Scotland's Curriculum for Excellence: Into the Future. Report presentation
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
0 j'aime•241 vues
Students in Scotland (UK) engage in learning through Curriculum for Excellence (CfE), which aims to provide them with a holistic, coherent, and future-oriented approach to learning between the ages of 3 and 18. CfE offers an inspiring and widely supported philosophy of education. Schools design their own curriculum based on a common framework which allows for effective curricular practices. In 2020, Scotland invited the OECD to assess the implementation of CfE in primary and secondary schools to understand how school curricula have been designed and implemented in recent years. This report analyses the progress made with CfE since 2015, building upon several months of observations in Scotland, the existing literature and experiences from other OECD countries. The OECD analysis and recommendations aim to support Scotland as it further enhances CfE to achieve its potential for the present and future of its learners. Just as Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence was among the pioneers of 21st century learning, its most recent developments hold valuable lessons for other education systems and their own curriculum policies.
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (8)
Similaire à Scotland's Curriculum for Excellence: Into the Future. Report presentation
Similaire à Scotland's Curriculum for Excellence: Into the Future. Report presentation (20)
Plus de Beatriz Pont
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Scotland's Curriculum for Excellence: Into the Future. Report presentation
- 1. SCOTLAND’S CURRICULUM FOR EXCELLENCE: INTO THE FUTURE An OECD report Launch webinar, 21 June 2021 The OECD team: Beatriz Pont, OECD Directorate for Education and Skills Romane Viennet, OECD Directorate for Education and Skills Anne Looney, Dublin City University Jan Van Den Akker, Twente University
- 2. 2 Today: Analysis and recommendations for the implementation of the Curriculum for Excellence Data collection • Document review • Scottish Government evidence pack • Previous OECD report (2015) Stakeholder consultation • 2 visits to Scotland • Video interviews • Webinars Analysis • Implementing Education Policies framework • Qualitative and quantitative • International comparison
- 3. Developing knowledge, peer learning and country support on policy implementation 3 Implementing Education Policies: an OECD project How can education policy implementation processes be designed to ensure that policies bring about effective educational change in schools? What types of implementation strategies can be pursued for school improvement policies? What kind of information/data can help policy makers understand progress with implementation of their reforms? Austria 2019-20 EDU Monitoring Estonia 2019-20 EDU Monitoring Ireland 2019 Sr Cycle Review Mexico 2018 Education Strategy Norway 2019-20 Competence Development Scotland 2019-20 Curriculum Wales 2019-20 Curriculum Iceland 2020-21 Education Strategy Recent tailored country projects
- 4. 2020 2021 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan1 Feb Mar Apr May Jun Scottish Practitioners Forum 1 Stakeholder consultation seminar Implementing Education Policies: Scotland SPF 2 & 3 SPF 5 SPF 6 Report launch June Initial analysis Evidence pack OECD data Document review 16/07 – 28/08 Fact-finding missions Policy 30 interviews, 50 stakeholders Schools 4 visits 6 group interviews 2 Nov - 6 Nov Draft report preparation 1st draft Feedback Report finalization Policy assessment Strategic advice Stakeholder seminar SPF 4 SPF 7 2nd draft
- 5. 5 An assessment focused on Curriculum for Excellence’s implementation Attention to both Broad General Education and Senior Phase Young people & learning at the centre Collaborative, inclusive approach with stakeholders Focus on implementation & effects on learning Is CfE implemented in such a way to contribute positively to the education of all young people in Scotland?
