THE current debate around the reintroduction of testing for primary pupils in Scotland has been notable for confusion over exactly what is being proposed by whom.

The subject came to the fore earlier this year after a survey by Scotland’s Chief Statistician found standards of literacy and numeracy in Scottish schools were falling.

The decline provided a ready source of material for opposition parties to attack the Scottish Government and the Conservatives jumped first by calling for mandatory national testing.

First Minister Nicola Sturgeon refused to rule out such a move, acknowledging the wealth of data on the performance of secondary pupils was not available for those in primary.

Since then, Professor Sue Ellis, from Strathclyde University’s school of education, suggested the introduction of a “national bank of tests” and Labour leadership hopeful Kezia Dugdale advocated a national framework in which “teachers use standardised tests”.

In fact, what is being proposed by many of those involved is very different from the traditional concept of mandatory standardised national testing where the resulting data is used to compare the performance of schools or even individual teachers.

The confusion partly comes down to the fact that national testing is not necessarily the same as national tests.

What some appear to be arguing for is a return to a system where all primary pupils across Scotland sit a standardised test at a certain stage of their school career - such as P1 or when they leave in P7 - to establish what level they have achieved and to allow direct comparisons between schools.

However, others who have called for “standardised tests” would not support a system where schools could be ranked against each other in such a crude way.

Experience tells us that when that happens, teachers start coaching pupils simply to pass the tests and they cease to be a measure of progress or a teaching tool and instead become the raison d’etre of the educational journey.

As a result, those arguing for the use of standardised tests, rather than standardised testing, want to see the introduction of a set of standardised testing materials for schools to use when teachers deem it appropriate. The fact councils are already spending millions of pounds buying such materials from universities in England makes this all the more sensible.

Unfortunately, the problem still remains that if test results are available they could be used to construct league tables that invite unfair comparisons between schools serving entirely different communities.

Interestingly, Ms Davidson has already cited Danish primary schools as a model of mandatory testing, but the country’s Ministry of Education is very conscious of these issues.

Tests are computer-based and adapted to individual students so no two pupils receive the same test. In addition, both test materials and results are kept confidential, with the exception of national comparisons, by exempting them from regulations regarding public access to information.