Post-16 Curriculum and Qualifications Reform in England and Scotland: lessons from home international comparisons

In this article we compare Curriculum 2000 and Higher Still, recent reforms of post-16 education in England and Scotland respectively. We draw on current and earlier research on the unification of academic and vocational learning in England, Scotland and other European countries in order to suggest areas for mutual learning to inform future curriculum and qualifications reform north and south of the Border. We highlight five of these - the conduct of the policy process, issues of progression, assessment, approaches to vocational education and key/core skills. In our conclusion we speculate on the possibility of either convergence or divergence of the English and Scottish upper secondary education systems as both evolve

The paradox of Scotland:limited credit transfer in a credit-based lifelong learning system

On paper, Scotland has a highly permeable, unified system of lifelong learning underpinned by the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework. Recent reports suggest that the reality is less positive. This paper examines credit transfer in Scotland across three interfaces: between general and pre-vocational learning and vocational education and training (VET); within VET; and between VET and university degrees. It finds that credit transfer across the first two interfaces is limited; credit transfer at the third interface is more frequent but often problematic. One explanation is that the system is designed around credit accumulation rather than credit transfer; this, together with other features of the Scottish system, means that a degree of permeability is built in without the need for formal credit transfer. But a second explanation highlights the epistemological, institutional and political barriers to a unified system. The paper illustrates the importance of distinguishing among different types of credit system and the limitations of credit and qualifications frameworks as agents of change in the face of the institutional logics of national education and training systems. The capacity of cross-national credit systems to support mobility between national systems should not be exaggerated