I love statistics! I am so nerdy on exam results day, not just about how my own candidates have done. But more so – what does the national picture look like? How does RMPS compare with other subjects? What are the grade boundaries? What’s the Gender Balance like? Tucked away on the SQA website is this little gift of a page – SQA Statistics. I could look at these spreadsheets all day! Now with a little help from AI – my time spent writing formulas and comparing data is significantly dropped and now we can do a proper deep dive into the data.
How many RMPS Students are there?
Firstly, let’s talk basic numbers. How many RMPS students are there at each level?
National 3 – There were 1,240 candidates in 2025. This level has more than doubled its intake since 2022, growing from 1,060 (2024), 815 (2023), and 610 (2022).
National 4: There were 8,740 candidates in 2025. This level has seen dramatic and consistent growth, increasing by nearly 3,000 candidates since 2022 (up from 7,280 in 2024, 6,415 in 2023, and 5,865 in 2022).
National 5: There were 2,505 candidates in 2025. This number has shown steady growth year-on-year, up from 2,495 (2024), 2,395 (2023), and 2,350 (2022).
Higher: There were 3,645 candidates in 2025. This is an increase from 3,490 in 2024 and 3,540 in 2022, though slightly down from a peak of 3,890 in 2023.
Advanced Higher: There were 215 candidates in 2025. This is a decrease from 255 in 2024, but similar to the 210 candidates in 2023.
RMPS is the 5th most popular National 3 and National 4 subject. Combined there’s over 16,000 pupils studying RMPS in a year.
RMPS is the 5th most popular National 3 and National 4 subject. Combined there’s over 16,000 pupils studying RMPS in a year.
This is most probably attributed to the fact that more and more schools are adding certificated awards into their Core RME classes. There are pro’s and con’s of this – is it devaluing the subject by having so many candidates complete it in essentially one period a week when it takes other subjects several periods a week to complete the same course work? Are we getting the right breadth and depth into our teaching or are we just teaching to the exam? Is this missing the point of Core RME?
But on the other hand you could argue we are accrediting the pupils for the work they would be doing anyway? Are we ensuring that RME is valued by offering a certification in it. I flip flop between these two camps every single day. I am not sure what the answer is and it is something I really want to research further.
How does RMPS compare with other Subjects?
With 2505 candidates in 2025, RMPS is 28th in terms of popularity. To compare with other Humanities subjects such as History (16,505), Geography (10,205) and Modern Studies (12,515), it’s still got a while to go gain in popularity. However, this figure is rising.
This low uptake can often be down to simple things such as staffing, course choice column restrictions (e.g. RMPS is up against social subjects and pupils aren’t able to pick more than one or two) or lack of understanding of what RMPS is.
When we look at how it compares to the social subjects in terms of pass rates – RMPS is the most successful when compared with History, Geography and Modern Studies with 75.8% of candidates achieving an A-C (45.8% of candidates achieve an A). This is only pipped by Classical Studies, a subject with only 310 candidates, 79.7% of whom achieved an A-C grade.
It’s a slightly different story in Higher RMPS. More candidates study Higher RMPS. Again this is not surprising, many schools offer Higher RMPS as a ‘crash subject’ as they don’t get numbers for uptake further down in the school.
It is almost as if pupils need 4 years of Core RMPS going through the different stages of denial that they might enjoy the subject; anger that they have been ‘forced into this subject’ before finally accepting that ‘it’s actually alright.
It is almost as if pupils need 4 years of Core RMPS going through the different stages of denial that they might enjoy the subject; anger that they have been ‘forced into this subject’ before finally accepting that ‘it’s actually alright.
To compare with other Social Subjects, Higher RMPS has an uptake of 3,645. History (9,865) Modern Studies (8,925) and Geography (7,100) are all more popular. Again, this could be linked to staffing, how the subject is perceived or whether it is even offered as a Higher.
When it comes to results, RMPS has a 68.6% of A-C marks. This is lower than it’s Social subject counterparts (History, 80.3%; Modern Studies, 74.3% and Geography, 75.6%).
Could this be because it is a harder qualification to pass? There needs to be more CLPL for teachers to deliver these qualifications. SQA Understanding Standards are back this year, but the event is booked up and many teachers are complaining they cannot get a space. I would highly recommend making sure you read the Course Reports when they are published as they are full of useful teaching nuggets.
Could the difference in the results be down to the fact, many pupils crash Higher RMPS. I would love to see the stats on how many pupils sit Higher without doing N5.
What about the Gender Divide?
Is there a gender divide? If you look at the National 4 results no. The candidates reflect the general population 52% Females and 48% males. However, I would approach this with caution, as previously discussed this is most probably down to the fact that a lot of National 4 RMPS comes from pupils in core classes. Many of whom did not opt to take the subject.
69.5% of National 5 candidates are female. At Higher, the divide increases further to 72% of candidates being female. This rings true with my experience classes tend to be made up majorly of females with only a handful of males.
When it comes to performance, females are also performing better in RMPS than males.
National 5:
- Pass Rate: Females 78.1% | Males 70.4% (a 7.7 point gap)
- Grade A Rate: Females 48.1% | Males 40.8%
Higher:
Grade A Rate: Females 30.4% | Males 23.4%
Pass Rate: Females 70.7% | Males 63.2% (a 7.5 point gap)
How can we encourage more males to take RMPS and when they are in the class, how can we ensure there is not a gender attainment gap? Perhaps there’s a research project in the making there.
What about Location?
It is encouraging to see that RMPS is taught in every local authority. But where is good RMPS taking place?
Shout out to Orkney Islands and West Dunbartonshire who both recorded a 100% pass rate.
