The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

CHAPTER 5: THE IMPACT OF SCOTXED

The previous chapter examined usage of ScotXed. This chapter now focuses on specific impacts that can be attributed to ScotXed, either directly or indirectly.

5.1 IMPACT ON SPECIFIC TASKS

In the previous chapter, we noted reasons why respondents had involvement with ScotXed and, for each element of involvement, they were asked to say whether ScotXed had made the task easier, harder or had made no difference. As can be seen in tables 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3, for most of these tasks across all respondent types, a much higher proportion of respondents claimed that ScotXed had made tasks easier rather than harder or making no difference. This pattern is the same when we examine headteachers within secondary and primary schools and admin / support staff within secondary and primary schools.

Table 5.1 Whether ScotXed has made tasks easier, harder or made no difference to perform (tasks common to all respondents)

Source: Q6c (schools) & Q8c ( LA)
Base: All who specified tasks at Q6a/b (schools) and at Q8a/b ( LA)

Table 5.2 Whether ScotXed has made tasks easier, harder or made no difference to perform ( LA tasks only)

Source: Q8c ( LA)
Base: All who specified tasks at Q8a/b ( LA)

Table 5.3 Whether ScotXed has made tasks easier, harder or made no difference to perform (school tasks only)

Source: Q6c (schools)
Base: All who specified tasks at Q6a/b (schools)

Where local authority staff had noted that a task had been made easier or harder with the introduction of ScotXed, they were asked to give their reasons for this. Regardless of the task under consideration, a number of key themes emerged as to why each had been made easier.

These included:

• Electronic data exchange is good;
• Easier to access / use (quicker, more efficient);
• Better quality of data;
• Good to have information in central location.

While most comments were positive about tasks undertaken via ScotXed, it is also worth noting that a small proportion of respondents noted the need for guidelines to be provided by the ScotXed Unit to help with its smooth running.

From the small number of LA staff who claimed that specific tasks were made harder, the key reasons were that:

• This involves more work or creates more work for staff;
• More data is involved in ScotXed;
• It produces additional information that schools and local authorities will not use.

Comments made during the qualitative discussions echoed those from the telephone interviews and almost all respondents - including stakeholders with experience of working with ScotXed outputs - participating in the qualitative element noted that ScotXed had helped to make tasks easier. Again, views were positive about electronic data exchange and this was seen as quick, efficient and effective. However, one issue noted by most of these respondents was that while tasks have become easier, the number of tasks has increased, so the overall workload associated with ScotXed has increased in recent years and this has implications for resources, training and so on. These issues will be discussed in more detail in chapter 6.

A number of headteachers noted that ScotXed has helped to ensure common standards and guidelines across local authorities. One primary headteacher noted that ScotXed had forced a common standard and clear guidelines for all schools.

A member of staff within a local authority also noted that ScotXed had made education authorities and schools more accountable and unified in the way in which data is captured and information provided.

While most stakeholders were not involved in the collection of data for ScotXed, there was a perception from some that the number of tasks has increased in recent years and that while the quality of the data collected has improved in recent years, that workloads for school admin staff may have increased.

5.2 POLICY DEVELOPMENT

5.2.1 Impact of ScotXed on Effectiveness of Decision Making within Local Authority

All local authority staff participating in the telephone interviews were asked to say what impact ScotXed has had on the effectiveness of decision making within their local authority (a positive impact, mixed impact, negative impact or no impact). As can be seen in chart 5.1, a majority of local authority staff (62%) claimed that the impact has been positive, 23% that this has been mixed. None claimed that this had had a negative impact and only 6% claimed that there was no impact at all. Those involved in the use of ScotXed at a policy or strategic level within their local authority were most positive (78%).

Chart 5.1 Impact of ScotXed on effectiveness of decision making within LA

Source: Q15 ( LA)
Base: LA staff (66)

The 41 local authority staff attributing a positive impact were asked to explain why, and key themes emerging were:

• Better quality information / better quality of information when making policy decisions / more information available / more reliable information (49%; 20 respondents);
• Easier access to data (20%; 8 respondents);
• Has helped to improve processes / QA within local authority (12%; 5 respondents);
• Positive comments on STACs (7%; 3 respondents).

