THE problems associated with controversial National 4 qualifications refuse to go away.
When they were introduced in 2014 the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA) said they would be seen as the equal of others.The thinking was radical. While National 5 qualifications, which do have a final exam, were viewed as the natural lead-in to Highers, National 4’s qualifications were expected to be sat by those looking to work, apprenticeships or vocational college courses.
Dr Janet Brown, chief executive of the SQA, said both employers and colleges were familiar with the concepts of internal and ongoing assessment and therefore they were better suited to pupils pursuing these routes.
However, as a number of surveys have revealed many teachers and parents have not bought into the qualification as was originally expected.
Some warned National 4 had led to groups of pupils viewing themselves as “second-class citizens” because there is no final exam.
A recent survey from Ipsos Mori Scotland seems to bear that out with fears of increasing disengagement from school.
As a result teachers have felt under pressure to push pupils towards the more advanced National 5 qualification, which does have an external exam.
That has led to the growing problem of pupils being awarded National 4 after failing National 5.
Figures from the SQA this summer bear out the reputational concerns with an 11 per cent decline in interest since 2015.
Unfortunately, there is no simple solution because opinion is still split over the future of National 4.
Some teachers believe only the introduction of an external exam will help restore its reputation, but others argue just as strongly that this will disadvantage those who do not naturally perform in exam conditions.There is a view that the scrapping of the unit assessments that allow the fall-back from National 5 to National 4 to occur will help resolve the problem.
There is a consensus that there needs to be a stronger focus from schools on explaining the purpose of the different options to parents – as well as ensuring pupils are being entered for the right qualification in the first place.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel