Scottish Parent Teacher Council

"Assessment, Testing and reporting 3-14 - Consultation on Partnership Commitment

SECTION A: REPLACING REPORTS WITH ANNUAL PROGRESS PLANS
Response
Option 1: develop a common framework for Annual Progress Plans/redesigned reports, but with scope for local adaptation
See comment below
Option 2: produce a single national Annual Progress Plan/redesigned reports format that is agreed and used by all schools.
No – see comment below
Other options/comments:
We are attracted to the idea of personal learning plans, but are concerned that in practice they will become over-bureaucratic and time-consuming. In terms of reporting to parents, we like the practice of one secondary school where parents are given a brief, single page summary of their child’s progress. All the subjects are listed and against each there is a tick indicating one of three options “excellent” “satisfactory” or “causing concern”. Parents are invited in to follow up on the subjects “causing concern” in a face-to-face meeting with the teacher. We like this system because it gives important information at a glance, in an easily understood format and with a proper opportunity for direct contact with the teacher where there are problems. Also, this type of report is not time-consuming and so can be sent out every term. In general parents want frequent and timeous information with more time for dialogue with teachers. We feel that such dialogue is the point when discussion about “next steps” is most meaningful and helpful. If the personal learning plans can be made simple in the way described above, then we support the idea. If they are developed, it is probably best to allow local variation so that schools can design PLPs in a style and language that is most suited to their parents. A large city secondary school could have very different needs from a smaller rural secondary school. However, we do not see the need to convert PLPs into Annual Progress Plans/Reports. The PLPs give an on-going dialogue, which is sufficient.

REPLACING THE CURRENT PROVISION OF NATIONAL TESTS : RESPONSE
Option 1: End the central provision of materials for national testing
No
Other options/comments:
We think that test materials should continue to be made available centrally although not, as currently, in a catalogue from which teachers can choose the test most suited to their class. As pupils and families move around Scotland, it is important that they are able to have confidence that there are common standards in all authorities. Moreover, it is important that secondary schools are able to have confidence in the standards achieved by pupils from the many different primary schools that they attend prior to moving to the secondary.

Option 2:
(a) Introduce the National Assessment Bank, for use in the same way as before to confirm teachers’ judgements
Yes
(b) In addition, support schools and authorities to introduce local moderation arrangements
Yes
(c) Extend the range of materials in the assessment bank to include other aspects of the curriculum and Core Skills
Science No Social subjects No Modern languages No Practical assessments No Core Skills No
Other options/comments:
We are enthusiastic about the idea of generating tests randomly from a bank of suitable items, as this will give proper challenge to pupils and teachers. The test will randomly sample across the whole curriculum. This means it will be less possible for teachers to predict which parts of the curriculum will be tested and which parts will not be, so there will be greater requirement to ensure that the whole curriculum has been taught before youngsters sit the test. This in turn will mean that a positive test result will give credible evidence that the youngster has properly completed that stage of the curriculum, not as often appears the case at present, only one section of the curriculum. However, whilst we see the benefits of using tests based on a random selection of items in a centrally devised and held bank, we do not think that this process should be extended across other subjects/areas in the curriculum. There has to be a balance between teaching that is tested and teaching that is free of such constraints, able to follow youngsters’ interests and digress slightly from the main curriculum. Often the most important aspect of teaching is engaging a youngster’s enthusiasm and an undue emphasis on tests can often destroy enthusiasm.

SECTION C: MEASURING IMPROVEMENT IN OVERALL ATTAINMENT THROUGH A SCOTTISH SURVEY OF ACHIEVEMENT RATHER THAN RELYING ON NATIONAL TESTS
NATIONAL MONITORING OF ATTAINMENT: RESPONSE
Option 1: The Executive continues the annual 5-14 survey of attainment as currently, by collecting school-level data from authorities and pupil-level attainment data from all authorities from 2004-2005. The current Assessment of Achievement Programme would continue alongside the annual 5-14 Survey.
No
Other options/comments:
If the benefits of the new randomly generated tests are to be fully realised, then schools should not feel under pressure to have a certain proportion of their pupils achieve particular levels. Primary schools should be encouraged to complete the curriculum and delay the test, rather than have youngsters pass the test on the basis of covering only part of the curriculum. This shift can be achieved if test results are no longer collected by authorities or the Executive as a way of measuring the system.
Option 2: Introduce the Scottish Survey of Achievement (SSA) to monitor national attainment. Discontinue the Annual 5-14 Survey.
Yes
(b) Extend the survey sample to include S4
No
(c) Build in links between survey data and annual census data/ScotXed data for each sampled pupil
Yes
(d) Build in links between survey data and schools’ attainment data for each sampled pupil
The case has not been made for this
(e) Extend the sample each year to include whole small groups of pupils with special characteristics, so their progress can be monitored and compared with that of the wider population
The case has not been made for this
Other options/comments:
We support the move to the Scottish Survey of Achievement as a way of monitoring the system. We do not see the advantage of extending it to S4 as youngsters by then are on an NQ curriculum, which is itself subject to external, national assessment. We are not clear how a survey at S4 could, would or should link into survey findings based on the 3-14 curriculum. The case has not been made and we do not think the survey should be extended simply because it is possible to extend it. We support the idea of building links between the survey data and the annual census data/ScotXed and think this should be sufficient to answer questions about schools, authorities and particular groups of children. Again, the argument for the other links has not been made convincingly.

Option 3: Introduce SSA as in Option 2, but change the subject cycle to include English and mathematics, or other subject areas, more often.
(a) Include new subjects by ‘pairing’ on the current 4-year cycle (state which subjects in the comments box below)
No
(b) Survey only English and mathematics every year
No
(c) Survey English or mathematics, and one other subject, each year
No
(d) Continue to include embedded Core Skills in each survey
Yes
Other options/comments:
The four-year cycle is useful as it enables trends to be identified. We do not think that a more frequent cycle should be introduced for mathematics and English as this is likely to give a false picture of change. The frequency of the survey should be determined by what is statistically valid, not by what is possible. In general, whilst we recognised the need for testing at the school level to provide information to pupils, parents and teachers on pupils’ progress and we support the survey as a means of monitoring standards within the system, testing should remain at the minimum level consistent with efficiency. Testing should not become the dominant activity in school. Testing should indeed be there to support teaching and to ensure that pupils are progressing properly.

Name JUDITH GILLESPIE

Your title or role in education (job title, teacher, parent, community member etc) Role –parent spokesperson, Title – Development Manager

Organisation represented (if relevant) Scottish Parent Teacher Council

Address for acknowledgement: ___SPTC_______________________________________________________ ___53, George Street ___Edinburgh_____________________________________________ _________________________________________________ Postcode ___EH2 2HT_________________ E-mail address: __sptc@sol.co.uk________________

Confidentiality
It is normal practice for responses to consultation papers to be made publicly available, unless respondents request that their comments remain confidential.

01 Dec 2003

Return to previous page