- 6. 6 Scotland in an international context: Declining PISA performance Average performance in reading, mathematics and science in Scotland (UK) and OECD average, PISA 2012-2018
- 7. 7 Scotland in an international context: Leading global competence proficiency 100 80 60 40 20 0 20 40 60 80 100 Philippines Indonesia Kazakhstan Morocco Panama Thailand Albania Brunei Darussalam Colombia Costa Rica Serbia Chile All countries average Malta Russia Slovak Republic Lithuania Greece Israel Latvia Croatia Spain Korea Scotland (United Kingdom) Chinese Taipei Hong Kong (China) Canada Singapore % Level 1 Below Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Students’ proficiency in global competence in Scotland and participating countries and economies, PISA 2018
- 8. 8 Scotland in an international context: Above-average equity in education [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] [CELLRANGE] 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 0 5 10 15 20 25 Reading performance (in score points) Percentage of variation in performance explained by social-economic status Strength of the relationship between performance and socio-economic status is above the OECD average Strength of the relationship between performance and socio-economic status is not statistically significantly different from the average Strength of the relationship between performance and socio-economic status is below the OECD average OECD average: 487 points OECD average: 12% Above-average in reading performance and equity in education Below-average in reading performance and equity in education Greater equity Above-average in reading performance Below-average in equity in education Below-average in reading performance Above-average in equity in education Equity and reading performance, PISA 2018
- 9. 9 Scotland in an international context: Teachers’ working time spent mostly in front of class Percentage of lower secondary teachers' working time spent teaching, EAG (2019)
- 10. • Of which 40.3% in higher education, 27.3% in further education, 22.9% in employment 95% positive destinations • Narrowing equity gap between most and least deprived areas 91.6% of 16-19 year-olds participate in education, employment, training or other forms of personal development In S3, 88% expected literacy and 90% expected numeracy levels • Attainment gaps decreased from 2009/10 to 2018/19 Improved attainment at SCQF 4-6 10 Scotland’s education outcomes : selected evidence 2018-19 2009—10 1+ pass Level 6 60% 50.4% 1+ pass Level 5 85% 77% 1+ pass Level 4 95.9% 94.4%
- 11. initial CfE statement published research, proposals, feedback, and publication of framework and guidelines all schools begin planning and implementing CfE development of new qualifications Developing the Young Workforce School improvement review (OECD) Attainment Challenge Streamlined CfE guidelines; Revised National Qualifications; Excellence and Equity delivery plan; National Improvement Framework RICs Joint Agreement; Empowerment agenda; Headteachers Charter; Refreshed CfE narrative CfE implementation assessment (OECD): Is CfE implemented in ways to contribute positively to the education of all young people in Scotland? Short chronology of Curriculum for Excellence 2004 2010 2012 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
- 12. A curriculum policy to help all learners thrive in the 21st century prepare children and young people for their future provide a broad competence- based education raise standards close the poverty-related attainment gap Priorities in Scottish education Main building blocks of CfE framework • 4 fundamental capacities • Children’s rights • 8 curriculum areas & 3 interdisciplinary areas • Assessment as an integral part • School-based curriculum design
- 13. Curriculum for Excellence: a pioneer among modern curricula 148 112 103 96 89 88 72 70 63 59 52 50 49 40 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Teachers and school leadership Evaluation (system/school/student levels) Curriculum, qualifications, standards Economic resources in education Quality of VET Quality of tertiary Transition between school and work Disadvantaged students ECEC Quality of secondary Organisation of decision making Students from specific population groups Learning environments System-level policies promoting or hindering equity Source: Education Policy Outlook Reforms Finder, OECD 2019 Note: Number of policies collected = 1 091 Curriculum reforms and revisions across the OECD (2006-2019) Scotland (UK) (2010) Norway (rev. 2016) Finland (2014-2016) Estonia New Zealand Japan (2018-2022) Wales (UK) (2020-2022)
- 14. 14 Curriculum for Excellence: underlying tensions with implications for the way it is implemented Flexibility System coherence Conceptualisation of learning Curriculum flexibility Interconnected focus Separated focus Knowledge, skills, competencies Student assessment and system evaluation Aligned to CfE Aligned to qualifications and system success measures Depth Breadth
- 15. 15 Assessment: how CfE works for learners and how to face the future • How has CfE been implemented, from a student’s perspective? Is the design working well for all students as they progress and transition through the system? Smart policy design • To what extent have stakeholders been involved and how can they engage most productively to continue delivering the best possible CfE? Inclusive stakeholder engagement • How are the policy and institutional environments contributing to CfE reaching all schools? Conducive environment Coherent and actionable implementation strategy Dimensions for success in achieving an education change What has been the implementation approach?
