Education - National Improvement Framework - A consultation on enhanced data collection for improvement

The list of key principles above cover the range of data that could be useful to understand in looking to close - or narrow - the attainment gap.

The use of the word ‘measure’ has featured extensively in the principles above, and I appreciate the need to measure or benchmark against particular milestones/targets but at the same time with this type of data it is important that qualitative data is also used. The stories and narrative which interweaves the numbers, the experience as opposed to or perhaps in addition to the ‘how many’, is richer at providing insight into children and young people’s lived experiences.

I’m interested in this point “the focus should be across the age ranges – from 3-18”. Considering around a decade ago the Scottish Government were keen on pre-birth to 3, it’s a pity that this is not under consideration, particularly when we are eager for Scotland to be the best place to grow up and the issues mentioned above do not start at the age of 3.

These sub measures are useful for telling us how many, but surely there is a need to understand the ‘why’ behind the exclusion and attendance and what can be put in place earlier (in Primary) to help mitigate? I would also be keen to know why the attendance/exclusions increase between Primary and Secondary. The quantitative data is useful to an extent for telling us how many per 1000 but you need to know why it’s happening in order to address it.

In addition, many schools are looking for more restorative practice, particularly in relation to exclusions - how would this be counted? Technically the pupils are not excluded but are supported in reconnecting with learning within the school

Yes these are useful measures but I feel, for the moment, should remain as sub measures.

Yes to engagement in extra curricular activities, the others, no. Engagement and participation in extra curricular activities is easy enough to capture through quantitative data and I feel that moving out of covid there will be an increase in engagement and participation in a range of extra curricular activities. There is a need to think about what types of extra curricular activities are being looked at, for example, school-associated activities including after school clubs or local authority and national organisation activities, or are you looking for local community activities that may not be as closely associated with school - this might include youth groups or even flute bands. So what is being sought or what counts for this quantitative data? Then you can look at the types of experience and how the children and young people feel about it through qualitative data.

Resilience and confidence are very difficult to measure, resilience and confidence in relation to what? What are the participants benchmarking against? What bias is brought in with these measures?

In summary, yes to engagement in extra-curricular activities as long as the parameters of what constitutes an extra curricular activity is made clear.

I’m not so sure about adding to the measures, even though I ticked yes, but what I am keen is to see the connection to wider achievements and certification. There are a number of subjects that tend to pursue alternative awards for young people, I’m thinking of Dance (RAD) and Music (ABRSM and others). For these subjects SQA are not the only show in town and as such these achievements are not recognised on their certificates - yet they do have an equivalency in SQA language (e.g., ABRSM Grade 4 is equivalent to AH, etc).

It can be included but at the same time, it’s only telling you how many and not the stories behind the choices. Also, employment can also include zero hours type contracts, is that really a positive destination? I would say to include, it could be a useful benchmark to see who goes onto pursue further study but it is important to learn about the stories and narrative behind people’s choices. So why voluntary work over further study or other paid employment? Is it in certain areas and if it is why is this happening? Is it due to lack of jobs or is it more to do with the individual? With that type of data, the qualitative, we can begin to understand the journeys of the young people and look to provide more community focused approaches to our teaching and learning. I worry that with macro level, national data that generalisations and misinterpretations/misrepresentations will be made, when actually getting the local data and the narrative around these numbers teachers, schools, colleges and community development can respond.

There is a need for a joined up approach. There are so many studies and projects and initiatives which are ongoing and which have been completed since at least 2006. I remember being involved in a Glasgow City Council/SCRE research project on health and wellbeing measures. It was interesting but I’m not sure what happened to the data. I remember another one, I think it was 2008, which looked at confidence, again, not sure what happened to that. Then fast forward to 2012ish and we have Growing Up In Scotland which aimed to follow the life and development of the group of children. Rather than reinventing the wheel or shelving projects after they have generated a research paper, there is a need to scope the current or completed projects and use these as part of the evidence gathering. At times it feels as though we are collecting data for data’s sake.

There is, of course, a very rich, localised body of data which is being gathered by teachers themselves for various Masters and EdDs/PhDs which could also be drawn upon. Likewise with projects such as the Teacher Leadership Programme at Education Scotland. These, usually qualitative, projects are content rich, providing insight into the life and learning of individual classrooms or departments. Many schools also utilise collaborative enquiry - these projects, the data arising from these projects, are so important. How can you draw upon these to good effect?

More than enough - in fact, plenty. As I read through the consultation document I became aware of just how many ‘asks’ and ‘stuff’ is required in terms of data collection - I would argue that we’re becoming obsessed with data to the point that that is driving the learning and teaching and losing sight of using it for the purpose of supporting the learning and teaching in our contexts. We are a system saturated with and by numbers for numbers sake, how can we support teachers to utilise this to good effect in their daily practice rather than creating yet more hurdles to jump and demands of their time?

The one key point that will drive my response here: teacher professionalism - trust the teachers. As I’ve stated at a few points in this response there is a wealth of data available, good qualitative data, through teachers’ professional enquiries.

The Professional Standards and the ITE programmes all point to developing an enquiring mindset, look at how teachers can draw on their data rich contexts to improve learning for the pupils in their classes and departments. Why is this voice not present in the data collection? Informed teacher judgement, trusting them as professionals to be able to help provide insight into their daily teaching experiences, helping them to contribute to the data collection and evaluation but also supporting them on how to use this. It is not something that happens to them, it happens with them and their professional roles, responsibilities and judgement in this type of approach is vital.

This is more straight forward at school and local level, perhaps even into regional - the question is how can the teacher voice be amplified at a national level and of that I’m not sure.

There is a need to support the development of skills required for critical engagement with data, this is lacking. There is a perception that data is something removed from the classroom, it is a stat far removed from the context of the classroom or school, whereas there is so much that happens as part of daily practice that could be used to better effect and for the purposes of informing planning for learning and teaching. Teachers needs support on how to utilise this effectively. Same for system managers, do they know why they are collecting data - usually quantitative data - and how do they use it? Does it sit on a shelf or is it reported elsewhere? If so, do they know for what purpose(s)?