Seòmar agus comataidhean

No, I did not instruct the review.

Yes.

You asked whether I had instructed the review itself. I did not, and the chief examiner can answer for herself on that point. I met with the chief examiner on three occasions during the review because I was concerned. I was concerned because, as members around the table know, I was receiving the same correspondence as other MSPs were receiving. Therefore, I was concerned at the outset and I wanted to understand what had happened.

We can talk about variation in the round. Variation in pass marks happens every year, and it happens in a variety of subjects. However, what I was hearing from the profession and from some parents was that there was an issue specifically with higher history and paper 2 this year, and I wanted to be absolutely certain that that was not the case. It is quite right that the SQA investigated the matter. You asked about the SQA using its own staff to do that investigation. The staff you are talking about are practising teachers, many of whom are markers for the SQA—

Is the point that you are making that they therefore cannot be objective?

That is something that we need to look at. I do not want to take away from the points that Mr Rennie is making, but Clare Hicks is right to say that the financial realities that we are living in are a pressure. We need to be cognisant of that.

As for the challenge, I know that the committee has taken evidence on the matter, but as cabinet secretary, I have not received much correspondence about it. I have had representations from the accreditation team within the qualifications body, who have a very clear view. Colleagues around the table might have heard views from the professional trade union or from the SQA. Apart from representations from the SQA, however, I do not recall receiving representations on accreditation, in recent history. I might be wrong about that, but it is not an issue that has been routinely raised with me.

I am not directly familiar with the Welsh approach to accreditation, but officials might be. If Wales had five times the budget, that would intrigue me.

There is no direct role.

Those are very rare.

No. I do not think that if you change structures you change culture. You must do both. Part of that is about embedding learner and teacher voices in the organisation, which is a new approach. For example, we have looked to increase the number of teachers who are represented in the structure. It is really important that practising teachers are involved in the governance arrangements, because it will bring credibility to the organisation.

People are important, too. In my opening statement, I talked about the comment of a secondary headteacher coming into the organisation, which was quite deliberate. It sends a message to the wider education system that we trust Scotland’s teachers to deliver on the qualification improvements. I want teachers to be empowered to lead the change that we need. I have made that happen through the curriculum improvement approach, with the appointment of Andy Brown as the national maths specialist, who is a secondary headteacher and a maths teacher.

I want to replicate exactly the same approach in qualifications Scotland. Having a secondary headteacher with the knowledge and understanding of delivering qualifications in a secondary school is really important. We need to see more of that in how the new qualifications body works, so that we are using the expertise of the people who work in our classrooms at the chalkface every day to drive the improvements that we need.

For too long—I know that the committee has heard this, not just in recent weeks but in the previous session—it has felt as though the qualifications body has been distanced from the profession. We need to see that closer working, which is part of the reason why I brought in the secondary school headteacher, but I do not see that as an end point. We must continue to change and evolve the culture. Throughout the process, we are looking at how we can better embed the teacher voice and the learner voice. The setting up of committees is part of that, as is the new chair appointment that I alluded to in my response to Mr Kerr.

During the next five years, we will have established new governance structures through the committees that Clare Hicks spoke about. Embedding them in governance structures is important. Having their voices as part of the way in which the organisations—particularly qualifications Scotland—work will be hugely important to driving a difference.

Looking at practitioners from a teacher’s perspective, I think that the new qualifications body has to be more front footed in engaging with Scotland’s teachers. Many of the staff in the SQA have come from the classroom. Most of our markers are teachers, and they are involved in setting the national standard. We have to create new ways for teachers to be involved in the organisation. Part of that is about the secondary headteacher secondment that I spoke about. I envision an opportunity for Scotland’s teachers to engage with the organisation more directly. The governance arrangements will stipulate that qualifications Scotland should more front footed in engaging with teachers and listening to their views, which is important.

The organisation has to feel less defensive. At times, that has been a challenge. It has to work with Scotland’s teachers, our learners and their parents. It should be less about gatekeeping, as has been the perception of it, whether that is fair or otherwise, in the past.