Thursday, 31 January 2013

“The Universal Panacea? The number one shift in UK education I wish to see in my lifetime”

My one true wish for the future of education in the UK, or in England at least, is to see politicians removed from education. Not politics you understand, but politicians. We are in a political profession, even if we profess no party preference, or if we express that we have no political interest, those are actually political decisions.

A Department for Education, not run by elected politicians, or career civil servants, but by good educational professionals would be my Utopia. This is my presentation as part of the #blogsync initiative http://share.edtronic.net

I am not going to say 'Michael Gove is an idiot', because that it too easy to write, and in doing so we are not actually doing our profession any good whatsoever. We are professional and reasonable people; name calling and mud slinging do not represent intelligent thought. Like it or not he was elected democratically (don't start me on the democracy of a coalition) and in this country we don't rampage through the streets and shoot down helicopters because there is a new curriculum initiative.

However this does not stop us having rational debate and saying that what he is doing is wrong.

Like many teachers at a senior level, I have an MA. Three years of hard work in my own time, travelling up to 80 miles on a round trip once a week or so, I wasn't going to waste my time. The time I used was spent on gathering evidence, from the research of others and from my own work in the classroom. No evidence, no MA basically. There is little evidence in Gove's ideology.

The one source he has quoted, Daniel Willingham, is a cognitive scientist, not a primary or secondary school teacher, in the USA, a country with perhaps more rigid curriculum rules than our own. He has researched brain mechanisms and memory, and has dismissed the usefulness of learning styles. He appears to be Gove's guru, and the source of his obsession with rote learning and the rigour of exams.

Phonics: I am not opposed to phonics as such, it is a way of teaching reading, but not the only one. The evidence base was very narrow. A study in Clackmannanshire, the smallest authority in Scotland, is the basis for the introduction of synthetic phonics in England. Too narrow a base, in a part of our nation with a different educational system. The testing too is a political tool. The use of nonsense words, whilst enabling new language learners to show their phonic skills, actually penalised good readers who for example might read the nonsense word 'dess' as 'dress' because they want to start reading real words to make sense of the nonsense. This appears to have penalised more able readers in their scores, and impacted on schools in the 'leafier' suburbs.

Rote learning. One small aspect of our battery of teaching tools. Useful for some children, not for others. Examinations. I am not opposed to them per se, but they prove what? Memory of facts, memory of set answers. Do they prove application of known skills? Already there is anecdotal evidence from the few remaining selective schools that children are being tutored purely for the entrance examinations, and not for their school work. As a result children are going to the grammar schools with level 3 and in some cases Special Educational Needs (other than ASD and Aspergers) that such institutions have not had to deal with before. Realistically if a child is going to cope with the demands of grammar school and the competition with other pupils, they need to be going there at level 5.

Academies. Another example of double standards. Entry criteria differ for a start. Teachers do not have to have recognised qualifications, yet there is a requirement to reach a certain standard in mathematics. There has been a head appointed at the Pimlico Academy Primary Section without any educational qualification. How on earth will there be any credibility there when a qualified and experienced teacher is criticised. Roke school in Croydon, a previously outstanding school had one rogue set of poor SATS, was put into category and is being forced into academy status in the Harris chain.

Decisions about school status aren't new though. Comprehensive education was a debate from the 1960s, but even then as a sop to Edward Heath, Harold Wilson agreed that Bexley would retain its Grammar Schools.

The Curriculum. We are being bombarded with changes in terminology. Is it inverted commas or speech marks? Determiners or articles? The Government is in place to run the country, not to dictate to us the way that we speak and the grammar that we use.

Mr Gove, like so many of his predecessors, is not a teacher. It is very easy to knock teachers. Just look what the panel did on last week's Question Time on the subject of school closures, even the normally logical Ian Hislop. Criticism of the decision to close schools based not upon the considerations of the Health and Safety of the children or staff, or on the ability of the school to offer an adequate day's education, but on the inconvenience of having to take a day off work and look after your own children.

Enough knocking of Gove. At least he is an Education Secretary to remember. Apart from Ed Balls the only one I could remember without reference to Wikipedia was Kenneth Baker, and I am someone who keeps an eye in with what goes on in politics. Oh there was that woman from my primary school days who took away my free milk. Name slips my mind at the moment. Even Shirley Williams, one of the few politicians I have time to listen to, and an eloquent supporter of the comprehensive system, made sure her daughter got a place at a selective school.

