SQA appoints former teacher to chief executive role
Mr Page began his career as a teacher before taking on multiple council roles as Director of Children's Services at Salford City Council and Chief Executive of Solihull Metropolitan Borough Council.
The SQA board selected Mr Page from a shortlist of candidates, and Cabinet Secretary for Education and Skills Jenny Gilruth approved the appointment.
In February, the former SQA Chief Executive Fiona Robertson stepped down following a series of high-profile controversies dating back to 2020. With her resignation, the SQA divided the leadership responsibilities between the Chief Executive and the newly created post of Chief Examining Officer, held by Donna Stewart.
With Mr Page's appointment, there are now teachers in both of the top roles at the SQA.
Following its passage in Holyrood on Wednesday, the Education (Scotland) Bill will establish a new qualifications body called Qualifications Scotland, pending royal assent.
Staff and officers are expected to carry over to Qualifications Scotland when it assumes responsibilities in December.
Mr Page said that he was "honoured" to oversee the transition.
'The passage of the Education (Scotland) Bill challenges us all to make reform a success – and we will deliver.
'SQA is already transforming at pace to build strong foundations for Qualifications Scotland, harnessing the deep knowledge, skills and commitment of our people. We will accelerate that work to deliver a future that improves outcomes and supports learning and teaching.
'As a former teacher from a family of teachers, I am keenly aware of the challenges faced in classrooms, colleges and across the education community, especially since the pandemic."
Read more
He added that the SQA's new Schools Unit, led by headteacher Sarah Brown as Senior Adviser, will be crucial for achieving the new organisation's goal of amplifying the voices of teachers and students.
"We will also work across the education and skills community to ensure that assessment and awarding align with wider pathways for success.
'By building new partnerships with industry and employers, we will strengthen the relevance and range of our skills-based and vocational qualifications to unlock opportunities for learners. That will help support Scotland with the skills our country needs to succeed in a rapidly changing world.
'I look forward to bringing my experience – and the lessons I have learned – to my new role. I want to begin by thanking my new colleagues, who have demonstrated great professionalism and successfully delivered over these past years of challenge and uncertainty."
Nick Page will take over as chief executive of the SQA in July and Qualifications Scotland when the new organisation takes over in December. (Image: SQA)
SQA Board Chair Shirley Rogers said that Mr Page was chosen because of his mixture of experience in the classroom and public service.
'I am absolutely delighted that Nick has chosen to join us. His career spans many achievements and a proven ability to lead through both change and challenge.
'I am confident that, drawing on these experiences and a commitment to learning from them, Nick will drive the positive transformation that ensures Qualifications Scotland delivers for every learner, every educator, and every community."
The transition to Qualifications Scotland will be one of the final steps in a process that began in 2021 when former Education Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville announced that the SQA would be scrapped.
Over the next four years, the Scottish Government spent over £1 million commissioning a series of independent reviews into qualifications and assessments.
However, the Education (Scotland) Bill and its vision of Qualifications Scotland has received a lukewarm response from opposition parties, teachers and the chief researchers who had recommended the SQA's replacement in the first place.
