Seòmar agus comataidhean

SATH is the professional association that represents history teachers in Scotland, although not all history teachers will be a member of it. The reason that I have sought to engage with it is purely based on the correspondence that I have received from history teachers. I asked my officials to engage to that end last week—I may bring in Clare Hicks on that point. I am happy to engage more widely with the history teaching profession to hear its views. It is also important for you, as convener, to reflect that not all history teachers have the same view as those that you have just espoused.

I will be happy to do so.

Yes, I do. I know that I have not had the time to give an opening statement, but I think that it is worth my while to put on the record how seriously I take the matter as cabinet secretary. The issue has been on-going for a number of months, and I recognise the concerns that have been raised by history teachers. It was quite right and proper that the SQA interrogated the evidence and that it conducted a fulsome review, which I am sure committee members have looked at and read in detail. The review makes a number of recommendations about next steps, but it also looks at the process that was adhered to this year. I will be very careful not to stray into operational matters, which are for the SQA, but I recognise that challenges were presented, and I think that it was right that it investigated them. The report has a fulsome body of findings on the approach that the SQA has applied.

I have also looked at the exam paper. I was an SQA marker previously, although I was not a history marker, and I recognise some of the concerns that have been raised by the teaching profession. However, I hope that the committee has looked at the report’s findings. I will bring in Fiona Robertson to talk to some of the evidence.

As I think that the chief examiner has explained, the matter is one for the qualifications body in the first instance. The review is now complete. Is it now your view that I should instruct an independent inquiry into the report?

No, I do not believe that I am.

Yes, but last year, a different approach would have been taken, because the approach that was taken during the Covid pandemic was still being applied. A more lenient approach was applied last year. Fiona Robertson might want to speak about the detail of that.

I think that Ms Robertson should provide the context first.

I think that we have received one such complaint since the appeals process closed.

I am more than happy to hear concerns from any of Scotland’s teachers. They routinely contact me on a daily basis, Mr Briggs, and I am more than happy to engage with them.

I have accepted the findings of the report that has been published. Incidentally, I do not think that any member who is in the room today has found any issue with the findings of the report. I was keen to hear from SATH. I think that it is reasonable for me as cabinet secretary to say that I accept the findings of the report but I want to hear the views of Scotland’s history teachers about where we go next. That is the pragmatic approach to take. If Mr Briggs has any further information, I am more than happy to hear it.

Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Scottish Government and local authorities. In law, we have the responsibility for improving Scottish education, and I accept my role in that.

The point that Fiona Robertson made about overpresentation is a key theme in the report, which—I know—all committee members will have read. The report looks at whether young people sat a qualification at a level that they might not have been ready for, and whether that perhaps had an impact on their performance. We need to look at that specific issue. I am keen to speak to the chief inspector about that and about how we can provide support by working with local authorities. The committee will be aware of the on-going improvement work on the curriculum improvement cycle.

I am also mindful of the longer term, because I do not want a repeat of what happened this year. I want young people, parents and teachers to have confidence in our qualifications system. I am mindful of the committee’s report and that we will have a debate on the matter in two weeks, and I would be happy to meet any committee members if they have any ideas.

I am particularly mindful of the role of accreditation and of how we can provide confidence in the system that there is independence of thought in applying regulation to the qualifications. As the cabinet secretary, I will need to consider that, because I am mindful that learning lessons through the reform process is so important. On Ms Duncan-Glancy’s point, the new qualifications body has to carry the trust of Scotland’s teachers, pupils and parents.

It is imperative that we consider the role of continuous assessment, which is a live issue in relation to my recommendations on Professor Hayward’s review. Arguably, if we had a process of continuous assessment—which, incidentally, we did have—we would not have such a level of overpresentation.

In fact, I remember sitting where Ms Dunbar is sitting now, asking Fiona Robertson that exact question, probably in 2019. As we do not currently have continuous assessment, we arguably have overpresentation. It is difficult to quantify that, but I think that one of the Hayward recommendations, on going back to continuous assessment, is the answer. That will help to drive improvement, and help to support and scaffold young people in preparation for that qualification.

The third point concerns accreditation and next steps. I am also very mindful of the role of SATH in all this, and listening to its feedback will be imperative with regard to where we go next.