Curriculum and Assessment Board minutes: June 2024

Attendees and apologies

• Andrew Creamer, Head of Learning Teaching & Assessment, Education Scotland 

• Andy Harvey, Education Officer, The Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) 
• Cheryl Burnett, Chair, National Parent Forum of Scotland (NPFS)   
• Clare Hicks, Co-chair, Director of Education Reform, Scottish Government 
• Craig Flunkert, Unit Head, Scottish Government  
• Donna Stewart, Head of Policy National Qualifications, Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) 
• Elizabeth Shevlin, Deputy Director, Scottish Funding Council 
• Emma Sinclair, Curriculum and Assessment Board (CAB) Secretariat, Scottish Government  
• Gillian Hamilton, Co-chair, Chief Executive, Education Scotland 
• Graham Hutton, General Secretary, School Leaders Scotland (SLS) 
• Iain Morrison, Head of Humanities, Care, and Services, Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) 
• James Russell, Director of Careers Information, Advice and Guidance (CIAG) Operations, Skills Development Scotland (SDS) 
• Jane Brumpton, Chief Executive, Early Years Scotland 
• Janie McManus, HM Chief Inspector of Education, Education Scotland 
• Joan MacKay, Assistant Director, Education Scotland  
• John Guidi, District Secretary, Renfrewshire, Scottish Secondary Teachers Association (SSTA)  
• Laura Murdoch, Deputy Director, Curriculum and Qualifications, Scottish Government  
• Linda MacLeod, Assistant Director, Scottish Funding Council (SFC) 
• Linda Woods, Senior Policy Manager, Curriculum, Scottish Government 
• Lorraine Davidson, Chief Executive, Scottish Council of Independent Schools (SCIS) 
• Louise Hayward, Professor of Educational Assessment and Innovation, Academic Representative, University of Glasgow  
• Louise Turnbull, Head of Scrutiny, HM Inspector, Education Scotland 
• Marie Hendry, Chief Executive, College Development Network 
• Matthew Sweeney, Policy Manager, Convention of Scottish Local Authorities (COSLA) 
• Mike Corbett, National Official (Scotland), The National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT) 
• Morven Montgomery, CAB Secretariat, Scottish Government  
• Ollie Bray, Strategic Director, Education Scotland  
• Saskia Kearns, Team Leader, Curriculum Development, Scottish Government 
• Stewart Nicolson, Joint Chair of Association of Directors of Education (ADES) 
• Victoria Smith, Strategic Director, General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS) 

Apologies

• Eddie Carroll, National Executive Member, The National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers (NASUWT)  
• Andrea Bradley, General Secretary, Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) 
• Erica Russell Hensens, Deputy Director, Student Interests, Access, and Quality, Scottish Funding Council (SFC)  
• Gill Stewart, Director of Qualifications, Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) 
• James Mckean, Policy Officer, Colleges Scotland 
• Julie MacDonald, Vice President, School Leaders Scotland (SLS) 
• Mark Priestley, Professor of Education, University of Stirling, Academic Representative  
• Martyn Ware, Head of Policy, Research & Standards, Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) 
• Pauline Radcliffe, Chief Executive, Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF) 
• Pauline Stephen, Chief Executive, General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS) 
• Tim Wallace, Primary representative, Association of Headteachers and Deputes in Scotland (AHDS) (Head Teacher, Preston Tower Primary School) 
• Tina Harrison, Representative, Universities Scotland  

Items and actions

Welcome and draft minutes from last meeting, 21 March 2024

The Chair welcomed attendees to the Curriculum and Assessment Board (CAB) meeting. Draft minutes from the meeting on 21 March 2024 were agreed as an accurate record and approved by members. 

This in-person and extended meeting of CAB focused on the Curriculum Improvement Cycle (CIC), to: 

• discuss the outcomes of the CAB subgroup established at the last meeting, to test early thinking on the CIC, and 
• seek CAB feedback on the general process and particularly the reflections on the technical framework

As discussed at the previous meeting, a CAB CIC Sub-Group was formed. The group met three times and had representatives from ADES, EIS, Education Scotland, NASUWT, SDS, SLS, SSTA, SQA and Academics from the University of Stirling. The aims of this group were:  

• to test current thinking on the CIC to date
• to develop a strong position for presenting a coherent plan to CAB on 3rd June 2024 on the suggested next stages of the CIC
• to start to identify unintended consequences; and 
• to ensure that we are mindful to consider the implementation strategy at all stages of the process