The EIS teaching union called the bill an "opportunity missed" for reform, while Professor Ken Muir, who carried out the original review for replacing the SQA, said it was "disappointing" that the bill preserves many of the major shortcomings he identified in the SQA's structure.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Trump sent ‘explicit' threat to cut funds from University of Virginia, senator says
The University of Virginia (UVA) received 'explicit' notification from the Trump administration that the school would endure cuts to university jobs, research funding and student aid as well as visas if the institution's president, Jim Ryan, did not resign, according to a US senator. During an interview Sunday on CBS's Face the Nation, Mark Warner, a Democratic senator for Virginia, defended Ryan – who had championed diversity policies that the president opposes – and predicted that Donald Trump will similarly target other universities. Warner said he understood that the former UVA president was told that if he 'tried to fight back, hundreds of employees would lose jobs, researchers would lose funding, and hundreds of students could lose financial aid or have their visas withheld'. 'There was indication that they received the letter that if he didn't resign on a day last week, by 5 o'clock, all these cuts would take place,' Warner added. He also said he believes this to be the 'most outrageous action' that the Trump administration has taken on education since it retook office in January. Ryan resigned from his position as UVA president on Friday. He was facing political pressure from Washington to step aside in order to resolve a justice department investigation into UVA's diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies, the New York Times reported on the same day. 'I cannot make a unilateral decision to fight the federal government in order to save my own job,' Ryan said in his resignation message to the university community. He expressed an unwillingness to risk the employment of other staff, as well as cuts to funding and financial aid for students. Ryan had a reputation for trying to make the UVA campus more diverse and encouraging students to perform community service. He had served as the university's president since 2018. Warner criticized the administration for what he said was its overreach in education. He said federal education and justice department officials 'should get their nose out of [the] University of Virginia'. 'They are doing damage to our flagship university,' he remarked. 'And if they can do it here, they'll do it elsewhere.' He referred to Trump's ongoing battles with Harvard, the US's oldest university, including the president's signing a proclamation to restrict foreign student visas and continued threats to cut funding over its DEI policies. 'They all want to make them like Harvard,' Warner said. 'End of the day, this is going to hurt our universities, chase away that world-class talent. 'And, frankly, if we don't have some level of academic freedom, then what kind of country are we?'
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
SNP councillor resigns from party after £500,000 drug bust
An SNP politician has stepped down from the party after being charged with drug offences following the discovery of a cannabis farm at a rural property. Aileen Orr, a councillor and one-time party staff member for Mike Russell, the former SNP president and Nicola Sturgeon ally, was arrested after a drugs bust in the Borders in February last year. Orr, now 71, called the emergency services to report a break-in at a farmhouse on the outskirts of the Berwickshire village of Paxton. When police arrived at the property they did not locate any burglars but did find a cannabis cultivation with an estimated street value of £500,000. Orr was arrested and charged last year, as was her 29-year-old son, Duncan Orr. A report is due to be submitted to prosecutors and a court date will be set in due course.
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
STEPHEN DAISLEY: As MSPs head for the beaches, a question... Would we REALLY be any worse off if they just didn't come back?
Imagine it is May 2021, a few weeks on from the Scottish parliament election, the sixth such poll held since devolution began. Only this time it's different. This time, Holyrood doesn't reconvene. No presiding officer is elected, no oaths taken, no committee conveners appointed. The parliament lies empty. It goes on like this for weeks, then months, until it becomes apparent that MSPs will never show up. The reason for their absence is unimportant. Maybe they've secured more gainful employment as a travelling circus, a major career change insofar as it would involve travelling. In every other way, however, there is continuity. Schools stay open, the NHS groans on, police still investigate your tweets, and councils empty your 15 wheelie bins sporadically while charging rates that would force the Emir of Qatar into a payment plan. All remains as before, budgets are allocated to services, but the 2021-26 parliament never sits and never passes legislation. Question: can you think of a single way in which you would have been worse off under this scenario? I ask because MSPs have just packed up their offices for summer recess, the last before the forthcoming Scottish parliament election, which must be held by the first week of May 2026. But as the politicians root around for their buckets and spades, I've been digging through the record of this parliamentary year and indeed the entire session, which is what prompted my little thought experiment. Because this parliament is surely the most insubstantial and inconsequential since the dawn of devolution. A do-nothing assembly that, on the occasions when it rouses