National Museum of Wales Education Leaders Summit Pre #ALTC26

Last week I was invited to contribute to a discussion among UK education leaders in the splendid surroundings of the Welsh National Museum Cardiff. This was an event pre Association For Learning Technology Conference #ALTC26 gathering hosted by Instructure. 

As we were in Wales the discussion was shaped by developments there, I was impressed by focus to push forward tertiary opportunities for all. In some respects they are ahead of Scotland in some other areas they are behind. I think difference may be that they do seem more prepared to make funding contingent on Universities and Colleges working more closely together. Check out MeDr developments and specifically current list of projects.

 In Scotland I'd make all tertiary activity  funded at the same level - that would correct the market and behaviours - and perhaps be much simpler than drip funding range of projects. 

It's interesting the theme of Life Long Learning is back on everyone's radar.

Here is a summary of the five key takeaways for supporting lifelong learners: You can read things in full on the Instructure Website

• Lifelong Learning as a Shared Societal Responsibility: Anchored in Wales’s Well-being of Future Generations Act, institutions and policymakers are encouraged to move past short-term priorities and collaborate on connected learning pathways. With AI reshaping the workforce, education must focus on long-term adaptability, creativity, and reducing inequality for underrepresented groups.
  
  
• Removing Barriers to Inclusion: To reach non-traditional learners, institutions need to make opportunities more visible and approachable. Examples include bringing education directly into local communities, libraries, schools, and remote areas to engage individuals who might not otherwise consider life long learning opportunities. I think there is massive role that Open Educational policies could play in this space. 
  
  
• Rethinking Traditional Institutional Structures: Current university administrative systems (enrolment, student records, course approvals) are designed for traditional 18-year-old undergraduates. To compete with agile commercial learning providers and adapt to policy changes (like England's Lifelong Learning Entitlement), institutions must simplify processes and embrace flexible, modular, or asynchronous online learning. Colleges in Scotland are much more agile here but lack funding. They could be a true engine of change. 
  
  
• Prioritising Collaboration Over Competition: Despite financial pressures and internal siloes between academic departments, stronger partnerships—both internally and externally with colleges and employers are essential to address changing workforce skill requirements. This is still a live issue in Scotland. In Wales the approach seems to be to use funding to incentivise collaboration between Colleges and Universities - I think a blunter instrument is still required in Scotland. 
  
  
• Redefining Success Metrics: Beyond standard metrics like enrolment, completion rates, and revenue, institutions need to evaluate success based on learner-centric outcomes. This includes career transitions, gaining confidence, social mobility, and supporting learners who move in and out of formal education over time. This remains really hard to track in Scotland while Universities resist adoption of Scottish Candidate Number etc. 

Where Scotland is Behind

• Funding Unitised and Short-Course Learning: The biggest area where Scotland falls behind is modular/Unitised  funding entitlement.

  • England is rolling out the Lifelong Learning Entitlement (LLE), allowing adult learners to take out loan funding for individual modules (30+ credits) or short courses throughout their lives.

  • Scotland’s non-tuition fee model relies heavily on full-time degree or full-award funding (via SAAS). It lacks a flexible, universal "credit bank" or modular loan system for adult upskilling, making it harder for mid-career adults to take single college or university courses without paying out-of-pocket.

• Institutional Agility & Admin Bottlenecks: Much like the UK-wide challenges raised in Cardiff, Scottish universities remain constrained by traditional multi-year degree structures and lengthy course-approval processes. Commercial providers and short-course online platforms often outpace Scottish universities and Colleges  in launching agile retraining programs. Though at least College and Training Provider provision is shaped around relevant occupational standards. SCQF Microcredentials have been a thing in Colleges since the last century - but things like part-time evening, saturday morning and or even flexible blended short course provision seem to lack support. 

Where is space for Open Education ? 

I rehearsed this in earlier posts - there is so much scope for collaboration around both course design and learning materials in Scotland. We need much more flexible models for all learners. 

Do you have a platform that really supports Life Long Learning ?

Too many institutions , despite COVID are still overly focused on old models of course development and delivery.  Perhaps as they are just easier to deliver ? 

College Funding in Scotland Revisted.

In 2024 I posted about the ongoing crisis around College funding. Things have not really got much better - so time for an update. 

Despite delivering essential vocational training and community social mobility, Scotland’s Further Education (FE) college sector is still facing an unprecedented financial crisis. While recent targeted, short-term funding streams (such as the New Flexible Workforce Development Fund and Defence Technical Excellence Colleges) provide welcome project opportunities, they do not close the sector’s core operational funding gap. Baseline funding cuts threaten the structural viability of local colleges across Scotland. Urgent policy rebalancing across tertiary funding is required.