Background, the language of curriculum reform and the curriculum improvement cycle 

There have been a series of recommendations for the development of a curriculum review cycle:

• Scotland’s Curriculum for Excellence: Into the Future (OECD) recommended “3.4 Develop 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”
• All Learners in Scotland Matter - national discussion on education: final report (Scottish Government) recommended a regular curriculum review process should be established to ensure that the curriculum remains fit for purpose, reflects contemporary learner needs, and can be effectively delivered in ways to ensure that all learners in Scotland have high quality curricular linked learning experiences 

It has been announced by the Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills that the first area for review will be maths and numeracy, followed by english and literacy. The overall sequencing and programme planning for the review and improvement cycle is underway. The CIC will consider all curricular areas and themes in a planned and systematic way.  CAB were invited to consider a draft model for the CIC, including examples of reviews that have taken place internationally, and pilot reviews which were led by Education Scotland in 2023/24. In undertaking each substantive improvement cycle, a wide range of stakeholders will be involved, in particular teachers, practitioners and subject leads across Scotland, CAB and the organisations represented on it.

The importance of the ‘language of curriculum reform’ was discussed. This discussion fed into a group working task where CAB considered a series of statements co-developed by Education Scotland and the CAB subgroup. 

The group considered the first two statements:

Statement one - communications and planning

• that we work towards sharing a high-level coherent plan for the Curriculum Improvement Cycle (CIC) for the next 10 years with the system from autumn 2024. This plan will be organised in horizons: short (1-3 years), medium (3-6 years) and long-term (6-10 year) with 2024 as year one.  

Statement two - the language of curriculum reform 

• that a piece of focused work is carried out at pace to explore and clearly define the language associated with curriculum reform. This will include key terminology identified by the OECD (2021) including “knowledge”, “skills”, “attributes”, “capacities” and “competencies”. 

CAB discussed statements one and two, and provided feedback: 

• there should be a transparent and open communication plan for stakeholders
• we need to ensure that everyone has the same level of shared understanding when it comes to language
• the CIC provides a real opportunity to work collaboratively
• the message must be clear to demonstrate why this is needed, exactly what the reviews will look at, and it should set out what is not changing, as well as what is
• timing of strategic decision making and communication during the school year is crucial

The Board also considered statement three, technical framework: 

• that we evolve the technical framework from the current model with its use, for example, of Es and Os, benchmarks and related approaches to assessment and moderation - to an enhanced model by making use of a Know/Do/Understand framework (or 'Big Ideas' framework). This will provide clarity with flexibility and continue to sit within Scotland's curriculum framework. 

CAB discussed statement three and provided feedback:

• language used in the current technical framework is too clunky, that results in clinging to aspects
• engagement is key to the re-development – need to listen to voice of the profession on the best approaches
• you cannot copy and paste a new system into Scotland from another country. We need to be mindful of cultural context
• we need to consider the quality/consistency of teaching resources available i.e., textbooks. We need to create and provide access to national resources to ensure a base standard of knowledge
• big ideas matter, make the learning journey clear and socially-just so it is more equitable across learners/schools  

Findings from the pilot curriculum reviews

Education Scotland clarified the purpose of the pilot curriculum reviews: finding the right process, surfacing early themes and tensions, and considering outputs from reviewing the curriculum, and how this related back to the OECD action plan recommendations 1.2 and 3.4.

The presentation cited a review of international approaches to curriculum review: this looked at how curriculum reviews were carried out across a range of countries (Estonia, Finland, Ireland, Japan, New Zealand, Ontario (Canada), and Singapore). 

An overview of the pilot reviews, which were led by Education Scotland, was provided including: meetings and events since February 2023 including national engagement events and core group meetings. A question was posed around considering the ideal composition of the review groups and models for recruitment and engagement.  The pilot reviews covered maths, health and wellbeing, social studies, modern languages, expressive arts, english and political literacy, and involved around 1,000 teachers.

The pilot reviews provided valuable learning/insights in relation to: 

• high levels of teacher engagement and enthusiasm 
• open recruitment topped up with targeted recruitment to ensure representation 
• in person approaches are more effective than online sessions
• service design and evidence-based approaches 
• considering practical challenges 
• wider communication and consultation opportunities – public website / transparency etc 
• expectation that a proportion of any group is “refreshed” annually

Education Scotland presented on the Maths and Numeracy Curriculum Improvement Group Structure (NRIM) noting that a partnership board had worked well. Their engagement has taken place across a core group, 3 sub-groups, a collaboration group and four network groups.