Key themes identified by the 16 local authority staff noting a mixed impact were:

• Positive impact on some areas but not others (40%; 6 respondents) - the qualitative data suggested a positive impact in that ScotXed has made the collection of data easier, but there were also perceptions that increasing numbers of requests for new and different data have created heavier workloads;
• Depends on source of information (13%; 2 respondents);
• Data readily available but usefulness questionable (13%; 2 respondents);
• Creates burden of collecting additional information local authorities can't use (13%; 2 respondents).

5.2.2 Impact of ScotXed on Policy Development at a Local Authority Level

All local authority staff were also asked to say how useful the ScotXed Partnership and its outputs have been in terms of policy development at a local authority level (see chart 5.2). Overall, 62% of staff claimed that this has been "very" (15%) or "quite" (47%) useful and only 10% that it has not been useful to any extent. However, 29% of local authority staff provided an answer of "don't know" and this was highest among those involved in using ScotXed on a day-to-day basis for the electronic exchange of data (44%).

Chart 5.2 Impact of ScotXed and outputs in terms of policy development at LA level

Source: Q17a ( LA)
Base: LA staff (66)

Again, the 41 local authority staff who felt that impacts had been useful were asked to give their reasons for this and key themes emerging were:

• Helps us to improve our focus / processes / drive agenda for policy making (41%; 17 respondents);
• Good quality / reliable data (34%; 14 respondents);
• Positive comments re STACs (22%; 9 respondents).

The key reason emerging from the 6 respondents who felt that impacts had not been useful was a lack of appreciation by the ScotXed Unit of the amount of work done by local authorities (33%; 2 respondents).

5.2.3 Responsiveness of ScotXed to Changing Policy Requirements

All respondents were asked to say how responsive they believed ScotXed was to changing policy requirements and, of those providing a response other than "don't know", views were largely positive, with a majority claiming that ScotXed has been "very" or "quite" responsive (see chart 5.3). However, significant proportions of all respondents were unable to comment on this specific question (35% of local authority staff, 54% of headteachers and 66% of admin / support staff). In examining sub-groups, higher proportions of headteachers and admin / support staff based in primary schools provided a "don't know" response than did their counterparts in secondary schools.

Chart 5.3 Responsiveness of ScotXed to changing policy requirements

Source: Q9 (schools) & Q17c ( LA)
Base: LA staff (66); HT (126); Admin/support staff (127)

Key themes emerging from local authority staff (n = 39) as to ways in which ScotXed has been responsive to changing policy needs related to:

• ScotXed keen to work in partnership / listen to our views / provide support (62%; 24 respondents);
• ScotXed responds quickly to changes (13%; 5 respondents);
• Help us to review our policies (5%; 2 respondents).

Only 4 local authority staff commented that ScotXed had not been responsive to changing policy needs and 3 of these noted that the ScotXed agenda is based on Ministerial requirements, not that of the local authority; one commented that ScotXed do not respond to problems.

The qualitative discussions showed that most respondents in schools viewed ScotXed primarily as a source to access statistical data. Some respondents within local authorities noted that ScotXed data is utilised for changing policy requirements and / or for developing policy, although there was still a focus from some on the application of data for school performance.

Some stakeholders were very positive about using ScotXed in relation to development of policy, although this related very much to their role within their organisation. Some stakeholders participating in the qualitative discussions noted that there are two distinct and different demands on the use of ScotXed; one related purely to changing policy and often involved very in-depth and sophisticated levels of analysis that will provide data as to whether a specific policy is working; the other related to the need for measurements of quality within Scottish education.

5.2.4 Monitoring the Impact of Education Policies at a School, Local and National Level

When asked to say how the ScotXed Partnership has allowed monitoring of the impact of education policies at a school, local and national level, a range of comments emerged, each made by small proportions of respondents (see table 5.4). However, high proportions of headteachers (44%), local authority staff (45%) and admin / support staff in schools (85%) were unable to provide a response to this question.

Table 5.4 How the ScotXed Partnership has allowed monitoring of the impact of education policies

Source: Q28 (schools) & Q39 ( LA)
Base: LA Staff (66); HT (126); Admin/support staff (127)

While the qualitative data echoes themes emerging from the quantitative interviews, this also highlighted some key issues that impacted on views of ScotXed and its role within policy development. While respondents were very positive about ScotXed and electronic data exchange, many noted that in relation to policy development, they received (or claimed to receive), little or no rationale for what is collected or explanations about how collected data are informing policy or initiatives. This was particularly the case for school based staff but some local authority staff also felt a degree of remoteness, and some respondents queried why data were requested and what they would be used for. There was often an assumption that information had been requested by the Minister. Some stakeholders involved in policy development noted that explanations were not provided as to why specific data were being requested and that this can serve to reinforce remoteness on the part of school staff in particular.