Key Financial Realities

• 7%+ Real-Terms Cut this year  Audit Scotland reports that college sector funding has fallen by over 7% in real terms over the last five years. If you look over last 10 years there is  a greater funding collapse. Audit Scotland's briefing paper, Scotland's Colleges 2025 shows that Scottish Government revenue funding for colleges decreased by 20 per cent in real terms over the five-year period from 2021/22 to 2025/26.
• Widespread Operating Deficits: More than half of Scotland’s colleges operate in deficit, relying on emergency Scottish Funding Council (SFC) cash advances to maintain short-term liquidity. They can't plan ahead. 
• Diminishing Provision: Workforce contraction via voluntary severance has coincided with course credits and student headcounts dropping to 10-year lows. That basically means less places for prospective students.  Part time learning numbers have plummeted.  Evening provision for reskilling adults has almost entirely disappeared.  

The Policy Disparity: Colleges vs. Universities

• Fiscal Control & Governance: Colleges operate as direct instruments of government policy under SFC control. Unlike universities—which enjoy greater fiscal freedom and research autonomy college boards and leadership face direct Scottish Government intervention during fiscal distress. 

• Targeted Grants vs. Baseline Stability: Short-term, ring-fenced initiatives (e.g., £10m New FWDF or £20m DTECs) enable rapid, employer-led upskilling, but cannot cover permanent staff costs, rising energy bills, or essential campus maintenance.

• Equitable Distribution: The commitment to "free" higher education has created an unintended structural imbalance, diverting core tertiary resources away from lifelong vocational learning and local college pathways.

Key Action Recommendations for Policy Makers

• Equalise Core Tertiary Funding Rates : Establish rate parity per candidate across Further Education, Higher Education, and work-based learning to ensure public funds follow the learner fairly and make the system make full use of SCQF.  Track learners across life long learning by full adoption of the Scottish Candidate Number SCN.

• Re-evaluate Regional Governance & Autonomy : Re-evaluate Regional Governance & Learn from Glasgow’s De-regionalisation. The dissolution of the Glasgow Colleges Regional Board (GCRB) proved that adding an administrative "middle tier" above colleges creates unnecessary overhead without protecting frontline budgets. Remaining regional structures across Scotland must either be given genuine, ring-fenced budget autonomy to serve their local economies, or be streamlined to allow direct SFC funding to frontline college delivery. 

• Align University Funding to National Standards: Differentiate public university subsidies by tying funding formulas to national occupational standards and articulation pathways from regional colleges. Academic autonomy should not extend to ignoring national occupational standards and SCQF. 

• Mandate FE Inclusion in National Capital & Innovation Projects : Ensure major economic and innovation investments (e.g., NMIS, Data Lab, DTECs) structurally embed regional colleges as core funded partners, not secondary outputs

• Expand Open Educational Resources (OER): Drive cross-sector adoption of UNESCO open education principles to widen access across regional communities. Ensure that all Colleges and Universities share all learning materials through open respositories and practice. To foster mutual support and collaboration and ultimately to support learners and teachers - wherever they are. 

• Stop the pretence that the patient(s) can heal itself :  There are currently two projects going on in Scotland, both sponsored by the Scottish Govt - The College Sector of the Future ( for Colleges) and for Universities the  Future Framework for the Sustainability and Success of Scotland's Universities.  In isolation neither of the sectors can find a solution on their own.  As they are both in the new tertiary system scope here for one project. 

Joe Wilson has 40 years experience of the College sector and  among other roles spent 15 years serving on three different College Boards of management. 

Reflections on 25 Years of the SCQF #scqf25years

In 2001, I was leading a range of sector-wide projects across Scottish Further Education for the Scottish Further Education Unit (SFEU). Across colleges, there was a  buzz surrounding the arrival of the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). For those of us working on the ground, news of a unified national framework was warmly welcomed.

Before joining SFEU, I had spent 15 years as a Course Team Leader in the college sector. My colleagues and I hit the same wall: a system of fragmented, siloed qualifications that created friction for learners trying to progress. We watched capable students pass college units linked to occupational standards with distinction, only to be told by universities or by professional bodies that their learning "didn't count" or that they had to start from scratch. The lack of proper, systemic recognition was frustrating and unfair. It wasn't just administrative red tape; it was actively hampering human potential. 