The current reforms, including academies, free schools and federations of schools, may sound the death knell of Local Education Authorities. Not a bad thing some people might believe. I have heard various authorities described as incestuous (metaphorically), corrupt, short sighted, and self interested. Again politics comes into play here.

LEAs are in the firing line of Government criticism if they appear to be failing their childrren. Derby and Coventry seem to be areas where an axe is likely to fall. Other authorities too are under pressure, and inevitably someone will pay the price. The nature of political self interest though means 'blame someone else'. This is true at National and Local level, and unfortunately in some schools too as some of my Twitter followers will attest to.

Is this personal you ask? Yes it is. Previous readers of my blog will know the experience my wife has suffered. One set of poor results due not to bad teaching but to the fact that the LEA had forced children upon the school who were not going to achieve level 4s. The current year 6 will achieve good results. Three other heads were dealt with in the same way, in word for word identical situations. The quota that the LEA could say to the Government to protect themselves for a while longer. Well: this affects people. The social, economic and emotional strains that this has imposed on our family probably mean nothing to the people who made that decision. My inability to speak out to a greater extent, down to the love and trust I have for my wife, is heartbreaking.

Politics you see affects people and unfortunately that has hit us hard.

Local politicians it seems are always putting their nose into schools for their own benefit. My old primary school, I discovered recently, has the former Lib Dem candidate for Parliament, and a local councillor, as its chair of Governors, and many of my old school friends, now parents at the school, tell me the feeling is that he holds the position very much for his own self promotion. His children don't go there. He lives in a different part of town.

Unions too. You don't escape my ire. Not the people at the top. You do a good job in the most difficult of circumstances. I mean the so called activists. Active you may be, but on whose behalf. Calls for strike action, refusal to hand in plans and cover for sick colleagues! Like I said before we are professional and children are at the heart of what we do, and a single day, even a single hour wasted can impact on the learning of a child. Much of this activism is aimed at getting up the noses of Heads and the SLT, and is often lead by teachers who are themselves ineffectual. Majorities in strike ballots may be mentioned, but many members don't vote. Not because they can't be bothered, but because they remember incidents such as David Blunkett cowering in the toilets at the NUT conference to escape an angry mob. Not a nice man I would agree, but a blind man, a frightened blind man. A most embarrassing day for the profession and manna from heaven for the right wing press.

We all hold political opinions- that is only right and proper in a democratic and free thinking society, and as good teachers we encourage debate and discussion. But politics affects us all as I hope I have illustrated.

Governments change, and bring their policies with them. It would seem unlikely at this stage that the current Government will be returned in 2015, though you never know. Likely then a new agenda, possibly one very different from that of Michael Gove, a man making more change than any of his predecessors. More upset, more change.

So I would like to see a Department for Education, and local administration of schools, whatever form that takes in the future, free of politicians and political motivation, but run by education professionals, without a personal agenda, not driven by the desire to force people out and humiliate them, but with the desire to build independently minded and compassionate young minds. If this country is going to have the future leaders that it deserves, this is where they will grow from.


3 comments:

  1. You're right, of course, all members of parliament are our elected representatives. However, all ministers of government are appointed, and what has become absolutely clear over Forestry, the NHS, Welfare and Education (off the top of my head) is that they really don't know what they're doing (and their advisors don't know much better either). So yes, a professional body of education is desperately needed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nice one Andrew, as you know I chose to resign from a senior leadership position in a secondary school due to a number of factors including;

    a) the introduction of 3 page lesson plans for every lesson in the year by the new Head
    b) having to observe on a rota every day
    c) being instructed to fail any teacher who failed to give me a lesson plan in their observation
    d) being bullied by a deputy head
    e) my last observation and the frankly bullshit reasons of my 'satisfactory' grade. "your starter was too long..." - Oh give me strength.

    There is absolutely no logic in having elected politicians in charge of these vital services. In fact I despair with where we find ourselves.

    I look forward to my new challenge of raising educational standards and improving the lives of young people in Sierra Leone from September. In fact I cannot wait for the opportunity to create an educational system that will be inclusive, will be focussed on student's interests and skills and will identify and focus on different types of intelligences throughout the curriculum.

    Many have forgotten what the point of school is! For too many it is purely to get the best results in order to attract more students and to pass Ofsted in order to justify their existence.

    No, non, nein.

    The purpose of schools should be to get young people ready for the rest of their lives. This includes academic attainment but there is so much more. They should be at the centre of schools. They are not.




    ReplyDelete
  3. Youtube Likes
    Really i appreciate the effort you made to share the knowledge.The topic here i found was really effective to the topic which i was researching for a long time.

    ReplyDelete