itself to action, confirms the wisdom of its original instinct. It is this parliament which brought forward the final draft of the Gender Recognition Reform Bill, rammed through Holyrood in a marathon run of late-night sittings shortly before Christmas 2022. Women's rights campaigners and legal scholars cautioned that its plans for self-identified gender changes would fall foul of Britain-wide equalities legislation, not least when it came to single-sex spaces. Parliament would not listen and then received the ultimate slap-down when Scottish Secretary Alister Jack made history and became the first holder of his office to block a Holyrood bill. The Scottish parliament fumed but the Court of Session sided with Mr Jack. MSPs had no cause for pique. Most showed themselves to be singularly incurious when it came to gender legislation, satisfied to regurgitate the dubious talking points of taxpayer-funded lobby groups rather than doing their jobs as legislators. Pursuing self-ID was a Nicola Sturgeon pet project, but it was also necessitated by her reckless decision to bring the Greens into government, handing ministerial power to an anti-capitalist doomsday cult that hitches its yurt to every policy fad on the go. This included the deposit return scheme, a thoroughly reasonable notion in theory, until Lorna Slater got her hands on it and drove it into the ground, alienating small businesses along the way. And in return for the votes of these ego-warriors, sensible, long-standing Scottish Government positions had to be jettisoned. An undertaking to fully dual the A96, a notorious accident blackspot, was diluted down to the weakest water. Despite the inclusion of an environmentalist party in Scotland's government, St Andrew's House missed target after target in its loudly proclaimed quest to cut emissions. Eventually, Holyrood scrapped annual and interim targets altogether. Failure has been a hallmark of this parliament. Take the PISA report confirming that performance in maths, science and reading continues to slump and Scottish schoolchildren lag behind their English counterparts in all three. Take the attainment gap, the closure of which Sturgeon asked to be judged on. It has widened, but that cannot be pinned on the former First Minister alone. It was the duty of parliament to hold her to account, but this parliament could not rise to its obligations. In this session, Holyrood has seen three First Ministers (so far) and neither Sturgeon, nor Humza Yousaf, nor John Swinney could be said to have feared parliament very often. All three warrant a share of the blame for the post-Covid NHS recovery that never materialised. For the habitually missed emergency care and cancer treatment waiting times. For the shame of elderly people forced to part with their life savings to pay for hip and cataract operations. Holyrood, the guardian of the people's interests, has attached no meaningful political price to this dire record. The same can be said of the Ferguson Marine fiasco, a slow-motion catastrophe that a more diligent and effective parliament could have stopped in its tracks. Yet as with so many of the topics at issue, MSPs, and we're talking specifically about Nationalist MSPs, chose to put party before country and keep their mouths shut. They saw their remit as that of parliamentary clapometers, there to make noise but not trouble. Taxpayers, especially those who rely on islands transport, bore the brunt of their cowardly partisanship. That word right there – 'partisan' – might just be a one-word summation of Holyrood's problem. Too many of its members regard themselves as components of a political bloc instead of elected representatives tasked with challenging, scrutinising and checking executive power. Recall how Nationalist MSPs rallied round Michael Matheson after he tried to bill the taxpayer for his holiday iPad use. A more basic test of fidelity, whether it is owed to parliament or exclusively to party, there could not be. And dozens of MSPs failed it. Holyrood is a parliament in which parliamentarians are in the minority. There is very little reason to expect things will improve in the eight months that remain when MSPs return from summer recess. This session will end with as much distinction as it has conducted itself thus far, and of what comes next we can only guess. Donald Dewar promised so much of Holyrood but even if he had been more circumspect, what we've got could only be a source of acrid disappointment. Who can say if things would be better had devolution never happened, but it's hard to imagine they could be any worse. This column began with a thought experiment, and it ends with another. Imagine you were given the opportunity to return to September 11, 1997, the day of the Scottish parliament referendum, retaining full knowledge of what has happened in the quarter century since Scots voted for legislative devolution. You head to your polling station, go into the booth, and poise your pencil over the paper. This time around, you know what's coming. The paucity of ambition, the dearth of delivery, the inevitability of failure. Much will not get better, some things will get worse, and the poor and vulnerable will pay the price. There will be mediocrity, ineptitude and cliquishness. The thinly veiled resentment towards its own people of a provincial elite that yearns only for the approval of international elites. A culture of secrecy, an aversion to scrutiny, and a closed-ranks hostility to anyone who speaks out of turn. This will be a parliament in which truth and conscience are in constant submission to party and power. The ballot before you asks you to choose between two options: 'I agree that there should be a Scottish parliament' or 'I do not agree that there should be a Scottish parliament'.