This remoteness on the part of respondents can engender a level of disassociation from ScotXed. For primary schools where ScotXed is perceived to be of little direct benefit or to not offer much by way of rewards for their time spent collating and providing data, the level of remoteness was more so than in secondary schools. One local authority member of staff noted,

"Secondary schools can see an immediate benefit of the big push they have in September to collect and send the data in, although it is a big effort to provide that information and it's very hard to give an incentive to a school to put in all of this effort if they don't get anything in return. Secondary schools know that they get STACs. Primaries get the school handbook data … but it's a bit more of a distance for primaries."

Overall the evidence suggests that this aspect of ScotXed's role is less salient than may be desirable in helping engender a sense of partnership and cooperation between the parties involved.

5.2.5 Responsiveness / Usefulness of ScotXed in Generating New Types of Data

All school staff were asked to say how responsive they believed ScotXed was in generating new types of data and local authority staff were asked to say how useful they believed ScotXed is in generating new types of data.

As shown in chart 5.4, of those providing a response other than "don't know", views were largely positive, with a majority claiming that ScotXed has been "very" or "quite" responsive. However, significant proportions of all respondents were unable to comment on this specific question (17% of local authority staff, 39% of headteachers and 57% of admin / support staff). In examining sub-groups, higher proportions of headteachers and admin / support staff based in primary schools provided a "don't know" response than did their counterparts in secondary schools.

Chart 5.4 Responsiveness/usefulness of ScotXed in generating new types of data

Source: Q10 (schools) & Q19 ( LA)
Base: LA staff (66); HT (126); Admin/support staff (127)

A range of comments was provided, each by small numbers of local authority staff, as to why ScotXed has been useful in generating new types of data. These can be summarised as follows:

• Quality of data / ease of use of data = 38%, 20 respondents;
• Provides good support to LAs / schools = 15%, 8 respondents;
• Positive comments re ScotXed Unit = 13%, 7 respondents;
• Good range of information = 10%, 5 respondents;
• Good comparative / benchmarking data = 10%, 5 respondents;
• Access to STACs / statistics = 4%, 2 respondents.

Comments from respondents participating in the qualitative research included:

" ScotXed has really improved the quality of data available to us."

Secondary headteacher

"This has created a reduction in what used to be a very onerous task. It is much quicker to produce statistical returns."

Admin / support staff in secondary school

" ScotXed has forced a common standard and clear guidelines for us, although there is a big resource issue."

Admin / support staff in secondary school

Good Practice Examples - Benefits of ScotXed

Good Practice Example 5.1 - Benefits of ScotXed

One member of admin / support staff within a secondary school noted that ScotXed data had been used to help develop awareness of absences within their school, which in turn has led to changes in behaviour management. The school had developed a behaviour management spreadsheet and introduced home link officers and corridor patrols. In this way, they prevented children wandering around school corridors when they should have been in class. Additionally, they were able to chase up non attendees at school much more quickly than previously. The school noted a reduction in the level of pupil absenteeism.

Good Practice Example 5.2 - Benefits of ScotXed

Another member of admin / support staff noted that using ScotXed had enabled them to set up a system whereby they could easily track pupil attendance at their school. In monitoring pupil attendance they had introduced a system of texting parents when a child was absent to find out why. They noted that levels of absenteeism had declined as the children were aware that they would be chased up for non attendance.

Good Practice Example 5.3 - Benefits of ScotXed

A member of admin / support staff in a secondary school noted that the teacher census had provided them with valuable data within the school. When the census was being undertaken, the information collected was put into a database. They found out that some teachers had qualifications about which the school had previously been unaware and these qualifications had been utilised when cover was needed for other classes. The benefit of having this information together in a single source was noted.

5.2.6 Integrating with New Initiatives

All respondents were asked to say how well ScotXed integrates with new initiatives such as A Curriculum for Excellence, Literacy and Numeracy, Assessment is for Learning and so on.

