Shirley-Anne Somerville’s announcement that the national exams board faces the chop came swiftly – or at least it appeared to. For many, the news will, as the Lib Dems said on Monday, be “long overdue”.
As everybody else was digesting the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s landmark review of Curriculum for Excellence (CfE), the Education Secretary unveiled her intention to replace the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA).
The move is among a package of measures that could result in a profound and positive re-direction of the country’s schools.
Ms Somerville’s plans are certainly wideranging but declaring she wants to scrap the SQA is the attention grabber.
READ MORE: Scotland should reform '19th century' pupil assessments
The agency has made precious few friends in the battle to repair its reputation after last year’s results fiasco, when the use of an algorithm that imposed downgrades on tens of thousands of pupils sparked public fury. John Swinney, Ms Somerville’s predecessor, eventually U-turned and said teacher estimated marks would be restored.
Although Ofqual boss Sally Collier stepped down in the wake of a similar debacle south of the Border, Fiona Robertson continued as SQA Chief Executive. But the hoped for turnaround in her agency’s fortunes never materialised.
After formal exams were cancelled for a second time, Ms Robertson found herself at the centre of a new storm as the Alternative Certification Model generated fresh anger amid reports that pandemic-hit pupils were being subjected to a brutal treadmill of tests and assessments.
The writing was perhaps most clearly on the wall during this year’s EIS annual general meeting, which saw Ms Somerville pointedly tell delegates that mistakes were made in the use of algorithms “at the SQA”.
READ MORE: Scottish education faces overhaul in wake of 'damning' OECD report
Of course, announcing reform of Scotland’s education system is the easy bit. As Ms Somerville’s predecessors will no doubt tell her, successful delivery is unlikely to be quite so straightforward.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel