outcomes.
Two
Contacts
Consultancy.”
“Create Consultancy”
01/12/08.
13 page response.
CfE
Council
Castleview Primary School Nursery
Staff.
Lead Director- Sexual Health,
Chair- Greater Glasgow and Clyde
Sexual
Health
Planning
and
Implementation Group.
from
“Create
Wellbeing
Edinburgh
City
Principal
Teachers
of
Physical
Education.
InverClyde, Renfrewshire and
West Dunbartonshire Interauthority
Health
and
Wellbeing
Engagement
Seminars.
NHS Lanarkshire Sexual
Health and (Blood Borne
Virus) BBV Health Promotion
Team.
NHS Lothian
Health Promotion Services
(Third Floor)
Lauriston Building
Edinburgh EN3 9HA.
to
140
GR088-1
The British Red Cross Response to the Draft
Experiences and Outcomes (Health and
Wellbeing).
Public Affairs Officer.
The British Red Cross.
28/11/08.
8 page response.
GR089-1
Health and Wellbeing Feedback.
A Parent and Carer Focus Group.
Edinburgh City.
28/11/08.
2 page response.
N/A.
“Careers
Scotland”
Discussion Groups.
19/11/08.
2 page response.
A school in Edinburgh City (only
info given).
Edinburgh City.
27/11/08.
3 page response.
N/A Unclear.
Leith
City.
27/1108.
3 page response.
N/A Unclear
N/A Unclear.
27/11/08.
2 page response.
Edinburgh City.
27/11/08.
1 page response.
N/A Unclear.
27/11/08.
3 page response.
NHS Tayside Schools’ Team
Directorate of Public Health,
NHS Tayside, Kings Cross,
Clepington Road, Dundee,
DD3 8EA.
28/11/08.
4 page response.
The Highland Council.
02/11/08.
9 page response.
ACE Information Event.
ACE Information Event.
28/11/08.
5 page response.
GR090-1
GR091-1
GR092-1
GR093-1
Looking at ‘Planning for Choices & Changes’
Experience & Outcomes within Health and
Wellbeing.
Student Review of Health and Wellbeing
Guidelines: Drugs.
Feedback on the Experiences and Outcomes for
Health and Wellbeing PSE.
Feedback on the Experiences and Outcomes for
Health and Wellbeing PSE.
GR094-1
“SNAG Group” - Health and Wellbeing Review.
Boroughmuir
Teachers.
GR095-1
Feedback on the Experiences and Outcomes for
Health and Wellbeing PSE.
N/A Unclear.
CfE Feedback - Health
Experiences and Outcomes.
Development
Worker,
People
and
Senior
Promotion Officer.
GR096-1
GR097-1
GR098-1
and
Wellbeing
Working Together to Inspire Learning and
Achievement in Highland Communities (Trialling
the Curriculum for Excellence Draft Health and
Wellbeing Experiences and Outcomes).
A Curriculum for Excellence – Comments from
Young People in Highland (Health and Wellbeing)
1 detailed
response.
Higher
Education
non-standard
Young
Health
group
Academy,
Edinburgh
GR099-1
Health and Wellbeing Trialling Report.
A contact from Kincardine Nursery
School.
Kincardine Nursery School.
02/12/08.
13 page response.
GR100-1
Curriculum for Excellence Learning Outcomes for
Health and Wellbeing.
N/A Unclear.
Learning
Scotland.
28/11/08.
3 page response.
GR046-1
Collective response from Midlothian Religious
Moral and Philosophical Studies (RMPS) staff to
the Draft Experiences and Outcomes in Religious
and Moral Education (RME).
Midlothian RMPS Meeting (on
19/08/08) with 11 delegates present
representing all 5 of the nondenominational High Schools of
Midlothian.
Midlothian RMPS staff.
27/10/08.
2 page response.
GR060-1
Official Response to the Curriculum for
Excellence RME Experiences and Outcomes Ref:
OR-007/2008
Church of Scotland, Church and
Society Council, EAGLAIS NA HALBA
Contact from the Church of
Scotland, Church and Society
Council, EAGLAIS NA HALBA
07/10/08
2 page response.