Once again, of those providing a response other than "don't know", views were largely positive, with more claiming that ScotXed integrates well rather than not well with these initiatives (see chart 5.5). Again, significant proportions of all respondents were unable to comment on this specific question (32% of local authority staff, 25% of headteachers and 57% of admin / support staff). Slightly higher proportions of headteachers than admin / support staff (33% compared to 25%), claimed that ScotXed integrates well with new initiatives, although high proportions of respondents were unable to provide an answer or noted that it is not applicable as yet. Local authority staff were most positive about how well ScotXed integrates with new initiatives. Staff in secondary schools were slightly more positive than those in primary schools.

Chart 5.5 How well ScotXed integrates with new initiatives

Source: Q11 (schools) & Q21 ( LA)
Base: LA staff (66); HT (126); Admin/support staff (127)

Qualitative discussions showed that for many respondents, particularly admin / support staff and / or those in primary schools, ScotXed was seen only as a channel from which to provide or obtain statistical information. On this basis, any relationship between ScotXed and other initiatives was seen to be very tenuous. There was little comment from these respondents over the extent to which ScotXed was seen to complement other educational initiatives and some respondents felt unable to comment on this issue. Stakeholders were more positive about the integration between ScotXed and other educational initiatives.

That said, most respondents felt that both ScotXed and any new initiatives are there to help bring about higher standards within education. A number of respondents in the groups and stakeholder interviews too referred to policies that had changed - most notably, to changes to the way schools deal with comparisons when pupils are bi-lingual and the way that the basis for comparing schools has shifted away from using only free school meal entitlement data, both of which changed in response to feedback from schools - but still did not tend to attribute the policy changes either to ScotXed or to their own role within the partnership process.

There were comments from a small number of respondents that ScotXed can work against the objectives of other education initiatives and cited A Curriculum for Excellence ( ACfE) as a specific example of this. Their view was that ACfE is designed to encourage innovation and flexibility in teaching, such as new approaches to problem solving which cannot be measured statistically, while ScotXed only measures the ability to provide statistical data based on examinations. The aim of one was seen by some to contradict the other and priority was given to A Curriculum for Excellence over and above ScotXed. However, this was not a view shared by all stakeholders. One noted,

"With A Curriculum for Excellence coming onstream and Assessment is for Learning, we would hope that the information which is collected would be consistent with the principles of the new policy direction."

5.2.7 Integration with Self Evaluation

In considering how well ScotXed integrates with schools' self evaluation processes, higher proportions of secondary headteachers agreed that ScotXed integrates well with their school's self evaluation process than did secondary admin / support staff (73% compared to 42%) (see chart 5.6). Secondary headteachers were also more positive than local authority staff (73% compared to 61%).

Among local authority staff, higher proportions of designated ScotXed representatives believed that ScotXed integrates well with schools' self evaluation processes than those involved with ScotXed on a day-to-day basis or at a strategic level (68% designated ScotXed representatives compared to 61% day-to-day involvement and 52% at a strategic level), although this difference is not statistically significant.

Chart 5.6 How well ScotXed integrates with schools' self evaluation process

Source: Q12 (schools) & Q22 ( LA)
Base: LA staff (66); HT (126); Admin/support staff (127)

From the qualitative interviews, there were comments that self-evaluation has increased in importance in recent years and ScotXed is seen to provide important and useful data to feed into this process. Secondary headteachers in particular were accessing STACs data for self-evaluation purposes and using these data for discussions with other school staff, local authority staff and external bodies such as HMIE during inspections. Local authority staff were also accessing STACs data and using this for discussions with schools as part of their self-evaluation process. There were some comments that improvements in the timings of the release of data have helped with self-evaluation. One local authority member of staff noted,

"I think schools see this [ ScotXed data] as a management tool. I think if you were to ask class teachers, they probably hate it but I think that as an improvement tool, it provides information to headteachers. It's the same as a personal appraisal at work, you're never going to be shocked by bad results as it tends to reinforce expectations of departments. We've had many conversations about the results in a particular subject about the school and someone will say right away 'oh that's because of this and that.' It reinforces the management knowledge of the school."

5.3 MINIMISING BUREAUCRATIC BURDEN

One of the key objectives of ScotXed is a reduction in bureaucratic burden and this was one of the issues covered during the course of telephone interviews and qualitative discussions.

All those participating in telephone interviews were asked to say how successful on a scale of 1 to 10 the ScotXed Partnership has been in minimising the bureaucratic burden placed upon local authorities (a score of 1 denoted "extremely unsuccessful" and 10 denoted "extremely successful").

Table 5.5 shows that there are some differences between sub-groups. Within local authority staff, higher proportions of those at a strategic level gave a score of 7 or more than did ScotXed designated representatives or those using ScotXed on a day-to-day basis. The difference between the 2 former groups is statistically significant.

Within schools, higher proportions of headteachers in secondary schools than in primary schools gave a score of 7 or more and this difference is statistically significant. Similarly, admin / support staff in secondary schools were slightly more positive. However, across both these groups, relatively high proportions of respondents provided an answer of "don't know".

Table 5.5 Success of ScotXed in minimising bureaucratic burden

Source: Q24a ( LAs); Q14 (schools)
Base: All respondents ( LAs = 66; schools admin / support staff = 127; schools headteachers = 126);

Comments made by respondents in both the telephone and qualitative surveys were that the quality of data produced by ScotXed has improved and that data transfer is easier with less duplication than previously. However, as the following quotation from a member of staff at a local authority illustrates, there were also comments that there are requests for new and different information and, because of this, the workload (including that demanded by ScotXed) has been seen to increase, particularly for admin / support staff who are primarily responsible for collecting and providing information. So, while the use of electronic data exchange in a central location is seen to be quicker and easier, overall there is a perceived increase in workloads.

"I think the level of information and amount of detail is only going to grow. We are going to soon have to add on disabilities in different databases and different systems. It's just going to continue and the range of information is just going to grow to a ridiculous level. And the burden on office staff and school staff to update these databases will grow so that they end up spending all day doing them."

A headteacher in a secondary school commented,

"It [ ScotXed] has definitely eased the burden and with electronic timetabling systems it does mean they [school staff] should be getting accurate and up to the minute information. But it has centralised the burden from a member of senior management to a member of office staff."

Some respondents - particularly those in primary schools - also noted that they do not always understand why they are asked to provide specific information and this lack of understanding may lead staff to query information requests. This may in part relate to the wide range of staff who may be involved in working with ScotXed. For example, administrative staff in a managerial position (such as Business Managers or Cluster Admin Managers) generally felt that they understood why specific information was being requested. However, explanations were not always then provided to more junior clerical and administrative staff who may be actually collecting the data.

There were also comments that, internally within schools, there can still be difficulties in collecting information from other teaching staff (for example, for the staff census), particularly when there is no clear explanation as to the purpose of the data collection or its benefit to those providing the data. One stakeholder noted,

"We do think it's important that Scottish school teachers have an understanding, have a broader picture themselves of how policy is arrived at in Scottish education, and obviously ScotXed is part of that process, so it's important that they have an explanation …. That's why we think more work needs to be done in terms of promoting the work of ScotXed."

Likewise, collecting and correcting data from parents can be time-consuming for staff; and many admin / support staff responsible for accuracy had doubts about the accuracy of the data as a whole when they could see how difficult it was to keep their own input correct and up-to-date.

All respondents participating in the telephone interviews were asked to say how successful the ScotXed Partnership has been in moving the burden of data gathering and management from teaching to administrative staff (a score of 1 denoted "extremely unsuccessful" and 10 denoted "extremely successful"). As shown in table 5.6, around half or more respondents provided a score of 7 or more, although higher proportions of admin / support staff provided a "don't know" response. The difference in responses between headteachers and admin / support staff is statistically significant. The difference in responses between primary and secondary headteachers is not statistically significant.

Across local authority staff, higher proportions of designated ScotXed representatives (76%) gave a score of 7 or more than did those using ScotXed on a day-to-day basis or those at a strategic level. The difference between those using ScotXed on a day-to-day basis and designated ScotXed representatives is statistically significant.

When we compare the views of designated local authority ScotXed representatives with those of primary and secondary headteachers, differences are statistically significant.

Table 5.6 Success of ScotXed Partnership in moving the burden of data gathering and management from teaching to administrative staff in schools

Source: Q15 (schools); Q25 ( LAs)
Base: All respondents (schools = 253; LAs = 66)

The qualitative research suggested that admin / support staff have, to an extent, removed some of the bureaucratic burden of data collection from teaching staff and adopted a higher level of responsibility for data collection within their schools. The increased use of electronic data exchange has also made data collection and provision easier. However, many respondents, including some stakeholders, felt that the number of requests for new and different types of information had increased in recent years, albeit that the process of collecting data had been made simpler and easier.