One year we lost an established articulation route simply as the academic course team leader who was the gatekeeper at a local university changed and their successor decided to block the articulation pathway. It could be a real lottery. 

So, when the SCQF Arrived in 2001 promising a single, common language for all learning built on the sensible view  that a unit of effort in a college held equal weight to one in a university it felt like a long-overdue revolution.

By 2003, my perspective shifted from curriculum support to national delivery when I moved to the Scottish Qualifications Authority (SQA), looking after half of all vocational awards in Scotland. The nascent SCQF team were along the corridor from me. 

Sitting at the SQA during those formative years was exhilarating we were doing the heavy lifting to make the SCQF work. We undertook the massive task of updating, reviewing, leveling, and credit-rating thousands of vocational awards, Higher National Certificates (HNCs), Higher National Diplomas (HNDs), and SVQs. We were creating the architecture for true "parity of esteem."

Since then, I have worked closely with the SCQF team members over the years (always a pleasure), spent time on the board of SCQF partnership and worked as an auditor for credit and levellng organisations.  

Looking back now, over two decades later, I ask myself: Did the SCQF live up to the promise we felt in 2001?

The answer is a nuanced yes, but.

Where it succeeded:

The SCQF created a transparent, world-leading infrastructure. It allowed colleges to build direct articulation routes into modern universities, saving thousands of students time and money. It gave non-traditional learners a way to see their worth, and it allows workplace learning to be formally valued alongside traditional academic degrees. It's been great to see professional bodies, community learning and other public bodies coming on board. 

 Where the battle continues:

The friction I fought as a Course Team Leader in the 1990s hasn't  disappeared. While the framework provided the language for seamless progression, it couldn't forcibly dismantle institutional culture. We still see universities guarding their gates, forcing HND graduates to repeat learning levels, and public perception clinging to traditional school-exam "gold standards."  

The funding system I think is the only lever left and that should be used very bluntly, to change some behaviours here. Public money should mean national standards. 

It's been a bumpy ride, during College restructuring a lot of experienced credit and levellers left the sector, though capacity is building up again. Universities tend to only credit and level their own provision, and there can still be some confusion in the system around the value of credit and levelling an award and or an awarding body seeking accreditation from the SQA. 

In 2001, we really hoped the SCQF would be a silver bullet. Today, I see it as an essential foundation. It didn't instantly solve every barrier to progression, but it gave us the blueprint to keep fighting for a fairer, more open education system in Scotland. #OpenScot  

In the School sector many of the benefits have still to be cultivated where -  academic subjects, vocational learning, and personal achievements could form an SCQF-levelled profile. We could  eliminate the high-stakes exam treadmill in favor of a balanced, credit-based portrait of a young person’s capabilitities - but that still seems out of reach. 

It is a key part of the Scottish educational landscape that needs to be better understood by everyone across the system. It is still the envy of many global education systems.  

Collectively we can all do more to make the SCQF Framework work for all. 

Happy Birthday SCQF and team members past and present. 

Generative AI and the Changing Nature of Assessment for DataLab Education Community

 

I enjoyed co presenting with Daire Maria Ni Uanachain . Daire's presentation and recording of session is now available on the Data Lab Education  Community Page 

If you are not a member of this community you should join. ( probably most relevant to folks in Scotland)   My own presentation is at foot of this blog post and I think complemented Daire's approach. 

I don't think we are at an inflection point yet. Changes to learning and assessment should have arrived when the internet and search engines became ubiquitous. 

Generative AI poses less of a threat to vocational training than to traditional academic sectors because vocational education relies on authentic assessment where learners must physically demonstrate practical capabilities rather than simply writing essays for these areas.  Digital evidence capture, such as video recording practical assessments (e.g. solar panel installation or working at height), work really well for verification and quality sampling.  Alternative assessments work in every other subject area too.   

To be clear, educational AI isn't about experimental frontier systems, it's about the accessible, everyday tools already at our students' fingertips. Keeping our focus on practical applications helps demystify the technology and prevents unnecessary anxiety from stalling essential digital skills development  (though the danger of armageddon will be this year's excuse for avoidance of any digital skills development) 

The truth is  getting teaching staff to change assessments rather than rely on 'AI Detection Engines' which don't work,  is massively challenging. Bad practice is deeply entrenched. We still have academic staff who ask generations of students the same questions and that should have changed long before the advent of AI.

Overcoming resistance to change is all about having the right governance, time and support in place. 

