Debate contribution: Pupil Assessments
Debate contribution by Mr Paul Givan on .
- MLA
- Mr Paul Givan
- Party at the time
- Democratic Unionist Party
- Date
- 16 June 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution (made as a minister)
- Business
- Oral Answers to Questions
- Heading
- Pupil Assessments
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5010404
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Earlier this week, I was pleased to launch an independent review of assessment. The panel is chaired by Tim Oates CBE, former director at Cambridge Assessment, who sits on it alongside Garry Matthewson, the former principal of Holy Family Primary School, and Dr Mick Walker, former director of the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency (QCDA). It is critical to ensure that our assessment system is fair, reliable and aligned with international best practice, providing clear insights into student outcomes. The review will examine assessment throughout primary school and at Key Stage 3 and will engage with education stakeholders across Northern Ireland over the coming months. The review will look at best practice within and beyond the United Kingdom and undertake a strategic assessment of current arrangements, identifying strengths and areas for improvement, in order to make detailed proposals about the future purpose, nature and design of assessment in Northern Ireland. The review is a vital step towards having an evidence-informed, world-class education system in Northern Ireland that is excellent, equitable and responsive to the needs of all our young people. While the review is being carried out, it is important to have consistent and reliable interim arrangements. Therefore, on 19 March, I announced interim arrangements for statutory Key Stage assessment for the three-year period from the 2025-26 academic year. The new system-level sample assessments will evaluate pupils' literacy and numeracy at the end of Key Stages 1, 2 and 3. The assessments will be developed and delivered by the Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA). They will provide insights into learning outcomes across the education system and play a vital role in shaping educational policies and interventions. The assessments will be taken by a sample of pupils and will be used to identify national trends in education performance.
300 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.02 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.82).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.02 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.01 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.01 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.01 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.02 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.82 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.02 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-related subject | 0.76 |
| Education structures, integration and community division | 0.19 |
| Religion and belief (including people of no religion), churches, faith communities and religious prejudice (including antisemitism and anti-Muslim prejudice) | 0.05 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
| Parades, bonfires and commemorations | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:51 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.