All local authority staff were also asked to say what had been the main benefits of the ScotXed Partnership to teaching staff in schools in their local authority. Key comments were as follows:

• Access to better quality information = 32%, 21 respondents;
• Benefit of access to STACs = 14%, 9 respondents;
• Burden moved from teaching to admin staff = 11%, 7 respondents;
• Teachers not involved in process = 9%, 6 respondents.

These themes were echoed by the qualitative research, where respondents perceived the burden of data collection as sitting with admin and support staff rather than teaching staff. Again, from the quantitative data there were acknowledgements from local authority staff that the main drawback to administrative staff in schools was increased burden / workload (cited by 55% (n=36) of local authority staff). Other drawbacks, cited by small numbers of respondents were:

• Having to teach / educate / train staff = 11%, 7 respondents;
• Lack of training = 3%, 2 respondents;
• Lack of money / funds = 3%, 2 respondents;
• Lack of guidance / unclear guidance from ScotXed = 3%, 2 respondents.

5.4 REDUCING THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN OF PRODUCING NATIONAL STATISTICS

Views on whether the ScotXed Partnership has reduced the administrative burden of producing national statistics within schools were relatively polarised, with 56% of headteachers and 44% of admin/support staff agreeing this is the case, compared to 39% of headteachers and 35% of admin/support staff disagreeing (see chart 5.7). That said, 21% of admin/support staff and 6% of HT provided a "don't know" response. Headteachers in secondary schools were more positive than those in primary schools (75% compared to 36%). Views of admin / support staff were similar, regardless of school type. Differences between the numbers of secondary headteachers and secondary admin / support staff saying "yes" are statistically significant.

Chart 5.7 Whether ScotXed Partnership has reduced administrative burden of producing national statistics (schools)

Source: Q31 (schools)
Base: All headteachers (126) and admin / support staff (127)

All local authority staff were asked if they believed that the ScotXed Partnership has reduced the administrative burden of producing national statistics within schools, local authorities and other organisations (see chart 5.8). Again, views were relatively polarised particularly for schools with 47% saying yes and 44% saying no. Views on whether the ScotXed Partnership had reduced the administrative burden of producing national statistics within local authorities were more positive, with 59% saying yes and 30% saying no.

Whether the ScotXed Partnership has reduced the administrative burden of producing national statistics within other organisations was relatively positive (39% saying yes; 12% saying no), although 48% provided a "don't know" response. Differences between those saying "yes" are not statistically significant.

Chart 5.8 Whether ScotXed Partnership has reduced administrative burden of producing national statistics within schools, local authorities and other organisations

Source: Q42 ( LAs; n = 66)

When we examine the role of different local authority staff, there are some differences. Higher proportions of designated ScotXed representatives than those with day-to-day or strategic contact with ScotXed, claimed that ScotXed has not reduced the administrative burden of producing national statistics within schools (60% compared to 39% involved on a day-to-day basis and 30% of those at a strategic level). Similarly, higher proportions of designated ScotXed representatives also claimed that ScotXed has not reduced the administrative burden of producing national statistics within local authorities (44% compared to 22% strategic and day-to-day). Conversely, higher proportions of designated ScotXed representatives claimed that ScotXed has reduced the administrative burden of producing national statistics within other organisations (48% compared to 28% of day-to-day and 39% of strategic).

Local authority staff who claimed that ScotXed had not reduced the burden of producing national statistics within schools, local authorities and other organisations were asked to say why. The key reason given related to an increased burden of collecting data, primarily because of an increased number of data requests, although there were also some mentions of inconsistency in MIS / problems with MIS or a need for more resources.

5.5 BENCHMARKING

All respondents participating in telephone interviews were asked if they were aware of any benchmarks / standards that have been published through ScotXed, and 62% of local authority staff, 40% of headteachers and 12% of admin / support staff said they were aware (see chart 5.9).

Chart 5.9 Awareness of benchmarks/standards published through ScotXed

Source: Q23 (schools); Q36 ( LAs)
Base: All headteachers (126) and admin / support staff (127); all LA staff (66)

There was little by way of difference in responses between headteachers or admin / support staff in primary or secondary schools. Within local authorities, the highest proportions of those aware of benchmarks / standards were designated ScotXed representatives (76% compared to 61% of those involved on a day-to-day basis and 48% of those at a strategic level).