- 16. 16 Attributes and capabilities describing the four capacities Four capacities 8 curriculum areas 1. Science 2. Languages 3. Mathematics 4. Social studies 5. Expressive arts 6. Health and wellbeing 7. Religious and moral ed. 8. Technology. 4 contexts of curriculum, including Experiences and Outcomes (Es and Os) Benchmarks A multi-layered curriculum framework
- 17. 17 Inspiring curriculum design requiring a focus on learners’ journey A driving force: CfE vision of excellence for all students recognized in Scotland and internationally. Relevant for its bold, aspirational, future- oriented approach. CfE framework enacted coherently for learners in BGE and Advanced Highers: school curricula & learning activities consistent with CfE intentions, commitment to varied teaching and pedagogical practices School based curriculum design: schools have implemented CfE across the country, with some evidence of success Teachers are well-trained and respected professionals, committed, and school leaders have developed strong pedagogical leadership capacities Strengths to build upon
- 18. 18 Inspiring curriculum design requiring focus on learners’ journey 20 years on, opportunities to develop some of the vision’s core elements following new curriculum research, education and societal change. E.g.: student learning and role of knowledge in 21st century curricula CfE’s framework, messages and core concepts are complex and spread over many instruments. Sometimes unclear for practitioners and leading to ambiguity in some key concepts. Some structures, learning and assessment practices in secondary education, especially in Senior Phase, lack consistency with CfE’s vision and hinder 3-18 curriculum experience: qualifications, choice, breadth Variable support from system for schools to access resources for curriculum design and teaching and pedagogical improvement: time, space, access to high-quality design-based research Education 2030: The OECD Learning Compass Issues to consider
- 19. • role of knowledge and indicators aligned to the vision to help understand student progress across the 4 capacities. Re-assess CfE’s aspirational vision against emerging trends in education: • consider how design of CfE can better help learners consolidate common knowledge base, skills and attitudes by end of BGE through to Sr Phase. Find a better balance between breadth and depth of learning throughout CfE: • adapt pedagogical and assessment practices to develop CfE 4 capacities. Adapt the Senior Phase to match the vision of CfE: • support around schools and collaboration for design and experimentation and with universities. Continue building curricular capacity at various levels of the system using research: 19 Recommendation 1: Balance Curriculum for Excellence so students can fully benefit from a coherent learning experience from 3 to 18 years
- 20. 20 Towards a shared ownership of Curriculum for Excellence
- 21. 21 Towards a shared ownership of Curriculum for Excellence Significant efforts to engage stakeholders throughout CfE’s lifecycle, contributing to wide support for CfE as a direction of travel: consultation and collaboration at the core. Conditions in place for wide support of CfE’s vision and shared ownership led by schools and profession, if system leaders fulfil their responsibilities to support others within a clear policy framework. Language developed and shared successfully in support of CfE’s philosophy across schools, pivotal to ensure a shared understanding of CfE’s vision and the policy objectives. Priority to clarify the division of responsibility between levels of education system, EPO 2019 Strengths to build upon
- 22. 22 Towards a shared ownership of Curriculum for Excellence Gap between intense involvement and effective impact on CfE implementation: lack of clarity on purpose of engagement and lack of consistence in use of stakeholder input CfE ownership described as fragmented and in need of transparency : too many owners claimed ownership while lacking clarity about their responsibilities Constant production and recycling of documentation described as “overwhelming” by practitioners, with terminology deemed too technical and lending itself to too much interpretation Public participation spectrum, IAP2 2014 Issues to consider
- 23. • System leaders can encourage involvement with better structuring of engagement approaches and clarifying purposes. Ensure stable, purposeful and impactful stakeholder involvement with CfE • allocation of responsibilities stable along shared ownership. Revise the division of responsibilities for CfE • to support developments of CfE: communication on next steps and collaborate. Structure a coherent communication strategy 23 Recommendation 2: Combine effective collaboration with clear roles and responsibilities
- 24. 24 Continued efforts towards alignment 24 Empowerment agenda DYW GIRFEC Attainment challenge NIF Policy cycle Governance
