Chamber and committees

I am grateful for that answer.

I understand. Thank you for that detail. I think that you talked about the second part of the matrix when it comes to personal and professional integrity. The cabinet secretary said that, before taking forward any reform of the qualifications, she needs to hear from teachers, particularly secondary school teachers, whom she says will be key in driving forward any changes. Pre-empting that, how did your review ensure that it heard from those teachers? What did that group broadly tell you, and how did those discussions impact on the final output?

I have a final question. As we heard from Pam Duncan-Glancy, into this context has come the RAAC situation. Do you have any concerns that addressing the RAAC situation might have a detrimental impact on future LEIP funding?

I have a brief question on absolute numbers. Several of my colleagues and I were at a very good event about engineering last night. Is there a concern that, when we talk about changes in overall numbers due to, perhaps, declining rolls, that masks specific challenges such as—as we heard last night—the fact that there are 300 fewer English teachers, 300 fewer maths teachers and 178 fewer computer science teachers than there were in 2008? I presume that those are the sorts of areas that we absolutely need to focus on, if we are to have a future in which we are sufficiently upskilled in science, technology, engineering and mathematic subjects for areas such as engineering.

Thank you.

I would like to investigate some areas of capital expenditure. Do any of you have a view on the design of the Scottish Government’s learning estate investment programme, particularly given that, I presume, local authorities pay the up-front costs of that?

I will follow up on that exact point. As I understand it, funding for the third phase was meant to be allocated last year but has not been. What impact will that have on any capital investment programme, and, bluntly, will it affect the building of new schools?

Qualifications, as they are set currently, are key to monitoring how the system is performing. Professor Hayward, can a Scottish diploma of achievement meaningfully allow for similar metrics to be gathered?

It could be argued that an examinations system provides an objective benchmark against which people can be assessed that might not be there with some kind of continuous assessment. How could you ensure parity in the assessment process in a continuous assessment framework, where different or more subjective means of assessment by the assessors might be applied?

Good morning. I have just a couple of quick questions on the process of the review group. Professor Hayward, the review was based on an integrity model of change. How do the work that you undertook and the final report reflect that integrity model?