While respondents referred to using a wide range of benchmark data, the highest proportion (22% of headteachers, 53% of admin/support staff and 20% of LA staff) were unable to remember which benchmarks/standards were used. The highest levels of recall from school staff were for SQA analysis, attainment data, comparative data and attendance figures; highest levels of recall from local authority staff were for attainment data, comparative data, STACs and attendance figures or data relating to their local authority specifically. This lack of recall may be due to schools using benchmark data produced by local authority staff or consultants rather than accessing data directly from ScotXed. Not surprisingly, higher proportions of headteachers were using benchmarks than admin / support staff.

When asked their reasons for using benchmarks, the key reason emerging was for performance comparison. Other reasons provided included the monitoring of performance, for provision of internal reports or for improvements.

All respondents who had used any benchmarks / standards produced by ScotXed were asked to rate these on a scale where 10 denoted "extremely valuable". Views of school staff were less positive about benchmarks than some other aspects of ScotXed, although the views of local authority staff were positive, with 80% awarding a score of 7 or more.

Table 5.7 Rating of benchmarks / standards published by ScotXed

Source: Q26 (schools); Q37c ( LAs)
Base: All respondents (schools = 66; LAs = 41)

All respondents were also asked to say whether they carry out surveys within their school or local authority for benchmarking purposes. As shown in chart 5.10, overall 42% of school staff (62% of headteachers and 23% of admin / support staff) claimed to carry out surveys at school for benchmarking purposes. Within local authorities, 41% of staff claimed that schools in their local authority carry out their own surveys for benchmarking purposes and 78% claimed to carry out surveys within their local authority for benchmarking purposes.

Chart 5.10 Whether surveys carried out in School / local authority for benchmarking purposes

Source: Q27 (schools); Q37d & Q38 LAs
Base: All respondents- schools (253); All in LA aware of benchmarking (41)

Higher proportions of headteachers claimed that surveys are carried out in their schools for benchmarking purposes (62%) compared to admin / support staff (23%). Within local authorities specifically, higher proportions of strategic staff claimed that schools in their local authority carry out their own surveys for benchmarking purposes (64% compared to 45% of day-to-day staff and 26% of designated ScotXed representatives).

5.6 SHARING DATA

All respondents participating in the telephone interviews were asked how successful the ScotXed Partnership has been in sharing data that schools and local authorities use as a matter of course in their day to day operation (a score of 1 denotes "extremely unsuccessful" and 10 denotes "extremely successful").

As shown in table 5.8, within schools specifically, headteachers were more positive than admin / support staff (52% awarding a score of 7 or more compared to 37%); secondary headteachers were more positive than primary headteachers (60% awarding a score of 7 or more compared to 46%). However, these differences are not statistically significant.

Local authority staff were more positive than school staff, although designated ScotXed representatives were less positive than those involved with ScotXed on a day-to-day or strategic basis. Again, these differences are not statistically significant. Differences between all types of local authority staff and primary headteachers are statistically significant; this is also the case for local authority staff and primary admin / support staff.

The qualitative findings show that agreement on this dimension varied in relation to respondents' direct involvement with ScotXed and other users of data provided by ScotXed.

Table 5.8 Success of ScotXed Partnership in sharing data that schools and local authorities use as a matter of course in their day to day operation

Source: Q16 (schools); Q29 ( LAs)
Base: All respondents (schools = 253; LAs = 66)

The role that local authorities and / or consultants play in producing reports can also serve to suppress positive views of the success of ScotXed in sharing data. Furthermore, reports produced by authorities may well have a different perspective in line with policy requirements or changes at a local authority level.

All school staff participating in the telephone interviews were also asked to say how they would rate the effectiveness of sharing data / information with local authority staff and with school staff through ScotXed on a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 denoted "not at all effective" and 10 denoted "very effective".

As shown in table B in Appendix A, in terms of sharing data / information with local authority staff, views were largely positive, with little by way of difference between sub-groups. Of key relevance here, is that significant proportions of staff provided an answer of "don't know".

Scores were similar in terms of the effectiveness of sharing data / information with school staff (see table C in Appendix A).

