Independent Review of Qualifications and Assessment - SG response: island communities impact assessment

Section 2 – Consultation & Evidence

2. The Consultation Process

Phase 1 of the Review:

The first phase of consultation was on the proposed vision and principles for the work via schools and colleges and Collaborative Community Groups (CCGs).

Phase 2 of the Review:

A second phase began in October 2022, including a public consultation hosted on the Scottish Government's Citizen Space portal between October 2022 and January 2023^[5]

Phase 3 of the Review:

The Phase 3 engagement ran from 3 March until 31st April. This sought views on a high-level overarching model for qualifications and assessment via discussions with Collaborative Community Groups (CCGs) and allied discussion groups, led by members of the Independent Review Group, and an online survey to schools and colleges.

Post-Publication

Since the publication of It’s Our Future: The Independent Review of Qualifications & Assessment^[6] the Scottish Government has welcomed views in writing and in person. This has been supported by an online survey to schools and colleges.

2.1 How Were Island Communities Represented?

Members of the Independent Review Group, which supported Professor Hayward, chaired Community Collaborative Groups. The significant number of individuals and organisations involved are listed in Annex 9 of the final report^[7]. It is worth noting that as well as a wide range of national organisations and agencies specific communities of interest relating to islands participated.

In addition, all local authorities (including the six island authorities) were consulted at all stages via the Association of Directors of Education Services (ADES).

Community Collaborative Group members

• Learners Group - Gaelic Medium (Gaelic and Scots Group via Young Scot)
• Parents and Carers Group - Comann nam Pàrant
• Headteachers Group - Portree High School, Skye
• National Agencies Group - Senior Education Officer, Gaelic, Education Scotland
• Inclusion & Equality Group – ASPIRENorth and University of Edinburgh, Gaelic Medium Education
• Further Education Group - University of the Highlands and Islands
• Higher Education Group - University of the Highlands and Islands
• Public & Third Sector Employers Group - Bòrd na Gàidhlig

Other Stakeholders

Professor Hayward also met the following individuals and organisations as part of the Review:

• Gaelic Medium Education Stakeholders Group
• Teachers group, Highland Council
• Oban High School with video link discussion with Tiree High School
• Teachers, young people and Council officials on Shetland

2.2 Stakeholder Evidence

The Phase 2 consultation allowed learners, parents, teachers and stakeholders to express their views on how the vision and principles established in Phase 1 might be implemented. Whilst no specific themes around islands emerged there were comments made by a small number of respondents concerning Gaelic and Gaelic Medium Education:

“This is a great opportunity to work towards a system that is more equitable and inclusive. At the moment pupils in GME are unable to access a full Gaelic medium curriculum, 3-18. The majority of GME pupils still do not have the opportunity to continue to develop their language skills in secondary education. This is an essential area for development relating to GME pupils. The rights of GME pupils to gain awards and qualifications through Gaelic must be guaranteed in any system and evidence provided that these rights are safeguarded.” - Comann nam Pàrant (Nàiseanta)

The Phase 3 engagement ran from 3 March until 31st April. The responses comprised 311 School and College survey responses; 34 non-survey responses submitted directly to Scottish Government; and 19 Collaborative Community Groups (CCG) and allied discussion group meeting reports, representing over 400 people. Whilst no specific island issues were raised the following comments were made in relation to rural and Gaelic matters:

• Learners from disadvantaged backgrounds, lower socio-economic areas and rural areas would have far fewer opportunities to achieve the Personal Pathway element of the Diploma than others.
• This also links to wider equity concerns relating to the setting itself: those located in lower socio-economic and rural areas were likely to have fewer resources and be able to offer opportunities to their learners.
• Respondents stressed that during the detailed development stage of the model, a great deal of work will be required to develop approaches to address these potential inequities and inequalities.
• Calls were also received to ensure the model recognises and supports Gaelic Medium Education in all aspects of the Diploma.

2.3. Digital Exclusion

Digital Exclusion for those experiencing poverty has been highlighted in the Fairer Scotland Duty Impact Assessment. This is, of course, equally relevant to deprivation in island communities. As in some mainland rural areas, islands can also experience infrastructure challenges such as poor or slow connectivity.

In terms of achieving the National Outcome of “We are well educated, skilled and able to contribute to society” it is argued that tackling digital exclusion can improve the ability to take part in online learning activities (particularly seen during local school closures from Covid-19 outbreaks) but also that digital exclusion exacerbates students existing experience of exclusion and inequality^[8].

