Chamber and committees

As well as ensuring that young people can consider sources and what is truth, is there a need to make sure that our young people have the knowledge and skills to use AI and utilise its opportunities? That may be something that we need to talk more about.

Given the changes that were made in that first period of the implementation of higher still and the alterations that were made to assessment, is it important to learn from that process? Is it important to have a consistent, stable position for a good period in order to properly embed the implementation of curriculum for excellence in this next important phase?

Thank you for that emphasis and clarification.

This will be my main question, because it is related to the area that we have been discussing.

I thank the panel for their evidence. I have been thinking back to when I was in the second year of higher still, with the implementation of NABs and that initial culture change. The position of coursework and continuous assessment then altered in the following years. That speaks to the point that Professor Hayward made at the beginning about the need to continually emphasise the vision through practical implementation. We also need to consider the points that Peter Bain has just made.

Following on from the consultation with teachers in the short term, and as we enter the implementation phase with the considerations of workload and buy-in, teacher training and continuous professional development seem to me to be crucial as we think ahead to the process of implementing the SDA and making it work. Have you had any reflections on that?

I am familiar with the best value report process and the considerations thereafter around how the Government and, in this instance, the education inspectorate should engage with the specific local authority, both at a political level and an official level. It seems that you have outlined that that is the right course for Scottish ministers and for parliamentary pressure to be directed.

Thank you, both, for your reflections. That is helpful.

Good morning, all. I will build on what my colleague Michelle Thomson asked about. Thinking back to before the Verity house agreement, in recent years, one of the main reasons for ring fencing and direction was because of political pressure being applied on the Scottish Government by Opposition parties and others to meet certain policy obligations that required local government to be a significant part—the main part—of that delivery. As we move on after the Verity house agreement, open up the flexibility and remove the ring fencing and direction—for clarity, I support that approach—what should be the Scottish Government’s role if a local authority is failing to improve outcomes in an area of national priority such as education?

I want to build on what Ruth Maguire asked. The answer from Dr Hutchison and the elaboration from Carrie Lindsay on teacher numbers was really interesting and important. I want to be absolutely clear: you think that consideration, whether in our public discourse, media commentary or analysis, should be given to the pupil teacher ratio rather than teacher numbers. Was I correct in taking that as your overarching message?

Absolutely. The regulations will be warmly welcomed in Edinburgh Northern and Leith, as well as elsewhere in the country, not just for the reasons that you have stated in relation to mobility and the fact that pavements should not be blocked because they are for the people who use them, but in relation to the quality of the paving. Too many streets are being damaged by pavement parking because of the weight of vehicles. I am grateful that everything is running to time.

So it is still on schedule, as December 2023 has been the proposed implementation date for some time.