GR075-1
Feedback questions on the Draft Religious and
Moral Education experiences and outcomes.
East
Renfrewshire
Education Department.
East Renfrewshire Council
Education Department.
05/11/08.
Organisation’s
response
questionnaire.
and
Teaching
RELIGIOUS AND MORAL EDUCATION
Council
to
141
GR076-1
Religious and Moral Education Engagement
Process.
Contact from the RME Engagement
process held at the Shetland
Learning Festival.
GR081-1
CfE Comments on the Religious and Moral
Education (RME) Draft Document.
A Lecturer in Religious, Moral and
Philosophical Studies.
GR101-1
Last 4 Curricular Areas – RME, HWB,
Technologies and RE(RC) – Response to the
Draft Outcomes – Part 2.
The Scottish Muslim
Association (SMPA).
GR106-1
Response to Curriculum for Excellence –
Religious and Moral Education (RME) Feedback.
The
General
Secretary
of
Edinburgh
Inter-Faith
Association/Conference
of
Edinburgh’s Religious Leaders.
Response Curriculum for Excellence – Religious
and Moral Education (RME). Outcomes (Primary
6/7).
Response from “The Scottish Sikh Women’s
Association” – Learning and Teaching Scotland –
GR108-1
Proposals for Religious and Moral Education in
Scotland.
Response to RME Experiences and Outcomes
GR109-1
(Primary 5/6).
Response to Trial Religious and Moral Education
GR110-1
(RME) Outcomes.
Response to Written Evidence from the Scottish
Inter- Faith Council – Learning and Teaching
GR111-1
Scotland – Proposals for Religious and Moral
Education in Scotland.
Curriculum for Excellence – Religious and Moral
GR113-1 Education Experiences – Response from the
Scottish Council of Jewish Communities.
RELIGIOUS EDUCATION (DENOMINATIONAL)
GR107-1
Parent’s
Shetland Learning Festival.
The Moray House School of
Education, The University of
Edinburgh, Edinburgh.
The Chairperson (SMPA),
113
Commerce
Street,
Glasgow, G5 8DL.
Edinburgh
Inter-Faith
Association/Conference
of
Edinburgh’s
Religious
Leaders.
30/10/08.
3 page response.
30/11/08.
39 page response.
28/11/08.
4 page response.
02/12/08.
3 page response.
St. Ninian’s
School, Fife.
“The Scottish Sikh Women’s
Association.“, 255 Nithsdale Road,
Pollockshields, Glasgow, G41 5AQ.
“The Scottish Sikh Women’s
Association. “
01/12/08.
5 page response.
N/A Unclear.
N/A Unclear.
01/12/08.
14 page response.
A contact from St. Ninian’s RC
Primary, Fife.
St. Ninian’s RC Primary, Fife.
02/12/08.
1 page response.
The Parliamentary and Equalities
Officer.
“The
Scottish
Council. “
01/12/08.
6 page response.
“The Scottish Council of Jewish
Communities.”
“The Scottish Council
Jewish Communities.”
01/12/08.
13 page response.
31/10/08.
3 page response +
RCRE feedback. 9
pages in total.
28/11/08.
2 page response.
N/A.
Completed
questionnaire
on
Technologies
on
behalf of Scottish
SCREEN.
GR083-1
Inverclyde, Renfrewshire and West
Dunbartonshire Inter-authority RE
(in Roman Catholic Schools)
Engagement Seminars.
GR112-1
Response to Curriculum for Excellence –
Proposals for Religious Education in Catholic
Schools.
“The National Association of
Diocesan
Religious
Education
Advisers.”
Primary
1 page response.
N/A Unclear.
Inverclyde,
Renfrewshire
and
West
Dunbartonshire
Inter-authority
Religious
Education (in Roman Catholic Schools)
Engagement Seminars.
RC
19/11/08.
Inter-Faith
of
Inverclyde, Renfrewshire and
West Dunbartonshire Interauthority RE (in Roman
Catholic
Schools)
Engagement Seminars.
The Director of “The Scottish
Catholic Education Service”,
75, Craigpark, Glasgow, G31
2HD.
TECHNOLOGIES
GR025-1
Scottish
Screen
on
Draft
Experiences and Outcomes.