- 25. 25 Continued efforts towards alignment 25 Great progress in developing and supporting teachers’ curriculum- making capacity and school leaders’ leadership: inspiring CfE innovation now widely used as a curriculum design principle. Other policies developed around CfE’s innovative philosophy, holding promises for alignment of student assessment, qualification practices and system evaluation and offering good practice internationally Considerable educational data available to the public, with NIF’s attempt to further enhance data quality Education widely seen as a source of pride and a priority, contributing to commitment to improvement and involvement, and intense political interest 2021 NIF and Improvement Plan, Scottish Government Strengths to build upon
- 26. 26 Continued efforts towards alignment Continuous challenges to school-based curriculum design: multiple new local and central initiatives, high rate of teachers’ class contact time Policy alignment: Some policies that aim to support CfE not aligned to CfE, such as qualifications from S1-3 onwards; and current system evaluation data limited to fully support CfE’s ambitions Busy system at risk of policy and institutional overload; and reactive and political approach to CfE review in the absence of an identified cycle of policy review OECD: Czech Republic, Hungary Partner: India3 OECD: Australia, British Columbia (Canada), Chile1, Estonia, Finland, Japan, Korea, Lithuania1, Ontario (Canada) Partner: China (People’s Republic of), Costa Rica, Russian Federation, Singapore OECD: Québec (Canada)2 Partner: Viet Nam OECD:Denmark, Ireland, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Northern Ireland (United Kingdom)3, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Sweden, Turkey, United States3 Partner: Argentina, Hong Kong (China), South Africa as necessary/ when ap- propriate every 5-10 years every 2-5 years every 15-20 years Frequency of major curriculum reforms, 2020 Issues to consider
- 27. • Consider dedicated time for teachers for curriculum planning monitoring student achievement and moderation. Provide dedicated time to lead, plan and support CfE at the school level • Explore assigning leadership and development responsibilities for curriculum to a specialist stand alone agency; refreshing remit of inspectorate regarding CfE. Simplify policies and institutions for clarity and coherence • Identify modes of student assessment aligned to 4 capacities of CfE and redevelop sample based evaluation system to collect robust data to support decision making. Align curriculum, qualifications and system evaluation to deliver on the commitment of Building the Curriculum 5 • Developing review cycle with planned timeframe and review agenda led by agency. Develop a systematic approach to curriculum review 27 Recommendation 3: Consolidate institutional policy processes for effective change
- 28. 28 An implementation approach that requires a long-term perspective A particular path to change: venues to engage many stakeholders, develop agreements allowing for responsiveness to implementation challenges with CfE Significant autonomy in schools to design and shape CfE’s developments, possibly building capacity on the ground No long-term strategy or structured and sequenced approach approach to look forward, plan and communicate CfE’s developments with a longer term perspective Issues to consider Strengths to build upon
- 29. 29 Recommendation 4: Lead the next steps for Curriculum for Excellence with a long-term coherent view Lead the next steps of CfE with a long-term focus 1.1. Re-assess CfE’s aspirational vision against emerging trends in education 1.2. Find a better balance between breadth and depth of learning throughout CfE 1.3. Adapt the Senior Phase to match the vision of CfE 1.4. Continue building curricular capacity at various levels of the system using research 2.1. Ensure stable, purposeful and impactful stakeholder involvement with CfE 2.2. Revise the division of responsibilities for CfE 2.3. Structure a coherent communication strategy to support developments of CfE 3.1. Provide dedicated time to lead, plan and support CfE at the school level 3.2. Simplify policies and institutions for clarity and coherence 3.3. Align curriculum, qualifications and system evaluation to deliver on the commitment of Building the Curriculum 5 3.4. Develop a systematic approach to curriculum review How will this be done? Who is responsibl e? Resource s? When? Measure progress?
- 31. THANK YOU! www.oecd.org/education/implementing-education-policies Beatriz Pont Sr. Education Policy Analyst, Directorate for Education and Skills beatriz.pont@oecd.org Romane Viennet Junior Analyst, Directorate for Education and Skills romane.viennet@oecd.org
Notes de l'éditeur
- On PISA’s global competence module, the difference between advantaged and disadvantaged students’ scores in global competence was larger than 80 score points in Scotland, was not significant after taking into account students’ performance in reading, maths and science. The findings show that advantaged students (those in the top quarter of the PISA index of economic, social and cultural status) have access to more learning opportunities than disadvantaged students in Scotland as is the case in 31 of 64 participating countries and economies.
- Net teaching time (typical annual number of hours) as a percentage of total statutory working time in general programmes in public institutions Source: OECD (2020), Tables D4.1 and D4.2. See Source section for more information and Annex 3 for notes (https://doi.org/10.1787/69096873-en).
