NEWS FOCUS SecEd: On Your Side


Will we ever 'C' the league table light?


THE HYPOCRITICAL world of politicians and league tables once again illustrated itself this week as the Department for Education turned its sight on schools entering pupils early for GCSEs. I, of course, do not particularly agree with the practice


Pete


Henshaw Editor SecEd


of encouraging bright students to sit core GCSEs early – usually in year 10 – in order to “bank” a C grade and free up curriculum time for focus on other subjects. All the evidence shows that it can often lead to a student’s


disengagement with a subject and also that early sitters often do not retain any interest in the subject in question – indeed many do not go on to study these subjects in further or higher education. Of course, while around a third of these early entrants do


manage to get themselves a B or higher, this is much lower than the national average for examinations sat in year 11. Furthermore, a quarter of the early sitters who achieve


a C do not try again for a higher grade in year 11. Two per cent of those who get a D also give up. More basically, though, early entry is too close to the


conveyor belt idea of education for comfort. Much of our school system is set up around the premise of a factory, churning out products as soon as we believe they are at a certain standard (on the whole) in English, maths and science. It is, of course, our educators who try and turn this exam


factory system into something more meaningful for our young people. It is our educators who try to facilitate an actual education in the midst of the C grade benchmarks and narrow examination focus that is forced upon them by successive governments. But this is where our educators are often perverted by


our politicians. League tables pervert our schools. They turn brilliant educators and amazing schools into tick box Charlies, forced to dance to a tune because they know if they don’t, their school will face special measures, closure or academy conversion or they as teachers will face capability. Of course, this is true to a lesser or greater extent as you


head from school to school and depending on the bravery of school leadership, but the C benchmark I believe influences the working lives of teachers and schools too much and, as I have said before, dismisses the achievements of too many students. Now, the government has asked Ofsted to do something


about early entry to ensure that the negative impact of this practice is lessened. Mr Gove says, in his letter to Ofsted, that the trend of entering students early so they can bank a C is of particular concern in maths. He adds: “I believe that this speaks more generally of a


narrowed curriculum, focused not on sound subject teaching as a basis for successful progression, but on preparation to pass exams.” Rich talk from a politician, whose predecessors are the


reason that terrified teachers and schools find themselves teaching to said tests much more than they’d like or they would choose to if given proper professional freedoms to educate our children. League tables pervert our system – especially now Mr


Gove has EBacc-ed us – and force us to fit the vast array of children with wildly different talents who inhabit our schools into a one-size-fits-all model. If you want to stop early entry, Mr Gove, stop publishing


league tables and stop making the C grade so much more important than any other. Sorry to bang this drum again, but as it seems no-one is


listening, it’s worth repeating: League tables force schools to focus too much on getting students a grade C. If you stop publishing league tables schools will not be forced to teach to the test or to the C grade. Instead they will deliver the education that they as professionals know is right for each child and which will give that child the best chance of succeeding in examinations and, more crucially, in life. SecEd


• Pete Henshaw is the editor of SecEd. You can email him on editor@sec-ed.co.uk. For more opinion and the latest news and best practice, visit www.sec-ed.co.uk or follow us on Twitter @SecEd_Education.


6 Chain reaction


ACADEMY CHAINS need to become more “pro-active” in engaging with other schools if they are to become the main drivers of a successful education system. A report by the National College


for School Leadership (NCSL) has also emphasised the importance of the executive principal role in academy chains. The report, carried out by


educationalists including Dr John Dunford and policy analyst Robert Hill, focusing on 48 “sponsored chains” of three or more academies as well as 122 “converter chains”. It considers the growth of


academy chains in a bid to understand the implications and challenges for school leaders. However, the report concludes


that sponsored academies need to engage more with each other and the rest of the school system if they are to help drive-up standards across the board. The report states: “If sponsored


academy chains are to be one of the main drivers of a self-improving and self-sustaining school system, they will need to become more pro-active in their relations with other schools. “This will also be of benefit


to them: organisations that have a culture and philosophy of being closed and inward-looking find it that much harder in the long-term to renew themselves.” Ways in which this could be


