NEWS FOCUS SecEd: On Your Side


No surprise as DfE cherry-picks figures Pete


IT CERTAINLY comes as no surprise that the government’s claims of England as a nation plummeting down international league tables when it comes to educational outcomes “cannot be justified”. The finding – from a study by the Institute of Education


Henshaw Editor SecEd


(IoE) – blows out of the water much of the rhetoric that education ministers have used to justify many of the coalition’s policies. The IoE says that an analysis of English pupils’ scores


in international maths tests conducted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development over the past 12 years reveals “no hard evidence of any decline in comparative performance over time”. Dr John Jerrim, who conducted the analysis, believes that our changing position in international performance tables “neither supports nor refutes policy-makers’ calls for reform”. He says that while the PISA tables (Programme for


International Student Assessment) shows a nation slipping (from 8th to 27th in maths between 2000 and 2009), another major study – TIMSS (Trends in International Maths and Science Study) – reports that the maths performance of our 13 and 14-year-olds rose in comparison with other nations between 1999 and 2007. This is fascinating. I for one do not recall hearing


ministers quote statistics from TIMSS. It almost makes you believe that the Department for Education is cherry-picking statistics to back up its policies of choice and ignoring anything that seems to contradict their wisdom. As an example, Michael Gove told the House of


Commons earlier this year: “The PISA figures show that the standard of education offered to young people in this country declined relative to our international competitors. Literacy, down; numeracy, down; science, down.” Fundamentally, Dr Jerrim says that the wildly differing


results from the two international league tables quoted above are a result of many factors, including changing samples of pupils, earlier test dates in the two most recent PISA tests (meaning students in the previous tests had around five months more learning under their belts), and the fact that more countries are now taking part in PISA (43 in 2000 to 65 in 2009 – the thinking being that it is easier to 10th out of 43 than 10th out of 65). While this study only focuses on maths comparisons,


it proves to me the truth of two things which I have long believed – league tables are not worth the paper they are written on and international comparisons are irrelevant. The Department for Education’s obsession with


comparing the performance of England’s schools both nationally and then as a whole with our international friends is fundamentally flawed. Statistics can be spun in many different ways and we all know how much damage our national league tables have done by driving schools to focus on certain students and certain subjects. But when we move to international comparisons, it


gets a whole lot worse. Can we really give any credit to an education minister who stands up in the House of Commons and complains that our educational outcomes are nothing like South Korea, or Finland, or Singapore. You cannot sensibly compare England, or the UK for


that matter, with many of the PISA countries. It’s not a case of a lack of aspiration, it’s not dismissing the talents or skills of our schools and educators – on the contrary, it’s acknowledging that the challenges that we face as a nation are vastly different to those faced by Singapore or Finland. You cannot begin to compare our education system with


these countries. We have different populations, cultures, ethos, density, heritage – you name it. Mr Gove looks at PISA and seems to think that teachers


in England simply aren’t trying hard enough. But I promise you Mr Gove, you could take a teacher from South Korea or Finland and ask them to manage class in Birmingham or Manchester and they would sink without trace. However, send a teacher from England the other way and they would fly. SecEd


• 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


Talent 2030


TALENT 2030 is a new national campaign to encourage more young people to pursue future careers in engineering and manufacturing. As tuition fees treble, and youth


unemployment soars, it is vital that we take a long hard look at how we can inform young people to make the choices that are right for them. While 2030 may seem some


way off, put into the context that the university starters for 2030 are being born this year, and those likely to hire and train the graduates for then are currently in our universities, it is important we start putting plans in place. The launch of this major


campaign follows the publication of the Council for Industry and Higher Education’s report, Great Expectations, which sets out a series of recommendations for schools, colleges, universities, employers and government in order to help the UK realise its potential in the face of growing international competition. These recommendations focus


on the need to ensure more young people, particularly girls, are encouraged to study mathematics and physics at A level and then engineering at university. If the UK is to remain


internationally competitive, then a particular focus on bringing out the talent of girls currently in schools is vital. As a country, we are currently


The new Talent 2030 campaign is looking to inspire young people – especially girls – to consider careers in engineering


and manufacturing. Aaron Porter is heading up the initiative and explains more


failing to tap into the talent of half the population. Only nine per cent of the


UK’s engineers are women. This compares unfavourably to a number of other European countries including Sweden and Bulgaria which are hitting 30 per cent. Although more women than men are now going to university in the UK, and their attainment is higher, this is not reflected in our manufacturing and engineering industries. While there are many talented


girls in schools with the ability to study engineering at university, three critical messages are not coming across strongly enough. Talent 2030 sets out to play up


the role that engineering has in the solutions for green technology and sustainability for the future, the earnings potential which engineers have (second only to medics), and to flag up more female role models who have been successful in industry.