The group considered statement 4:

• that we continue to support and enact the proposed model for the curriculum review cycle which allows for an overall cycle of approximately ten years working through four interlinked stages: 1) analysing; 2) engaging and co-creation; 3) sharing, learning and adopting; 4) mobilising, monitoring and evaluating. 

CAB discussed statement four and provided feedback:

• this links closely with the communication and planning – this is not a top-down approach to the CIC
• a clear criteria to review groups – will provide a guide for where the gaps are and provide a benchmark for filling those
• there are helpful lessons from the National Discussion consultation which was targeted and successful in reaching young people
• ensure that there is cross fertilisation of subjects when creating working groups
• engagement groups need purpose and role of stakeholders clearly set out, and an appropriate timeframe to refresh personnel in a group
• there is a risk that a hierarchy will develop across schools that are more/less involved with the process. It is important that time is available for teachers to engage with the process in schools
• the involvement of teachers in the CIC model is critical and teaching unions have been consistent that resourcing should allow release of class teachers. Stakeholders may be disengaged with the education reform process (for example, because of consultation fatigue)
• there are groups such as local authority subject networks that would benefit from being mapped as part of this work
• the statements should acknowledge other places/centres where subjects are taught beyond schools

Exploring the core competencies 

The group considered statement five, cross curricular themes/core competencies: 

• that we continue to explore a number of cross curricular themes/core competencies (e.g.: learning for sustainability) - and think carefully about how they can be embedded across the contexts: the curriculum areas; interdisciplinary learning, personal achievements and ethos and life of school

CAB discussed statement five and provided feedback:

• provides an opportunity to reduce repetition of topics across subjects and ensure coverage of these topics, as this can be dependent on subject choice. The language used to describe these are important – we need to have clear terminology in use
• we need to get better with curriculum planning for cross curricular themes
• there may be an opportunity for primary teachers to provide support to teach these cross curricular topics in some secondary schools
• it could be beneficial for learners if a more targeted approach is taken to identifying the subjects, and where each “core competency” fits in
• the process needs to be flexible enough to be reactive to change e.g., Artificial Intelligence (AI)
• this has the potential to improve practice in inter disciplinary learning
• it is easy to ‘audit’ or signpost where these should be covered, but in terms of teaching and learning what does embedding mean? In the context of secondary schools this could become an “audit” approach rather than application of knowledge/skills in contexts
• this would bring about greater consistency between primary and secondary “equity of knowledge”
• the curriculum is driven by assessment in the senior phase, and there is an opportunity for this to be different through this review
• how do you ensure progression with cross-curricular themes? 

Evolving the technical framework  

Education Scotland presented on observations, themes, tensions and key structural opportunities:  

• the knowledge learners should have, and its purposes, needs to be clarified and this can support attainment and progression
• there are structural issues linked to the current technical framework
• the curriculum needs to be decluttered to promoted depth of learning though there are challenges around how this can be achieved
• teachers want clarity and flexibility not prescription and more guidance 

When considering the position of knowledge there is a lack of clarity over what knowledge to cover, contrasting purposes for knowledge in the curriculum, an inconsistent knowledge base, and there is a need to confirm what we mean by knowledge. 

The group were then invited to consider statement six, Reviewing the Contexts for Learning (including curriculum areas): recruitment:

• that each of the contexts for learning (which includes the eight curriculum areas) adopt a ‘wider collaboration’ and ‘core’ group model as well as utilising existing networks. Participants will be recruited in an open process. This will be complemented through targeted recruitment where there is a need to address group balance in relation, for example, to inclusion, diversity, or expertise. It is expected that a percentage of each group will be refreshed annually

CAB discussed statement six and provided feedback:

• the effectiveness of this could be tested in an associated schools and cluster model
• benchmarks must be clear at outset: what are we trying to capture? 
• there is a desire for things to be quantified, but the content must be the lead
• on group composition, inclusivity is challenged by use of summer schools and weekends – need to put more resource in to release time in the working week
• important not to be driven by secondary schools and consider early learning and primary schools

Any other business: agreement, timeline and next steps 

Education Scotland invited the organisations represented at CAB to contact them if they were interested in a further session on CIC specific to their stakeholders. 

Actions

• a final slide on timeline to be issued by Education Scotland and feedback from CAB is welcomed via email
• discussion on timeline of the curriculum areas to be incorporated into the next CAB meeting on 17 September 2024

There was no other business, and the meeting was concluded.