Seòmar agus comataidhean

In recent weeks, the level of absences in schools has been equivalent to the level when we cancelled exams last year. Do you have reflections about lost learning and where we might be at the moment? I do not mean to be alarmist, but do you agree that it is appropriate that we consider that in the decision-making process?

I am sure that the universities would talk about the cap on student numbers that the Scottish Government put in place. Seamus Searson and Tara Lillis, do you have comments on these issues?

But there is a cohort of kids now and from the previous year who feel that the system has not served them well and that those exceptional circumstances have not been taken into account.

I want to look slightly beyond the qualifications process and immediate assessments to the learning. I was struck by Seamus Searson’s comment about pupils being driven into the ground by assessments and the convener’s remarks about compression being the theme. We understand that there was, in essence, less teaching across the year for a variety of reasons, particularly for some cohorts. There was less time in school, so learning was difficult to access. We have taken evidence from young people in the past couple of weeks, and it is clear that many of them feel that they have not learned as much as others have learned. What challenges will that present as young people progress to the next stages of their qualifications or, indeed, their lives?

I declare an interest as a serving councillor on Dundee City Council, which is Audrey May’s employer. Also, Audrey May is a former teacher of mine. That is the more interesting point. She was a very young teacher.

We are going to talk quite a bit about qualifications, grades and outcomes, first and foremost. The other side of the outcome that I am interested in is knowledge and what young people learned.

I think that Tony McDaid made a point about missing the workhorse term and an awful lot of people missing an awful lot of time in school. As we look forward, what concerns do you have about what those young people might not know because of what they have missed, and what they have learned?

That makes sense to me. However, it worries me a little when I hear from young people who are going from highers to advanced highers, for instance, and when I speak to university principals and lecturers about people coming out of school with perhaps a lack of knowledge compared to what they might have had otherwise. The question whether we, as a country, are adapting to address that worries me a little.

I do not want to burrow too deeply into that, because I have another question.

Data that were released yesterday show the scale of the attainment gap produced by the ACM—or the alternative certification model; I am trying to avoid acronyms as best as I can. They show that around 75 per cent of private school pupils got A grades compared with fewer than half in the state sector. Do you think that the system benefited the most affluent at the expense of the poorest?

The move from teacher judgment to demonstrated attainment in the second year obviously created many of the pressures that you are talking about in terms of the assessment model and having to go through that. As part of the process, it removed taking into account the circumstances that many of the young people you describe were facing. They had to get the exams done, as there had to be demonstrated attainment rather than judgment. Does the absence of exceptional circumstances and appeals not go against what you are saying about the lived experience of young people?

All of that is useful and, when we consider the design of the 2022 system, those broader impacts must be part of it. It cannot just be about the assessment model; it has to be about the reality of what teachers are facing in the classroom and the circumstances that those young people face.

My final question is about the low number of appeals. Mr Flanagan said that most pupils seem to be satisfied, but I have had representations from a significant number of pupils from across both cohorts—those who got results last year, under the algorithm, and those who got theirs this year, under the alternative certification model—and they are greatly concerned that exceptional circumstances were not accepted in their appeals. So many people faced exceptional circumstances. Should they have been included in the appeals process, and should they be included in the future? I am not too interested in additional information, because I know that provision was made for that to come through in September. That is mentioned in some of the written submissions. I am talking about the exceptional circumstances that were faced.

Do you think that is happening?