NEWS FOCUS SecEd: On Your Side


What is the purpose of education?


As seced comes to the end of its eighth year of publishing, a battle is being fought over the purpose of our education system and what it is that we should be teaching our children. The conservatives seem hell-


Pete


Henshaw Editor SecEd


bent on pursuing an ideological routing of our curriculum. I find it absolutely unfathomable that our education system is set to take such a leap backwards. We will soon find ourselves faced with a knowledge-based


curriculum and with a secretary of state who thinks that english and maths (and perhaps Latin) is all that matters and that education should be based on regurgitation of facts. Believe me, I understand the importance of knowledge


and facts, as I understand the need for a focus on english and maths (especially grammar), but these are only a few of the pieces of the jigsaw. This government has made it painfully clear that it believes academic education to be the only aspiration worth having. It has forced schools to focus on the academic to the detriment of all other subjects and its curriculum review is set to make things worse. education minister, Michael Gove, has accused people


who argue as I do of misunderstanding. He says the national curriculum will be a slimmed down guide, something that teachers can then build on. Fine in theory, but when you look at how Mr Gove is measuring schools, you realise that this won’t happen. Teachers simply will not feel confident that they have the freedom to teach how they want to – teach what you like, the government says, as long as it’s what we measure. The english Baccalaureate will destroy the life chances of


some pupils – this is a fact. evidence is already strong that schools are coercing pupils into taking geography or history or a language instead of other subjects, and resources for non- eBacc subjects are being decimated and provision reduced. And the eBacc is only the start – the new 50 per cent floor target will also ensure that from years 7 to 11 pupils are drilled constantly and solely in maths and english. Mr Gove talks of singapore as a comparison, citing its


excellent performance in english and maths. What he fails to mention is that singapore moved away from a knowledge- based curriculum years ago and focuses now on competencies which cross subject boundaries. Mr Gove also talks about Oxbridge as the pinnacle of


education. It is for some, but certainly not for the majority. No, the pinnacle of education is when a student finds the skills and talents that most motivate and inspire them and discovers a pathway through school and beyond which will help them to best develop those talents and turn them into a life. To this end, art is as valid as english, dance as important as maths, media studies as crucial as science. It seems to be taboo to suggest that getting a child a c in


maths and english is not the most important aim of education, but I feel passionately that it isn’t. I have always said that we should strive to support every child to achieve as much as they can when studying maths and english. But with equal vigour, we should recognise that a diversity of talent is what the world is built upon and that this needs to be reflected in our education system. Furthermore, industry is crying out for skills (the kind they


are teaching in singapore) and we must recognise this too. The modern world demands skills in its inhabitants. Our education system – created for the industrial revolution – still holds english and maths above all others. We still do not consider it important to give our young people 21st century skills and the ability to apply those skills to any context. Think about project management, a skill that is crucial to


the economic success of many thousands of businesses, or creativity – the modern workplace is built around innovation and the ability to come up with creative solutions. I could go on: risk-taking, resilience, team-working, leadership – these are the new core subjects of the 21st century. Real education is about nurturing talent, inspiring


young people, and fostering the skills that they need to live independently in the modern world. It’s not about telling them that they should take geography instead of dance because the government says so. We must win the fight for the purpose of our education system – for the sake of our children and their future prosperity and happiness.


• Pete Henshaw is publisher and editor of seced. Email editor@sec-ed.co.uk or visit www.sec-ed.co.uk. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/SecEd_Education


www.sec-ed.com Education clashes


THe depARTMeNT for education (dfe) this week clashed with Mps over a number of issues related to the schools inspectorate and the behaviour of students. In publishing its response to two


reports from Mps on the education select committee, the government looks set to ignore a number of recommendations. In a report on the role of Ofsted


in April, the Mps said that the inspectorate should be divided into two organisations – an Inspectorate for education to focus on schools and nurseries and an Inspectorate for children’s care that would focus on things like children’s homes and adoption services. However the government has


categorically refused the idea, say- ing that it would be too expensive, cause too much disruption, and would divert attention from more “critical tasks”. The government’s formal


response said: “We do not agree with the select committee that the concerns they have highlighted sup- port the argument for splitting the current inspectorate. We agree with the witnesses who have observed that structural change is less impor- tant than quality of personnel and inspection methods. structural change is costly, in terms of time, as well as money, and disruptive. “prioritising it would divert


attention and resources from the more critical and urgent task of pursuing and securing the inspec- tion reforms we consider to be vital. We are not convinced that making structural changes would address directly the improvements to the leadership and quality of inspec- tions that the select committee has rightly identified.” In its own response to the report,


Ofsted said a single inspectorate is beneficial because it can provide a joined-up view in different areas of education locally and nationally. The government also clashed


with the select committee over another recent report, this time into behaviour and discipline. Mps had raised concerns that the dfe’s data currently “does not


Earlier this year, the Education Select Committee released two reports into student behaviour and the role of Ofsted. This


week the government responded to them both. Daniel White reports


fully represent” the nature of behav- iour in schools, good or bad, includ- ing the impact of behaviour on staff, pupils and parents. The report, published in


February, urged the dfe to col- lect data on all serious incidents in schools, not just permanent and temporary exclusions. This should be complemented by a survey of teachers, pupils, parents and carers, Mps said. However, the government


response said: “(We know) that the majority of pupils are well behaved and serious incidents of violence in schools are rare. We already collect detailed statistics on permanent and fixed period exclusions; collecting new data would put inappropri- ate extra burdens on teachers and schools.


