I’m old enough to remember CSE mode 3 where courses where devised, and exams set and marked by teachers. I believe that in America and other countries school exams are set and marked in house. Even in Britain it happens at University level. I am very very happy to accept that there are ways of recognising attainment and achievement other than our current model.

With all of these alternative systems there is some form of internal recognition and external moderation, and there is the rub. At present the only model for this that many know is the current SQA model. My own view is that almost everything that currently poses as internal assessment is plagued with problems. It can involve hours of teacher effort that too often serves to produce a tick in a box rather than reflect any real skill or learning by the pupils.

What do I think of the proposal to ‘assess National level 4 primarily through course assessment’? I’ll tell you when I have seen the arrangements from the SQA and can understand how it will work. Internal assessment can work, it does in many countries. It can recognise real achievement without burying teachers in bureaucracy. Can Scotland find and use a meaningful and manageable system – I do hope so.

With the final Experiences and Outcomes published it is now possible to start open discussions with schools about how we plan our journey from where we are. I see two strands to moving forward.

1. To establish a genuine sharing mentality across schools.
2. To agree the nature and extent of support needed when moving on from 5-14.

Glow must be a key feature of both of these. To promote sharing schools are being ‘encouraged’ to put forward an example of existing learning in science this term. It is proposed that all SIP development next year will be conducted with sharing across schools in mind at the outset. To seek agreement on what suppport is needed I am, this term, in the process of a round of conversations with schools to move forward the ‘thinking out loud’ process started in February (Feb 13th post – Building a science curriculum) It has become very clear that any attempt to put in place something that really is supportive and genuinely flexible can easily become wordy, complex and inaccessible.

Our present challenge is to construct a means of presentation that provides selective easy access to focussed support as required, be it background theory or hints on how to start lessons. On this matter I fear it is a case of back to the drawing board so nothing to share yet.

This is the latest draft of the strategy paper:
Download the draft proposal (May 15th).

I know LTS are promising additional formats including versions that cover the whole curriculum later on, but to help me progress my own planning I felt I needed them NOW. As starters I have prepared focussed versions of the Science EOs aimed at levels and also an overview of ALL the EOs for a particular level. These need to be used with caution but my colleagues are already finding these useful. I hope you do too. They are on the ‘Final Experiences and Outcomes’ page to download.

I understand that when the documents are finally published next week they will be available to download in Word as well as pdf format – I do hope so as that will save several hours work. The experience with the draft outcomes was that we wanted to be able to re-arrange EOs to better suit our needs. This is something better done at the centre for the benefit of all and we have made a start. Obviously this can’t be completed until the final form of the EOs is confirmed upon publication. Shortly after the start of next term we will share additional formats such as:
All Experiences and Outcomes for a level for all Currciulum areas on one or two sheets (to provide an easy overview for linking across subjects).
A slimmed down version of the science EOs for each level but including all key information for practioners.
Science EOs outcomes for each level on a single sheet.

Planning ahead
During the past few weeks I have had further conversations with colleagues about moving forward and the paper ‘Building a Science Cuuriculum’ has been revsied slightly. Several colleagues have agreed to share and discuss the proposals and to feedback by the end of April. At that point I plan to produce a revised version which will be elevated to the status of ‘draft’. When I have something to report I will post it here.

Glow
At last been able to get my hands on Glow and have been able to explore its potential and its limitations. Yes its clunky, no its not always intuitive and yes, it can take considerable time to find out how to do what seem relatively simple things. That said it does seem to be able to do just about everything I’d want it to do and it isn’t half as clunky as using this blogging software. Overall I am finding it much more powerful than many of the comments on other forums had suggested.

Back to reality in two weeks but just now there is packing to do.

Unrelated to this, but possibly of interest to you, is the information that notes and video material from the HMIe Science Good Practice conference in November is available on the CfE website. I was sceptical about how well they would be able to capture the essence of the conference but am impressed at what they have been able to put together. Job well done I thought.
Link to Science Good Practice Conference notes and videos

I looking forward to the buzz and discussion at the ASE annual bash this weekend – see you there.

The past two weeks have provided an opportunity for me to seriously consider ‘what then’. I know that some colleagues are still reluctant to accept that there will be no significant detail provided nationally beyond the released Experiences and Outcomes. Yes, there will be additional guidance exemplifying concept development, and exemplification of teaching approaches for some outcomes. The indications are that this will be welcomed but will, I suspect, fall far short of what many were hoping for.

From conversations it is apparent that some Secondary colleagues feel that action is not possible until there is clarity regarding curriculum structures and the new qualifications. That clarity will not be with us until Spring 2012 and cannot be allowed to paralyse the junior Secondary curriculum. Primary colleagues have eight curriculum areas to juggle and many are looking for further guidance with science sooner rather than later.

During the past year there have been numerous occassions where I have been grateful to see and read draft papers from many individuals where they shared their early thinking. This willingness to share is a boon to all whether or not you agree with the detail within. It is in that spirit of exploring and sharing that I post the papers below. I welcome any reaction to inform this iterative process.

This is an early draft paper in which I try to summarise where we are and future options.
Download the draft paper.
These are a first and incomplete attempt to test the feasibility of some of the proposals in the above paper.
Download a first stab at Electricity.
Download a first stab at Energy.
I used some resources from the American Association for the Advancement of Science to explore whether a broader acknowledgement of science skills we value (beyond the fair test) was feasible – jury still out although I like the idea.
Science skills.

Well, January fast draws to a close and there is still no word of publication. The revised outcomes for science have been progressing through the necessary levels of Quality Assurance and clearance. The CfE site has no official news for us regarding publication, it still claiming to be ‘last updated’ on Dec 18th. Unoffiocially I have heard that the publication of final outcomes is hoped to start in February. Curriculum Areas will be released in batches, probably over a month or two, with Science in the first batch to be released.

Meanwhile, schools in the North are discussing the possible shape of the revised curriculum structures needed in Secondary Schools to respond to the new S1 to S2 curriculum, and to consider the implications of the revised S4 to S6 structures. Papers from the associated seminars can be found on North East CfE website set up for that purpose. Go to the necfe.wordpress.com.

Stay in touch – as soon as there is firm news I shall post it here along with Word versions of the important docs.

New National Qualifications
Where groups or individuals indicated that they were willing, the feedback to the consultation on new national qualifications has been published on the Scottish government website.

I have added the feedback from the SSTA and also the NUTUWT unions to those responses already on the Downloads page.