At both National 5 and Higher, the largest student cohorts are consistently found in councils like The City of Edinburgh, North Lanarkshire, Fife, and Aberdeenshire.
Shout out to Orkney Islands and West Dunbartonshire, who both recorded a 100% pass rate. At Higher, performance was exceptional East Dunbartonshire (79.6% pass rate) and Stirling (44.2% Grade A rate).
This national spread calls for a few things – firstly how important it is for SQA to ensure that everyone can access support, whether online or in person. There is a Glow Team for both National 5 and Higher RMPS, however it is unfortunate that many council don’t easily give access to their staff on Glow meaning they are missing vital support. It also highlights the importance of a National body such as STARME (www.starme.co.uk) to ensure they are representing their members and offering support where needed and encouraging sharing of good practice in the subject.
Component Marks
Let’s think about the Component Marks a little further.
National 5
- Question Paper (80 marks)
- Mean Mark: 52.1 / 80 (65.1%)
- Candidates achieving full marks: 55
- Assignment (20 marks)
- Mean Mark: 12.8 / 20 (64.0%)
- Candidates achieving full marks: 45
With the average mark being 65% which would equate to a B it seems fair for this exam. The National 5 was a fair paper. The assignment was on a whole done well too.
Higher
Paper 1: World Religion, Morality & Belief (60 marks)
- Mean Mark: 30.2 / 60 (50.3%)
- Candidates achieving full marks: 10
Paper 2: Religious & Philosophical Questions (20 marks)
- Mean Mark: 12.8 / 20 (64.0%)
- Candidates achieving full marks: 210
Assignment (30 marks)
- Mean Mark: 21.0 / 30 (70.0%)
- Candidates achieving full marks: 150
Higher tells a little bit of a different story. Paper 1, the average mark is just over 50%. This is showing candidates are not performing well in this section at all which is really affecting overall grades. It will be interesting to see what the Course Report says about this and how we can help candidates with this. I know personally, I am stripping my content right back which saddens me as I feel like I am loosing the depth of teaching Higher and teaching more and more to the exam.
Paper 2 – the performance is much better. To me this makes perfect sense, there are only a handful of questions that can be asked in Paper 2 so candidates can go into the exam very well prepared and just ensuring they are answering the questions. I would say for me personally again, I am stripping my content right back for this section and teaching to the exam unfortunately.
Candidates did really well in the Assignment – I like the assignment for this it brings the marks up for those pupils who struggle with exams. It’s a hard slog asking anyone to write 5 essays on 3 very different and vast topics on an unknown subject in a relatively short space of time. Assignment gives that breathing space for candidates.
The grade boundary was not adjusted for Higher, despite the poor performance in Paper 1, but think this could be attributed to the better performance in the Assignment. I know assignments get a bit of a mixed response, they are the marmite of the secondary teachers world.
Is the story similar for philosophy?
I am not a philosophy teacher, but am interested to see if there is a similar picture here. I have asked my virtual teaching assistant (Google Gemini) to tell me what the story is in Philosophy. I’ve added my own commentary.
“The first thing you notice is scale. While RMPS is a mainstream giant, Philosophy is a specialist subject with a smaller, dedicated following. Its pathway begins at National 5 with a cohort of 255 students. But here’s the fascinating part: that cohort more than doubles to 550 students at Higher! This shows an incredible continuation rate; once students get a taste for Philosophy, they are hooked. It’s also great to see the Higher pass rate increase this year to 58.9%. ”
- It’s lovely to think that this is pupils that are staying on to take N5 Philopshy after HIgher but the reality that is more likely is staffing. Departments have to choose between N5 Philosophy or HIgher, they can’t run both as well as RMPS.
When it comes to academic rigor, Philosophy is right up there. The grade boundary for an ‘A’ in Higher Philosophy (68.2%) is almost identical to Higher English. The subject is clearly no easy ride.
- Again, our little AI friend here doesn’t realise that a drop below 70% means that the grade boundaries were dropped slightly as the exam was not done well or it was too hard.
The gender story in Philosophy is a real head-scratcher. Like RMPS, it’s a female-majority subject (~65% at both N5 and Higher). But the performance data is a paradox. At National 5, boys have a slightly higher pass rate, but girls achieve significantly more ‘A’ grades. Then, at Higher, this completely inverts! Girls now have a higher pass rate, but the boys who pass are slightly more likely to achieve an ‘A’. It’s a fascinating statistical puzzle that I’d love to hear Philosophy teachers’ theories on!
- A head-scratcher indeed. This is quite interesting that boys seems to perform better at N5 than Higher. Would love to hear why that might be.
Finally, the component marks at Higher show it’s a tough, exam-focused subject. With no assignment to fall back on, students have to perform on the day. The average score for both papers hovers around the 50% mark (49.2% for Paper 1, 51.8% for Paper 2), confirming the challenging nature of the final exam.
- That is a very low average mark. Would love to hear thoughts on why this might be. Was the exam particularly difficult this year or is it always like this?
What are the key takeaways?
There are a lot of takeaways and hidden stories in this years RMPS results. It definitely opens up calls for more research into a few of the strands. I am currently undergoing a project into What is RME?, but I know there is also subsequent research into attainment in RMPS.
The rise in certification at National 3 and 4 is an interesting one. This is something I am going to touch on further with my research as we look at accreditation in RME.
There is a definite call in the RMPS teaching community about CLPL, or whether it is being accessed. I know from previously speaking to the SQA, not many people actually read the course reports, but yet there are always cries out for more support.
There are a lot of unknowns about RMPS and what it’s future will be in line with the curriculum improvement cycle but I am excited to see it progress.