Meeting of the Parliament 19 September 2018
I am saying nothing of the sort. I am saying that teachers, in working their way through the assessments, will have greater clarity about the performance of individual young people against the standards across the country—the benchmarks for what we expect from curriculum for excellence. I am talking about the levels that are achieved by young people across the country, not the results across the country.
The assessments are high quality and are delivered as part of everyday learning. They provide teachers with a detailed breakdown against core skills, and they highlight not only where a child might need additional support to achieve the relevant standards, but where a child might be excelling and might require additional challenges. That is in keeping with the Government’s twin aims of closing the attainment gap and raising standards.
Crucially—this relates to part of Liz Smith’s motion—the assessments are designed to fit compatibly with the early level of curriculum for excellence, which is a play-based level. It is therefore appropriate that only a small amount of time—less than an hour in one year, on average—is taken to ensure that the play-based learning that is undertaken by children is equipping them with the core skills that we believe they should acquire by the end of P1. Without that assessment, we will run the risk that the needs of children in progressing on to the first level of CFE might not be effectively served by our education system.
If the assessment is administered correctly, a child will take part in it as part of their normal class work and it will not feel different from any other task that they are asked to do.
I have dealt with the education arguments; I want now to turn to some of the political issues. I acknowledge the long-standing hostility of the Greens and the Liberal Democrats to such testing. They are entitled to their view, but I do not share it. I point out to them that they are hostile to all standardised assessments and that they are being asked to vote for that in the Conservative motion.
I am appalled by the Conservative Party. When the First Minister announced national standardised assessment in September 2015, Ruth Davidson responded in the chamber by saying:
“I am pleased that our repeated and sustained calls for standardised assessments to be introduced in schools have been heeded.”—[Official Report, 1 September 2015; c 31.]
The Conservative manifesto in 2016 said that the Scottish Government should
“design the new standardised tests at P1, P4 and P7 to fit into these international methodologies”
and claimed credit for the introduction of national assessment.
This morning, Liz Smith said that the Conservatives had changed their mind on P1 assessment. That was not what she said on 28 August, when she said:
“The Scottish Conservatives have never been in favour of formal standardised national tests in Primary 1”.
That statement is untrue. It demonstrates the deceit that is at the heart of the Conservative motion today.
Last week, the Conservatives were demanding more school data; this week, they want less. In 2016, the Conservatives supported P1 assessment, but today they do not. There is only one conclusion to draw: the Conservatives are playing politics with the education of our children. We will not play along with them.
I move amendment S5M-13945.1, to leave out from “considers” to end and insert:
“recognises that assessments are a key tool to inform teachers; professional judgment of the needs of the children and young people that they are teaching; agrees that the assessments are delivered as part of everyday learning and provide consistent evidence for teachers to identify the next steps in a child's education; further agrees that this is especially valuable in P1 if closing the attainment gap is to continue; recognises that the assessments are not high stakes, there is no pass or fail, and that they should never cause stress to young children, and welcomes the changes and improvements already made following the first year of operation to ensure a better experience for younger pupils and provide extra reassurance to teachers and parents.”
Motions, questions or amendments mentioned by their reference code.
- S5M-13945.1 Primary 1 Tests Motion