Technologies
Scottish
SCREEN,
the
nonDepartmental Public body for all
aspects of screen culture and
industry.
SCOTTISH SCREEN.
142
GR048-1
Response from
Technologies.
GRO511
Feedback on Technologies, West
Council, Home Economics Department.
GRO521
Scottish ICT Development Group Comments on
Draft
Experiences
and
Outcomes
for
Technologies.
The Scottish ICT Development
Group is an association of
educational ICT staff from the 32
Local Authorities in Scotland.
GRO531
Inverclyde,
Renfrewshire
Dunbartonshire
Inter-Authority
Seminars.
Inverclyde, Renfrewshire and West
Dunbartonshire
Inter-Authority
Technologies Seminars.
GRO561
GRO571
West
Lothian
Council
on
A contact
Academy.
based
at
Linlithgow
Lothian
A contact
Academy.
based
at
Linlithgow
and
West
Technologies
SCIS (The Scottish Council of Independent
Schools) Edinburgh Home Economics Group:
dated 10th November, 2008.
Departmental Response to Draft Outcomes for
Technology from Braes High School, Design
Engineering & Technology Department.
GRO581
Galashiels Academy Computing Department on
the Draft Outcomes in Technology.
GR078-1
Technologies - Experiences and Outcomes.
GR102-1
Response to Technologies Draft Experiences and
Outcomes.
GR103-1
SCIS (Edinburgh) Home Economics
Group.
West Lothian Council.
10/11/08.
4 pages of detailed
response.
West
Lothian
Home
Economics Department.
7/11/08.
4
page
response.
detailed
Contact
from
Development Group.
13/11/08.
4
page
response.
detailed
11/11/08.
6 pages of detailed
responses.
14/11/08.
4 pages of response
19/11/08.
5 page document.
ICT
Inverclyde, Renfrewshire and
West Dunbartonshire InterAuthority
Technologies
Seminars.
The Convener - based at
George Herriot’s School,
Edinburgh .
Contact from Braes High School.
Contact
School.
from
Braes
High
Received by email from a Class
Teacher.
Galashiels
Academy
Computing Department.
17/11/08.
2 page response.
Montrose Academy.
N/A.
12 pages of detailed
response.
28/11/08.
2 page response.
30/11/08.
2 page letter.
01/12/08.
1 page response.
01/12/08.
7 page response.
Response to Draft Experiences and Outcomes in
the Technologies.
A Principal Teacher of Computing &
Business Education.
Scottish
Technology
and
Engineering
Association,
(SCOTETA), (Director), SCOTETA.
The General Secretary of The
Royal Society of Edinburgh.
SCOTETA – The Engineering
and Technology Association
(Scotland).
The
Royal
Society
of
Edinburgh.
GR104-1
Curriculum for Excellence: Response to
Technologies Outcomes and Experiences (Draft).
Two contacts from The Scottish
Heads of Computing.
The Scottish
Computing.
GR105-1
Technology Teachers’ Association’s response to
ACfE Technologies Outcomes
A contact from the Technology
Teachers Association.
Technology
Association.
Heads
of
Teachers
143
Individuals n=20 additional documents (18 on curricular areas; 2 general responses [1 handwritten letter]).
SCIENCE
Code
Title
Compiled by
Source
Date
Brief description
PER0011
A personal response to CfE Learning
Experiences and Outcomes for Science.
A Senior Lecturer in Science
Education.
University of Edinburgh.
23/02/08.
4 page document.
PER0021
Feedback from Website: Physics: personal
feedback in response to the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes in Science.
A Principal Teacher of Physics
(St. Maurices High School).
St. Maurice's High School.
N/A.
1 page document.
PER0041
Views on Curriculum for Excellence Science/
Chemistry.
A contact from the University of
Edinburgh, School of Chemistry.
A
Contact
from
the
University of Edinburgh,
School of Chemistry.
30/06/2008.
2 page document.
A contact from the Gaelic
Department, Sgoil Lionacleit.
Gaelic Department, Sgoil
Lionacleit.
N/A.
2 page document.
Gaelic Learners.
Gaelic
Learners
information given).
N/A.