- The CfE pursues the vision to enable all learners aged 3 to 18 gain the knowledge, skills and attributes needed for life in the 21st century. It specifically aims to: provide learners with a broad competence-based education to help them develop four “fundamental capacities”, namely becoming successful learners; confident individuals; responsible citizens; and effective contributors. These “four fundamental capacities” are central to the CfE; to raise standards: Scotland’s performance on PISA has worsened since the early 2000s. to close the poverty-related attainment gap: the performance variations between students of higher and lower socio-economic situation are significant. to prepare children and young people for their future. Note: the image is a poster developed to communicate the “Refreshed CfE Narrative”
- 4 capacities at the centre of CfE’s vision The attributes and capabilities specify the 4 capacities 4 contexts of curriculum (different contexts in which students learn) 8 curriculum areas to organise learning beyond subjects (each area gathers several subjects and structure learning in BGE, but individual subjects become more prominent in SP) Experiences and Outcomes (Es and Os): describe the expectations for learning and progression in all curriculum areas Benchmarks: developed to provide clarity on the national standards expected (and thus learners’ progression) within each curriculum area at each level, using the EsandOs (note from analysts: benchmarks only characterise learners at certain points of BGE)
- CfE vision is a driving force: a vision of excellence for all students recognized in Scotland and internationally and valid for its bold, aspirational, future-oriented approach CfE framework enacted mostly coherently for learners aged 3-15: School-based curricula are designed and implemented consistently with policy intentions Learning activities as intended by CfE Commitment to varied teaching and pedagogical practices Commitment to developing instructional resources Examples of excellent practices in Advanced Highers courses Teachers are well-trained and respected professionals, and school leaders have developed strong pedagogical leadership capacities
- There are opportunities to develop some of the vision’s core elements, such as the role of knowledge in 21st century curricula: curriculum research progress; evolutions in education and societal issues CfE’s framework, messages and core concepts became too complex, unclear and lacked consistency for practitioners (many documents and instruments) hampering curriculum design. Structures, learning and assessment practices in Senior Phase lack consistency with CfE’s vision and hinder 3-18 curriculum experience: qualifications, choice, breadth Curriculum design and continuous improvement in teaching and pedagogical leadership requires time, professional investment, and access to high-quality design-based research, which schools can only enjoy with continuous support from the system
- 1.1. Revisiting CfE’s aspirational vision in meaning and practice to take account of evolutions in education and society over the past decade. Scotland could first, consider updates to some of its vision’s core elements and their implications for practice, in particular the role of knowledge in CfE; and second, define indicators aligned to the vision to help understand students’ progress across all four capacities. 1.2. Finding a better balance between breadth and depth of learning throughout CfE, to deliver Scotland’s commitment to provide all learners with a rich learning experience throughout school education. Scotland could consider how the design of CfE can better help learners consolidate a common base of knowledge, skills and attitudes by the end of BGE, and nurture and hone this base for them to progress seamlessly through Senior Phase and the choices its offers. 1.3. Adapting the Senior phase to match CfE’s vision: Scotland could consider adapting the pedagogical and assessment practices, and the structure of learning pathways in the Senior Phase to enhance learners’ experience of upper secondary education and help them develop CfE’s four capacities continuously. 1.4. Continuing to build curricular capacity at various levels of the system using research, by developing the environment of curriculum design support around schools, including in supporting exchange and collaboration between practitioners for curriculum design and experimentation within and across schools; and collaboration between schools and universities
- Significant efforts were made to engage stakeholders throughout CfE’s lifecycle, which contributed to wide support for CfE as a direction of travel for Scottish education. Consultation and collaboration are at the core of CfE processes, as much in policy design as in curriculum planning, development and enactment. The great degree of stakeholder involvement around CfE created the conditions for shared ownership and wide support of CfE’s vision. Stakeholders agree that schools and the profession should hold responsibility for conception, implementation and outcomes of their own curricula, provided the rest of the system fulfil their own responsibilities to support schools and the profession within a clear policy framework. Scotland successfully developed an education language to support the philosophy of CfE that made its way into daily discussions of education policy makers, teachers and learners alike thanks to efforts of communication by system leaders. CfE allows for flexibility in school curricula, so it was pivotal to ensure a shared understanding of CfE vision and the policy objectives.
- There seems to be a gap, however, between stakeholders’ intense involvement, and the limited impact of these views on effective enhancements to CfE implementation. There seems to be a specific concern among stakeholders that learners’ input is not enough taken into account within decisions, although Scotland is committed to consulting its youth. More generally, greater clarity is needed in the purpose of stakeholder engagement initiatives around CfE, as well as consistence in the use of stakeholders’ input At the same time, CfE ownership was most often described as fragmented, with many owners lacking clarity about their responsibilities. Transparency in the division of responsibilities among stakeholders is a necessary condition for policy success, in a system that promotes shared responsibility of its curriculum. Constant production and recycling of documentation was often described as “overwhelming” by practitioners, and the terminology used was deemed too technical and lending itself to too much interpretation. Communication around CfE became to confused. This can hinder implementation by leaving CfE open to wide interpretations and overwhelm schools, learners and parents.