Local authority staff were asked to comment on how they would rate the usefulness of sharing data or information through the ScotXed Partnership, again using a scale of 1 to 10 where 1 denoted "not at all useful" and 10 denoted "very useful" (Table 5.9). Views were largely positive in terms of the usefulness of sharing data / information through ScotXed with 82% of local authority staff providing a score of 7 or more. In terms of the usefulness of sharing data / information with school staff, 78% provided a score of 7 or more. However, a significant proportion of local authority staff (35%) were unable to comment on the sharing of information with other organisations.

Table 5.9 Local authority staff views on usefulness of sharing data / information through ScotXed with ….

Source: Q33 ( LAs)
Base: All respondents = 66

5.7 WHETHER SCOTXED PARTNERSHIP HAS IMPROVED THE QUALITY OF AVAILABLE DATA

Views on whether the ScotXed Partnership has improved the quality of available data were largely positive, with 98% of LA staff, 80% of headteachers and 67% of admin/support staff claiming that this was the case (see chart 5.11). Across school type, staff were most positive within secondary schools. Headteachers in secondary schools were more positive than those in primary schools (95% compared to 65%).

Chart 5.11 Whether ScotXed Partnership has improved the quality of available data

Source: Q29 (schools); Q40 ( LAs)
Base: All respondents; HTs (127); admin / support staff (126); LA staff (66)

When asked what works well in the whole concept of the ScotXed Partnership and the data exchange process, local authority staff noted a range of different aspects and key themes are summarised as:

• Good/effective communication / consultation = 36%, 34 respondents;
• Accessibility to data = 27%, 18 respondents;
• Opportunities provided to share data = 12%, 8 respondents;
• Whole process / concept works well = 11%, 7 respondents;
• Good quality of data = 9%, 6 respondents;
• Range of data available = 8%, 5 respondents;
• Good website = 5%, 3 respondents.

In summary:

• Views on the impact of ScotXed are largely positive in terms of electronic data exchange and respondents commented that data collection has become much easier in recent years. This is not attributed purely to ScotXed but also to other forms of MIS being utilised;
• There was a perception that ScotXed has helped to make data collection easier than previously, but that requests for data have increased. So while the bureaucratic burden of data collection and provision is seen to have decreased, many respondents perceived workloads in relation to additional data collection and provision to have increased, albeit that some data requests will come from other sources and not ScotXed. The quantitative and qualitative data also show that the bureaucratic burden on teachers has decreased and this has shifted to school administration staff;
• When assessing a range of potential impacts of ScotXed, notable proportions of admin / support staff were often unable to provide comment;
• Many respondents view ScotXed purely as a mechanism for the collation and provision of data and, as such, do not consider or at times perceive its impact on policy, decision making and so on. This is particularly true of those working within schools, many of whom did not feel they were provided with a rationale as to why specific data is being collected or explanations as to how this data is informing policy. Respondents who did view ScotXed as contributing to policy and decision making were stakeholders who were using data produced by ScotXed to inform their decision making;
• Because of the view from many that ScotXed is a mechanism for data collection, notable proportions of respondents - particularly admin / support staff and some headteachers within schools - find it difficult to comment on issues such as how the ScotXed Partnership has allowed monitoring of the impact of education policies, or how this integrates with initiatives such as Curriculum for Excellence;
• Given a lack of understanding on the part of some respondents, there is a sense of remoteness from ScotXed and lack of involvement within the ScotXed Partnership, particularly on the part of school staff;
• Views on STACs are positive from users, and many primary school headteachers requested a STACs equivalent be introduced;

• Across the range of possible benefits of ScotXed, perceptions are largely positive from those offering a view. However, for many of these benefits, significant proportions of respondents were unable to provide a view. In general, local authority staff were most positive about the impacts of ScotXed across a wide range of different aspects such as integration with other education initiatives, reducing bureaucratic burden, sharing data, improvements in the quality of available data and so on. Secondary headteachers are generally more positive than secondary admin / support staff, primary headteachers and primary admin / support staff. However, in a number of instances notable proportions of respondents (particularly admin / support staff and primary headteachers) are unable to provide comment on the impact of ScotXed;
• Views on whether the ScotXed Partnership has improved the quality of available data were largely positive, with 98% of LA staff, 80% of headteachers and 67% of admin / support staff claiming that this is the case.

« Previous | Contents | Next »