A new report looks at the impact that academy chains have had across the education system. Daniel White takes a look


done include allowing middle and emerging leaders to have experience across the chain and outside the academies, as well as using teaching school status to expand involvement with other schools. A further recommendation includes chains opening up more of their CPD and leadership sessions to other schools. However, Russell Hobby,


general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said that collaboration is not exclusively for academies and that academy chains are not a “silver bullet” or “guaranteed success”. He told SecEd: “School chains


also present their own problems of diversity and fragmentation: potentially increasing the flow of information between schools in the chain while reducing the flow of information between chains. “Schools in chains may


experience less autonomy than maintained schools; and larger chains seeking cost-saving through standardised procedures could lessen local accountability and diversity. An education system


IN RESPONSE… Dear sir


I refer to your article and editorial regarding the levels of unpaid overtime that teaching and education professionals are working (Teachers top unpaid overtime list; Are you working 9.6 hours overtime? SecEd 310, March 1, 2012). Unfortunately, it is a shame


that you chose to focus only on the impact on teachers and disregarded the remainder of the education workforce. Over the last few years, there has been a significant shift towards reducing the burden of “pointless administrative or other tasks” (your phrase, not mine) placed upon teachers and this is to be


commended. The vast majority of the “pointless administrative or other tasks” still need to be done and it often falls to non- teaching educational professionals to do them. Bearing in mind that the


group is identified in the research as teaching and education professionals, it is not just teachers who are working unpaid overtime. Therefore, it is not just teachers


topping the unpaid overtime list, it is the whole of the teaching and education profession. It includes SEN/ALN specialists, HLTAs, cover supervisors, examinations officers, curriculum managers, bursars, school business managers, pastoral and behaviour support


staff and the vast array of other specialists within the non-teaching education profession that are now burdened with the “pointless administrative or other tasks” that enable teachers to focus on teaching. The editorial concludes that


“teachers work incredibly hard” and deserve “good wages” and “stronger than average pensions”. I agree. Unfortunately, the majority of non-teaching professionals are employed on term-time only contracts that not only affect rates of pay, but pension accrual too. Surely the rest of the education profession deserve equal treatment?


Ian Lloyd (via email)


Editor’s note We strive to ensure that SecEd stands up for all school staff. I take the point that my editorial and the news piece in the March 1 edition should have made mention, extensive mention, of the extra hours also worked by support staff. I would emphasise, however,


that the use of the term “pointless administrative tasks” is not in reference to the essential work done by all support staff, but a reference to the often pointless tasks that teachers – and support staff – can be lumbered with that distract them from their real, valuable work – endless meetings, for example, or needless paperwork or data requests.


that was simultaneously more fragmented and more uniform would be no improvement on the current arrangements.” Since the first academy chain


opened in September 2004 they have continued to grow rapidly and as of January 1 this year nearly 350 mainly sponsored academies were part of 48 chains consisting of three or more academies. Similarly, nearly 1,200 schools


have converted to academy status – around a quarter have done so as part of a chain (a multi- academy trust, an umbrella trust or a collaborative partnership). The report, says that between


2008/09 and 2010/11 the proportion of students gaining five A* to C grades at GCSE, including English and maths, increased by 15 per cent in chains of three or more academies. This compares with increases of 12.2 and 11 per cent for standalone academy schools and two-strong academy partnerships, respectively. However, the report warns that


chains must ensure their operating model is fit-for-purpose because “it


will need only one project to go wrong for a chain’s reputation to be damaged, potentially irreparably”. Elsewhere, the report found


that secondary federations with executive leadership outperform federations with one headteacher each leading one school. It also said that Ofsted inspectors should be given a mandate for inspections to involve executive principals and CEOs. Brian Lightman, general


secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “The evidence in this report highlights the pressing need for the role of executive principal to be considered by the School Teachers’ Review Body. These are relatively new roles which need to be properly defined, particularly to provide clarity about who holds the ultimate accountability for the performance of a school within the chain and where accountability for the performance of chain sits.” Mr Hill added: “Academy


chains are not a panacea for all the problems of schools. Being part of a chain does not necessarily guarantee success or insure against failure. Sponsored chains have challenges to address as they expand. They need to reflect on what it means to be a chain and be clear about their teaching and learning and operating model.” To read the report, visit www.nationalcollege.org.uk


www.sec-ed.com


SecEd • March 15 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