- 2.1. Ensuring stable, purposeful and impactful stakeholder involvement with CfE: system leaders at national and local levels could continue encouraging the involvement of stakeholders (and in particular, students) with CfE by structuring better each engagement initiative they offer, clarifying its purpose, designing it accordingly, and letting stakeholder input inform decision-making. 2.2. Revising the division of responsibilities for CfE: system leaders and stakeholders could revise the current allocation of responsibility for CfE, including responsibilities for its strategic direction, its reviews and updates, and the response to schools’ needs of support with curriculum issues. The revised allocation should be stable over time to fulfil Scotland’s commitment to a shared ownership of CfE. 2.3. Structuring a coherent communication strategy to support the vision of CfE: system leaders, with the Learning Directorate and Education Scotland at the forefront, could develop a communication strategy in support of CfE’s next developments, and collaborate with practitioners, scholars and other CfE stakeholders as they do so
- Scotland made great progress in developing and supporting teachers’ capacity to be curriculum makers, and the capacity of school leaders to lead the process of curriculum in their schools. Affording autonomy at school level within a central framework, an innovation carried by CfE at the turn of the millennium, is now widely used as a curriculum design principle. Other education policies were developed to build a coherent system around the innovative philosophy brought by CfE. Early policy developments around CfE promised to align student assessment, qualification practices and system evaluation to the philosophy of CfE. The comprehensive framework for assessment designed in 2010 was hailed around the world as an exemplar with a clear focus on the centrality of the learner, and new tools such as the low-stakes SNSA and revised national courses were developed Considerable educational data available to the public, NIF attempt to further enhance data quality Education widely seen as a source of national pride and a priority, contributing to the wide commitment to educational improvement and willingness to get involved. . It has been granted great importance in the political debate to a degree that would be the envy of many a system
- School-based curriculum design has become more challenging for schools: multiple new initiatives at local and national levels. Tension between Scotland’s high rate of teachers’ class contact time and expectations for teachers to lead and plan curriculum locally. Some initiatives attempting to support CfE initially now hamper implementation. Contradictions in secondary as early as S1-3 (national qualifications), leaving little space for curriculum to meet the needs of learners Misalignment between CfE’s aspirations and system of qualifications became barrier to implementation in secondary (despite attempts to reform) Data generated by current system monitoring tools seems limited to fully support CfE’s ambitions Importance granted to education translates into a busy system at risk of policy and institutional overload; and heated political debate With the absence of an identified cycle of policy review, this results in a reactive and oftentimes political approach
- 1.1. Providing dedicated time to lead, plan and support CfE at school level: in support of the next phase of development of CfE, Scotland can consider the provision of additional dedicated and ring-fenced time for all teachers, for curriculum planning, for monitoring of student achievement and in support of moderation of assessment outcomes. 2.2.Simplifying key policies and institutions for clarity and coherence with CfE: to align the institutional structures with a clear ownership of CfE, Scotland could explore assigning leadership and development responsibilities for curriculum (and perhaps assessment) to a specialist stand-alone agency; and that it consider refreshing the Inspectorate’s remit regarding CfE. 3.3. Aligning qualifications, system evaluation and curriculum to deliver on the commitment of Building the Curriculum 5: Scotland could first, identify modes of student assessment that could be used in school and external settings at Senior Phase levels, in alignment with the four capacities and CfE philosophy; and second, re-develop a sample-based evaluation system to collect robust and reliable data necessary to support curriculum reviews and decision-making. 4.4.Developing a systematic approach to curriculum review: Scotland could consider establishing a systematic curriculum review cycle with a planned timeframe and specific review agenda, led by the specialist stand-alone agency.
- Strengths: The Curriculum and Assessment Board and its predecessor provided a venue to engage many stakeholders, get input and feedback and develop shared agreements on progress and challenges. It allowed for responsiveness to the challenges raised regarding CfE implementation Issues The implementation of CfE has followed a particular path to change, without a long-term strategy. There was no clearly structured and sequenced approach to implementation, and no simple mechanism to look forward and plan CfE’s developments with a longer term perspective. It also made it difficult to communicate clearly and strategically about CfE: adhoc manner involving many documents, reports, supporting materials, without a clear sequence of events
- Credits Laptop by Ziyad Al Junaidi from the Noun Project Dialogue by Vectors Market from the Noun Project