IN RESPONSE… Dear sir,


Apparently, most heads are over 55 and the rest are not far behind. Now that I am in my early 50s I am beginning to think of retirement because I am getting tired. Headship is a young person’s game and I am tired of trying to fix Broken Britain, tired of government ideas that make no sense, and tired of trying to do a first class job without the tools to do it properly. I have been a head for over


15 years and during that time I have watched the social fabric of society slowly disintegrate. It is the children that bear the brunt. In my school alone, I have seen more children than ever before placed into care, three have made more than one serious suicide attempt, and one is currently sectioned because society needs to be protected from her. Two others are due in court soon in relation to the riots,


several are self-harming and some have been overcome by drug addiction and have dropped out. I do what I can; I attend Team


Around the Child meetings, push for psychological assessments and intervention by children’s services, but with the council cutting jobs in the area I fear it won’t be long until young people don’t get the support they need and start dying in tragic circumstances. A head I once worked for


coined the phrase “practised fearlessness”, by which he meant the more often you do something dangerous the easier it gets. Over the years, the government of the day has introduced some whacky ideas which I have refused to engage with. I am currently “not doing” the English Baccalaureate because it would condemn most of our students to failure and would mean they left school without any relevant qualifications. I can’t understand why the


government insists on coming up


with whacky ideas for education, rather than asking the people they employ to deliver the service what we would do. The last thing I need right now is a free school, a university technical college, or a specialist maths school on my doorstep when there are 2,000 surplus secondary places across my area. Where does Michael Gove


think the teachers are going to come from to work in these specialist maths schools? They are going to come from existing schools which will, in turn, have a detrimental effect on schools’ results. Specialist maths schools will get good results at the expense of all other schools; how does this help the government to improve the education system? Yet again, someone hasn’t thought this through. As if it weren’t hard enough already to meet the constantly rising floor targets, this latest initiative will effectively tie one hand behind our backs.


For all 30 years of my career I


have regularly worked 60 hours a week without a second thought. I have put the needs of the children in my school before those of myself and my family because, naïvely I thought teaching was a profession and that I could “make a difference”. But not anymore. Why should


I work myself into an early grave for this government? I have never felt so in conflict with a government as this one and so out of tune with their ideas and philosophy. The government would do


well to keep its hand off my pension and let me retire when I need to. By making me work until I am 68 it will be shooting itself in the foot because I will just get older, less able to cope with the physical demands of headship, and more cynical and subversive as every day goes by.


Name and school supplied Indeed, we are delighted that


Jane Wernick, the engineer who helped to design the London Eye, is a passionate supporter of our campaign. We are keen to dispel the


myths surrounding engineering and manufacturing. Careers in these industries can be very creative and those working within them get to make things which can benefit and change the world around them. The Talent 2030 website brings


together a whole host of resources for teens, parents, teachers, universities and employers aimed at informing and encouraging young people to consider why and how to pursue a career in engineering and manufacturing. For universities and employers,


there is an opportunity to showcase what you are doing to encourage young people to consider future careers in your departments or industries.


We also have a school outreach


project set up with the University of Warwick and the National Higher Education STEM programme which will see representatives from industry and academic speaking directly to pupils in schools, as well as organising visits for pupils to go onto university campuses and into industry. As with all projects of this


nature, we are seeking funding from organisations who share our ambition to see the pipeline of talent into manufacturing and engineering grow over the coming years, to ensure the brightest and the best British students are supported as best they can be. If you would be interested


in sponsoring our website, or supporting the schools outreach activity, please feel free to contact us directly.


SecEd


• Aaron Porter is director of Talent 2030. He was formerly president of the National Union of Students (2010/11).


Further information


If you would like to find out more about Talent 2030, visit www.talent2030.org or follow the campaign on Twitter (@Talent_2030) or Facebook. If you would like to get in


touch with Aaron Porter directly, you can contact him by emailing aaron.porter@talent2030.org


6


SecEd • January 5 2012


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