2 page response.
A contact from Donaldson's
School for the Deaf.
A contact from Donaldson's
School for the Deaf.
N/A.
1
paragraph
feedback.
PER0031
An individual response from the Gaelic
Department/ Sgoil Lionacleit: Submission for
Draft Literacy and Gaidhlig outcomes.
“Sgoil Lionacleit.”
An individual response from
the Gaelic Department/
Sgoil Lionacleit:
“Sgoil
Lionacleit.”
(Only
information given).
N/A.
2 page document.
PER0171
A Submission for Draft Literacy and Gaidhlig
Outcomes.
Gaelic Department.
Gaelic Department
information given).
N/A.
2 pages of detailed
response.
N/A.
“Mental
Health
Emotional Wellbeing.”
04/12/08.
1 page response.
A contact from Graeme High
School, Falkirk.
Graeme
Falkirk.
27/10/08.
2 pages of
feedback.
GAELIC LEARNERS
PER0051
Sgiol Lionacleit, Feedback on
Outcomes for Gaelic Learners.
the
Draft
PER0151
Feedback on Curriculum for Excellence Area
Event (Gaelic Learners).
(Only
ENGLISH AND LITERACY
PER0061
Feedback on the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes for Literacy.
of
GAIDHLIG AND LITERACY
(Only
HEALTH AND WELLBEING
PER0191
A Response
Outcomes.
to
Health
and
Wellbeing
and
RELIGIOUS AND MORAL EDUCATION
PER0081
Feedback/ Comments on Cover paper for Draft
Experiences and Outcomes for Religious and
Moral Education (RME) as well as comments
High
School,
144
on the Draft E & O in Religious and Moral
Education (RME).
A contact from the Glasgow
Buddhist Centre.
A representative of (FWBO)
the
Glasgow
Buddhist
Centre, 329, Sauchiehall
Street, Glasgow G2 3HW.
27/10/08.
1 page response.
PER0161
A Principal Teacher of RME.
North Berwick High School.
East Lothian.
N/A.
1 page response.
PER0071
A contact from the School of
Computing, University of the
West of Scotland.
The School of Computing,
University of the West of
Scotland.
N/A.
1 page on CfE
Technologies with
reference to the
computer
games
element.
Individual Teacher response 1.
Design,
Engineering
&
Technology
Department,
Braes High School.
19/11/08.
4 page response
document.
Individual Teacher response 2.
Design,
Engineering
&
Technology
Department,
Braes High School.
19/11/08.
4 page response
document.
Individual Teacher response 3.
Design,
Engineering
&
Technology
Department,
Braes High School.
19/11/08.
4 page response
document.
Individual Teacher response 4.
Design,
Engineering
&
Technology
Department,
Braes High School.
19/11/08.
4 page response
document.
An individual Teacher response.
Teacher
of
Business
Education
and
ICT
(Inverclyde).
08/11/08.
1
paragraph
comment.
PER0091
A response to the Draft Experiences and
Outcomes for Religious and Moral Education
(RME).
A Response to Curriculum for Excellence
Religious and Moral Education (RME)
proposals.
TECHNOLOGIES
PER0101
PER0111
PER0121
PER0131
PER0141
Feedback on Technologies, Draft Outcomes.
An individual Teacher response (1) to the Draft
Outcomes for Technology from Braes High
School, Design Engineering and Technology
Department.
An individual Teacher Response (2) to the
Draft Outcomes for Technology from Braes
High School, Design Engineering and
Technology Department.
An individual Teacher Response (3) to the
Draft Outcomes for Technology from Braes
High School, Design Engineering and
Technology Department.
An individual Teacher Response (4) to the
Draft Outcomes for Technology from Braes
High School, Design Engineering and
Technology Department.
A personal comment on the Draft Experiences
and Outcomes for Technologies.
General response
PER0181
A general response to the Curriculum for
Excellence (CfE) Consultation on Outcomes.
A Head teacher.
Primary School, Glasgow
City.
19/03/08.
2 page hand-written
letter.
PER0201
A general response to the CfE Draft Outcomes.
An Acting Principal teacher.
Primary school,
City.
03/12/08.
1 page response.
Glasgow
145