Unlocking the potential of these tools locally hinges on closer collaboration between IT departments,  academic and support staff. Building trust and dialogue between teams ensures we fully leverage the native AI features already sitting in our VLEs (like Canvas) and the enterprise platforms Microsoft or Google accounts. 

This is essential to prevent growth of shadow IT etc.   

There is useful support from Qualifications Scotland and a host of other sources. I've listed some current ones in slide deck. 

Hot of the press Glasgow Universities Toolkit for Reflecting on the Use of Digital and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Technologies in Learning and Teaching is included on this list. 

Launch of Toolkit for reflecting on the use of Digital and AI Technologies in Learning and Teaching

Last Monday, before heading up to Dundee University to move my son into student halls, I had the opportunity to attend the launch of an excellent new resource at the University of Glasgow.

The team at the School of Education has developed the Toolkit for Reflecting on the Use of Digital and Artificial Intelligence (AI) Technologies in Learning and Teaching. Rather than promoting specific tools or offering a rigid compliance checklist, the toolkit encourages structured reflection, professional dialogue, and active enquiry through self-assessment activities, real-world case studies, and guided reflective frameworks. It supports reflection across various dimensions of technology use and can be used individually or collaboratively, with the flexibility to adapt to different educational settings.

It is structured into four parts that move from examining personal pedagogical assumptions to analyzing mock case studies and planning future lessons. By utilising established academic frameworks like SAMR, TPACK, and the Conversational Framework, the resource encourages a shift from mere technology adoption to evidence-informed reflection. 

The materials also highlight ethical considerations, such as data privacy and accessibility, ensuring that tools serve human-centered learning goals.

Ultimately, the toolkit provides a staged scaffold for practitioner enquiry, helping teachers sustain a reflective digital practice as technology evolves.

It was good to meet some Education Scotland colleagues along at the launch and hear that they had been supportive in the development of this resource. 

The toolkit has several clear strengths:

• Sensible progression: It thoughtfully steps staff through selecting suitable technology based on actual learning needs, asking grounded questions about tech and AI along the way.

• Solid pedagogical focus: It grounds learning design effectively, with a particularly useful focus on the ABC model.

• Open access: It is published as an Open Educational Resource (OER), making it widely accessible. #OpenScot 

The overall approach is remarkably sound, and it is worth planning to use some of the slides and exercises with staff to help shape their approach to learning technology and AI. That said, to make the absolute most of it in practice, there are a few tweaks I'd make:

• Streamlining the activities: I’d likely cut down on some of the exercises. A few sections feel slightly wordy, and it can take a bit long to reach the practical next steps of selecting the right technology.

• Localising to institutional context: In an institutional setting, you need to explicitly point staff toward the specific tools supported by their institution. The toolkit omits this local layer to remain universally applicable, so I’d add that context back in.

• Critiquing misuse: It also presents a good opportunity to explore what might be missing, or address where educational technology and AI are being used inappropriately. Example I often use - a poor set of engineering lecturers being driven to distraction by an edtech trying to get them to adopt Powtoons of cuddily toys with powertools. 

• Expanding case study scope: The team is currently expanding the case studies at the back. Right now, they are heavily focused on primary schools, which opens up a great opportunity for colleges and HE institutions to collaborate with the university to develop further sector-specific examples.

Ultimately, I’d take the core slides and checklists and adapt them to fit a specific institutional context. Overall, the resources in this pack are a valuable addition to the toolkit of both Learning Technology teams and staff developer leads.

There are a lot of resources appearing in this space. (digital learning support with a focus on AI)  I didn't ask but was not sure where this resource fitted along side Glasgow University's lead on the Centre for Teaching Excellence and or work around digital learning appearing from the digital hub at Edinburgh University. 

Event was timely as I was doing a sector wide presentation later in the week with an AI focus and I was able to include this resource in references. 

There was a plug too for an 'International Symposium' on AI in summer 2027 

If you work in Learning Technology or a Learning and Teaching Academy worth downloading the PDF - and with proper attribution for orginal underpinning work perhaps running your own local AI model to repurpose some of the slides and resources in this pack.  My preferred model for this at moment is giving Notebook LM the PDF and asking it to create presentation slides that I can then edit. 

Here is a first pass at creating presentation from the PDF using Notebook LM - it is far too 'glossy' I would never use a deck like this - but great indication of what Notebook LM can do in under a minute.  Please note proper attribution. 

Get Involved

Download: Access the full Toolkit PDF on Glasgow ePrints.

Contribute Case Studies: If your college or university wants to contribute sector case studies, reach out to Dr. Mark Peart at the University of Glasgow School of Education.