School reform? Yes, please!
15 Mar
(Sunday Times 15.3.09)
They certainly do! We can't blame all of the current mess on Tony Crosland for ditching grammar schools, as the system he reformed was not fit for purpose either. But despite an increased spend per pupil of 55% in real terms since 1997 (the year I left school), we have not seen the increase in social mobility that was promised. Instead of revelling in the success of increasingly high examination results in the comprehensive sector, GCSEs and AS/A2 are accused of being dumbed down to the point where some of the schools educating the nation's brightest sparks are rejecting these qualifications altogether. IGCSE, Internation Baccalaureate... these pupils need something more substantial to get their teeth into, and to differentiate them from the increasing number of students achieving 3 As at A2. The new starred A at KS5 will help to differentiate the most able, but will it be enough?
At the other end of the spectrum, a plethora of lower standard Level 2 and 3 courses mean that many can stay in education who previously would not have met the standards required, but do we have enough proof that it is doing young people any good? There are still worrying numbers of students at 16 for whom a C-grade at standard GCSE is unattainable. In order to get them the magic 5 or more A*-C, schools have to enter students for all kinds of alternative courses that have GCSE equivalence. Many students sit BTECs and other vocational qualifications which bump up the A*-C numbers, (apologies to Ken Boston from the QCA but I am not convinced by your about equivalence), and by extension we should expect more students to go on to further training and employment as a result of these additional qualifications. However, numbers of NEETs have not descreased as hoped but look like they are
It's pretty obvious that the current system is failing the students both at the top end and the bottom. There are also thousands of children in communities across the UK who through no fault of their own are educated in schools which are unsatisfactory in both maintained and independent schools (see Ofsted pointed out that:
"The gap between the performance of the best and the weakest schools is unacceptable."
I still feel strongly that the system we currently have needs big reform from a tough reformer. Could Conservative Michael Gove be the next man for the job? The Times calls him a "worthy antagonist for [Ed] Balls" and explains that:
"the opposition really does have a reforming agenda. It proposes to build on Tony Blair’s belated public service reform programme, especially his plans to provide more variety and excellence in state schools, of which the city academies are a shining example. Parents, charities and private companies will also be encouraged to set up their own schools under the state’s umbrella."
It sounds very grass roots and community-led: a massive shift away from the control-driven, initiative-loaded system we currently wrestle with. Could it just work, or will it be a swift leap from frying pan to fire?
“Parents, charities and private companies will also be encouraged to set up their own school”
I have a very different reading of this! You see grass-roots, community led, I see the potential for a whole bunch of people who have no right and no qualifications setting up their own school in a crazy dash for government back money. And if the audit tools for these will be A-Cs, then I see a recipe for exam factories and high exclusion rates.
We do need a shift away from the current system, but we need to rethink the place of schools in the education system. Not just turn them into the monsters than some academies seem to be becoming.
Jim Knight MP (Minister for Schools in England) commented via Twitter:
@mrslwalker great site. Schools work but more 2do at top & bottom. Gove not answer. More great teachers, personalisation, engaging parents
I asked Jim:
@jimknightmp Thanks very much for replying! What do you think schools should be doing for the top and bottom ends of the spectrum?
and he replied:
@mrslwalker top – exciting project-based, science clubs etc; bottom – catch up classes, 1-2-1 tuition, work related; 4 all freed up curric.
What education really needs are some philosophers and theories. For 30 years, maybe longer, education has been in the hands of what are called practical educators. That is where we get the absurd notion of preparation for work in a future world which none of us understand the realities of. It has also given us the dreadful pragmatics of literacy and numeracy strategies and phonic approaches to the teaching of reading. The National Curriculum makes assumptions about knowledge which are simply too painful to engage with. The examination system trundles on as if we have learned nothing about assessment. Jim Knight, who I think is a really good minister in many ways, is another tinkerer around the edges. Catch up classes and one-to-one tuition are simply rubbish if they are supporting learning your seven times tables by heart or demarcating sentences with full stops and capital letters!