IN RESPONSE…


Education secretary Michael Gove last week said that within a decade the “vast majority” of students should be taught maths until the age of 18. In a speech at the Royal


Society in London, he also spoke of the importance of mathematics for future employment. Mr Gove quoted recent


research from the Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education as he raised concerns about the fact that many students are forgetting maths skills learned at GCSE because they do not continue to study the subject post-16. The national curriculum


review is still ongoing and although Mr Gove said he did not want to “prejudge” it, he said that more students should be learning topics such as algebra and calculus earlier.


SecEd


Michael Gove: “In its present form, Gcse maths does not enable children to understand conditional probability, normal distributions or randomness. should this be something we should look to change? And on a more fundamental level, it’s clear that not enough


young people secure a basic level of competence in maths. every year, about half of our pupils leave school without even a ‘c’ in maths Gcse. But it’s not just those pupils who give us cause for concern. We still send powerful signals throughout our education system that it’s somehow acceptable to give up on maths. critically, we allow students to


abandon any mathematical study after 16, in stark contrast to other developed nations. The ‘maths gap’ that most pupils now experience after the age of 16 means that even those who did well at Gcse have forgotten much of the maths they learnt by the time they start their degree or a job. I think we should set a new goal for the education system so that within a decade the vast majority of pupils are studying maths right through to the age of 18. We’ll improve the supply of


teachers with specialist subject knowledge in chemistry, physics and maths through ‘conversion’ courses that enable graduates of related disciplines to acquire the specialist subject knowledge necessary to train and serve as teachers in these subjects.”


Dame Julia Higgins, chair of the Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education:


“We were delighted to hear Mr Gove recognise the importance of maths in education, both at primary and more advanced levels. Further study of mathematics would ensure students, and those entering the world of employment, are better equipped to manage the challenges they will face. We wholeheartedly agree with


the education secretary that the vast majority of pupils in the UK should be studying maths right through to the age of 18 – to make this happen we need to develop a range of different post-16 courses to allow everyone to study the mathematics that they need to progress.”


Katja Hall, chief policy director, Confederation of British Industry: “Good numeracy skills are essential in today’s labour market so it’s reassuring that the government has listened to our call to get more young people studying maths beyond the age of 16. It’s really important to get the majority of people, regardless of ability, to continue developing their maths skills beyond Gcses, so we welcome Mr Gove’s goal to make this a reality. There is currently a gap


between the standard of maths


achieved by many school leavers and the skills that employers require. closing this ‘maths gap’ will


give UK businesses access to the skills they need to stay ahead of global competitors and drive private sector growth.”


Dame Athene Donald, chair of the Royal Society Education Committee: “We need to place science and innovation at the heart of the UK’s long-term strategy for economic growth if we are to remain competitive, and at the apex of this must be inspiring the next generation of scientists, mathematicians and engineers. The education secretary’s


recognition that more students should be studying maths and for longer is particularly welcome, both for maths as an intellectual and applied subject and for the role it plays in all disciplines of modern science. The Royal society’s most


recent State of the Nation report identified a significant shortage in the numbers of students studying mathematics past Gcse, given the needs of higher education and the economy, and advocates that all students should study some form of mathematics to 18.”


“As part of their inspections,


Ofsted makes judgements on how a school deals with bad behaviour and under the new streamlined school inspection system which will be trialled this summer, behaviour and safety will be one of the four core areas that they will examine. This stronger focus on core areas will enable Ofsted inspectors to hold schools to account more effectively for their pupils’ behaviour.” On exclusions, Mps on the


select committee said that schools should not be able to “abdicate all responsibility for disruptive chil- dren”. They also said that govern- ing bodies need to have the “right knowledge and expertise” to make fair judgements and supported the retention of the Independent Appeal panels (IAp) for exclusions.


However, the government reaf-


firmed its view that IAps should be abolished because they can “seri- ously undermine a headteacher’s authority”. The government statement said:


“The possible reinstatement of an excluded pupil, however rarely this happens, can seriously undermine a headteacher’s authority. This may then create a deterrent to other headteachers which could stop them from excluding a child when it is right and necessary to do so. “That is why we have included


in the education Bill a clause that will abolish Independent Appeal panels and replace them with review panels. These review panels will not be able to require a school to reinstate a pupil, but will be able to direct the governing body to reconsider a case.” Theeducationselectcommittee


is a cross-party group chaired by conservative Mp Graham stuart that scrutinises government policy. The committee reports to the gov- ernment with its recommendations and recent inquiries have included the lessons learned from Jamie’s Dream School and the impact of the english Baccalaureate.


SecEd


• For the full reports and responses, visit www.publications.parliament.uk


6


SecEd • July 7 2011


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16