The Scottish Government’s Connecting Scotland programme takes a targeted approach to redressing this balance; providing support and devices to those most in need. The programme has delivered on its target of getting 60,000 digitally excluded households online in the first 3 phases, distributing devices, and internet access for 2 years, via more than 1,000 organisations^[9]. Notwithstanding this investment, there is still a disparity between the digital access between the most and least affluent households.

There is significant variability in digital access and digital approaches across the 355 secondary schools in Scotland. This brings an element of geographic inequality which intersects with other forms of digital inequality and would represent a challenge if the recommendations were implemented at pace.

2.4. Stakeholder Feedback Following Publication of the Final Report

Professor Hayward sought to address some of the concerns raised during the three phases of the review in her final report, so it is worth considering the feedback received since the final publication :

In regard to island communities, points made include:

• There is much to be gained from the focusing of young people’s minds on key issues and ideas which are relevant or of interest to them, whether global or local. The local, highly individual communities and cultures often found in the remote or island settings typical of Argyll and Bute can benefit greatly from young people’s focused attention on their unique dynamics, issues and questions.
• Argyll and Bute Council agreed that the assessment and qualifications system should be central to eradicating the poverty-related attainment gap, and should allow the achievements of all young people to be recognised and valued in an environment where established preconceptions about the relative value of different qualifications no longer pertain. For the system to achieve such, it is fully agreed that the assessment and qualifications system must have a high degree of flexibility, with the related requirement for it to be personalised through a wide range of attainment and achievement pathways. This is of particular significance to Argyll and Bute Council, where the small, remote and rural nature of many of our schools mean that this breadth and flexibility of curricular choice is not always as available as it is in larger settings closer to centres of population.

In regard to Gaelic and Gaelic Medium Education (GME):

• GME subject specialist representatives were very supportive of the Independent Review’s recommendations and considered there to be potential opportunities within each of the SDA’s three proposed elements. There were also concerns about the additional workload that may be put on Gaelic specialist teachers.
• For GME they cited issues for curriculum and qualifications meeting the needs of the community - both in terms of content which reflects their experiences and values the fields of work for rural employment and skills.
• There is scope for the Diploma to redress issues for pupils who have gone through GME or have fluent Gaelic at home being encouraged and supported to gain a recognition or formal qualification of their Gaelic skills.
• Overall stakeholders recognised advantages to Scottish Education that the SDA could deliver for learners. They said that it would be crucial that there was a clear understanding from the outset that Scotland provides Secondary Education in two languages, either through the medium of English or GME. The SDA offers several opportunities to address challenges arising for the GME system. The National Gaelic Language Plan 2023-28 and Local Authority Gaelic Language Plans will be important mechanisms for delivering faster progress in this area. Overall stakeholders were in agreement and welcomed the inclusion of specific reference to GME (including relating to digital profiling).
• In GME there are good experiences available in schools, but currently this is not being captured (music specialists etc) the SDA provides an opportunity to formalise this. But there is an equality and equity issue here and a risk that if the opportunities aren’t available in GME, young people might disengage. Agree with the recommendation that all parts of the SDA are available in Gaelic.

In regard to digital inclusion stakeholders told us:

• The final report does not address geographical inequalities, especially around equitable provision for colleges (for example) and the challenges of providing increased breadth and depth in the Senior Phase (e.g. small rural schools / travel to other providers / cost and time of transport etc). Acknowledging that whilst solutions can be digital in nature, there needs to be considerable investment in the digital infrastructure in rural locations in order to make this a reality for our young people.
• A minimum entitlement to digital access would be helpful.
• Despite the challenges, delivering virtual learning for young people alongside mainland classes could be positive in terms of broadening choice in the Senior Phase.

In regard to elements of the Diploma:

• There remains a risk that young people living in more deprived and rural areas may have less opportunity to be involved in activities that would contribute to the Personal Pathway element whereas others would have more opportunity to be involved in this. Making this an entitlement would help but would require a clear definition of what this means and appropriate funding and guidance to allow it to happen.
• The Personal Pathway has the potential to deliver new opportunities for the GME system, for example: Using experiences through Gaelic within the Duke of Edinburgh Award, Prince’s Trust, John Muir Award, SSERC, and Caritas Award etc. However further work will be required to ensure that the award schemes have Gaelic language materials and advice.
• If Project Learning is implemented in a way that ensures that resource, support and structures that are put in place ensure Gaelic is included as a method and medium of delivery for this element then it could have positive impact on the engagement of pupils in their community and, if delivered digitally, with other GME pupils nationally. Overall project learning could be positive for GME.

Clearly island communities will also share positive and negative views with other stakeholders across Scotland. One of the frequently cited concerns is around teacher workload and this could be felt more keenly where challenges in teacher recruitment in rural and island communities already exist.