IMPROVING SCHOOLS IN
SCOTLAND: AN OECD
PERSPECTIVE
(REVIEW OF CURRICULUM FOR
EXCELLENCE)
OECD Review Team
Edinburgh,
14 Dec 2015
So much that is positive in CfE
• A 21st century agenda of knowledge and
competence
• Holistic approach – 3-18 and 4 capacities
• Real professional engagement, trust and
consensus
• Enthusiasm for teaching and learning
• Courage and patience to stay the course
• Major parallel reforms e.g. teacher
education.
2
So our review about going even further,
addressing such questions as:
• How to combine boldness of ambition with
specific learning evidence, professional
accountability and far-reaching equity?
• How to grow capacity for building CfE in
schools & communities while enhancing
system leadership?
• How to ensure that parents and the public
are on board as well as educational
professionals?
3
EQUITY AND CLOSING THE
GAP
4
Many positives
• Achievement levels spread relatively
equally
• Scottish students are ‘resilient’
• Migrant students do well, and gender
gaps not as wide as in many systems
• Scottish schools are inclusive
• Impressive array of policies,
programmes and strategies
5
650
Above-average mathematics performance
Above-average equity in education outcomes
Above-average mathematics performance
Below-average equity in education outcomes
600
Netherlands
Scotland
New Zealand
500
Canada
Ireland
OECD average
Norway
450
400
OECD average
Mean mathematics
score
550
350
Below-average mathematics performance
Below-average equity in education outcomes
Below-average mathematics performance
Above-average equity in education outcomes
300
30
25
20
15
Percentage of variation in performance
10
5
0
Greater
6
Scottish students are ‘resilient’
7
Scottish migrant students do well
8
BUT…
• Still concern about ‘closing the gap’
especially between areas of greater and
less deprivation…
• … and particular challenges confronting
secondary schools.
9
Students in least deprived areas have higher
achievement levels than those in most deprived
areas, at all stages
Proportion of pupils performing well or very well, by deprivation category
and stage
Reading 2014
Numeracy 2013
10
Our recommendations
• Be rigorous about the gaps to be closed
and pursue relentlessly “closing the gap”
and “raising the bar” simultaneously.
• Ensure a consolidated and evidenceinformed strategic approach to equity
policies.
11
EVIDENCE ABOUT QUALITY
IN SCHOOLING
12
There are clear positives
• Achievement above international averages
in science and reading, while similar in
maths
• Positive attitudes towards school
• Upward trend in attainments and positive
destinations
• Risk behaviour is improving.
13
Scottish 15-year-olds are above OECD average
in reading and science while similar to average
in mathematics
Achievement in mathematics, reading and science in OECD countries, PISA 2012
14
Positive attitudes towards schools among
Scottish teenagers
Attitudes towards school: 2003 and 2012
Percentage of students who reported “agree” or “strongly agree” (a) or who
reported “disagree” or “strongly disagree” (b)
15
Continuous increase in the proportion of
students pursuing further study
Staying-on rates in publicly-funded secondary schools , 2000/01 to 2014/15
16
BUT…
• A stubborn minority of schools still not
good enough
• Some declining achievement levels on
international data, especially maths … and
using Scottish data.
17
Scottish performance in mathematics and
reading dropped sharply before CfE was
implemented …
Trends in Scotland’s achievements in PISA by subject area since 2003
18
Our recommendations
• Develop metrics that do justice to the full
range of CfE capacities informing a bold
understanding of quality and equity.
• All other recommendations, especially
about schools, teachers & leadership, and
about evaluation and assessment.
19
QUALITY, SCHOOLS &
LEADERSHIP
20
Many positives
• Widespread engagement in learning, and
engagement with parents and local
communities.
• Widespread acceptance and commitment
to CfE by the educational community.
• Strong focus on professional capital and
leadership: TSF, GTCS standards & new
Scottish College for Educational
Leadership.
21
BUT…
• Varying quality of implementation on the
ground
• Value of innovating learning environments,
especially for secondary schools in deprived
areas (but not only)
• Need to focus on teacher and school
collaborative practices with greatest impacts on
student learning
• Need for greater leadership in and from the
‘middle’.
22
Our recommendations
• Focus on the quality of implementation of
CfE in schools and communities, and make
this an evaluation priority.
• Develop targeted, networked, evaluated
innovation in secondary school learning
environments to enhance engagement.
• Develop a coherent strategy for building
teacher and leadership social capital.
23
ASSESSMENT AND
EVALUATION
24
Many positives
• Assessment as part of, and not separate from,
learning and teaching.
• Strong formative emphasis, with range of
methods to collect information - designed to
support learning.
• The coherent developmental emphasis of
teacher appraisal and school self-evaluation..
25
BUT…
• Insufficiently robust information and use of
assessment to inform policy & practice
• Wide range of assessment practices, e.g.
across LAs and across schools, including
what to assess around Es & Os
• Persistent bureaucracy
• Insufficient engagement of research
community and lack of independent
evaluation
26
Our recommendations
• Develop an integrating framework for
assessment and evaluation that encompasses all
system levels.
• Strike a more even balance between the
formative focus of assessment and developing a
robust evidence base on learning outcomes and
progression.
• Strengthen evaluation and research, including
independent knowledge creation.
27
GOVERNANCE & DECISIONMAKING
28
Many positives
• Wide engagement of different stakeholders
and a strongly consensual approach
• High trust
• Patient building of ingredients & capacity,
and implementation
• Extensive frameworks, reference materials,
and professional development.
29
BUT…
• Central management is strong but what
about leadership? – system leadership and
from the ‘middle’
• Simplification needed for a complex
curriculum with many layers and dimensions
• Performance gaps between local authorities.
30
Our recommendations
• Create a new narrative for the Curriculum
for Excellence.
• Strengthen the professional leadership of
CfE and the “middle”.
• Simplify and clarify core guidance,
including in the definitions of what
constitutes the Curriculum for Excellence.
31
FINAL REMARKS
32
CfE at a “watershed”
Is it:
1. Key transition moment?
2. Ready for take-off ?
3. Make or break time?
• We think our recommendations give an
agenda for 1), will help drive 2) forward,
and would tip the balance, if 3) looms,
towards ‘make’ rather than ‘break’
33
Thank you!
David Istance
Andrew Hargreaves
Maria Huerta
Helen Timperley
34