Goodbye Mr Chips, Hello Mr Squeers.

One of my largest gripes with the current government’s handling of primary education was the snatching away of (then) current frameworks and curriculum guidance with no replacement in sight for years. I know, I know! As a Head Teacher I could have quite easily mapped out a whole school framework for English & Maths based on a set of principles laid down in the renewed (old) framework for Literacy & Maths.  However that would mean messing around Google looking for the archive files, Gove’s online lair for banned practical and useful resources, like Indiana Jones’s less brave nephew.

But it wasn’t just the new (old) Literacy & Maths framework that had gone: the whole ruddy renewed (old) national curriculum had gone! The good one, which Rose had contributed to – that was almost but not totally the same as the current (old, old) national curriculum but with a bit more skills and the long sentences split into smaller ones. I know, I know! I could have bought into a corporate curriculum that ‘guaranteed’ to be in line with current government legislation and also ‘promised’ to be fun. (You could tell it was fun because one of the topics was called ‘Chocolate’. )

No it was far easier for me to sit back and wait for the new National Curriculum. And wait I did.  After a lot of waiting I could only think that this new curriculum was going to be amazing! I mean they were not doing a rushed job; they were really taking their time. And I waited, and waited and carried on waiting, even when the rumours starting flying around that it was just going to be about knowledge and content. ‘No!’ I said, standing on my chair batting older, more grumpy heads on the nose with a rolled up copy of Gove’s Bible, ‘Our Government are not taking this long to craft a national curriculum based on lists of stuff children should know and they are definitely not taking this long because they’ve nicked it from an American approach to education and they have to go through all 6000 pages changing ‘Math’ to ‘Maths’.  

So I carried on waiting until the day finally came and the proposed national curriculum arrived. I missed it actually, but luckily quite a few people were tweeting it about so I got me a copy. It’s getting a bit of flak but I think there are some good bits in it. Most commentators however are tooling up and blog-bashing Gove over the wider curriculum elements and History in particular is getting firmly happy-slapped.

Granted, it does appear to be rather long lists of historical facts that are to be learnt and this does beg the question did Mr Gove get his ideas on effective education from Mr Squeers in Nicholas Nickleby? ‘When the boy knows this out of book, he goes and does it. That’s our system.’ But, I personally don’t mind the scope of historical study outlined in the document but then again, I like history. Actually, I’ll rephrase that: I like knowing about stuff that happened in the past.

My biggest problem (about me not the curriculum) is that while I enjoy each episode of ‘Simon Schama’s A History of Britain’ I cannot retain a single sustained fact about any of Schama’s lessons six weeks afterwards. My biggest problem (about the curriculum, not me) is that it is in danger of producing a system of education that will not enable any child to retain a single sustained fact about any teacher’s lesson six weeks afterwards.

Effective education…really effective education, in my mind, is about: acquiring knowledge through the application of skills.  Just giving away knowledge isn’t good enough. The joy of primary school education is teaching children facts by equipping them with skills and this can only be done through a broad and balanced curriculum that allows teachers to combine subject skills to create well-crafted topics. Topics that inspire, allow children to think critically about the information they receive and allow them to actively engage in finding out about the world around them. Only then will you get passionate learners who are then ready to consume knowledge at a more advanced level. As much as Gove wants, children are not going to leave Key Stage 2 with a complete knowledge (let alone understanding) of the British Isles based upon his mighty list alone.

I am sure that Gove is not expecting teachers to just churn out facts and get children to memorise Kings and Queens but his draft history curriculum does seems disproportionately weighted towards understanding historical events through knowing FACTS. The fact that you can get children to learn about historical events, personalities, bias, politics, and culture through, say, art seems to be lost.

This, as I see it is the biggest disappointment of the national curriculum: it’s just a list that he want children to know. At least the old (old, old) national curriculum had the dignity to suggest some interesting schemes of work that linked with other subjects. (Yes, I know they got a bit over-subscribed to but they were a start) Gove apparently has neither the time nor the inclination to attempt something as complex as joined up thinking across the subjects. The idea that some subject’s skills lend themselves well to learning about other subject’s content is less important it seems than promoting selfish, single minded subjects.  The idea that education is about developing true intelligence and nurturing talent is less important than being able to test an individual’s penchant for fact regurgitation at the end of each year.

This expectation for mass content knowledge coupled with a lack of thought on curriculum skills may, I fear, mean that topics as I know and love them will disappear. Lessons will be dis-jointed. Children will learn isolated facts. The concept of cross-referencing skills over a series of subjects linked by one over-arching topic will be lost. Pupils will be judged on memory. Our nation will become a nation of pub quiz bores. Sadly the battle between producing ‘historians’ or ‘Statisticians’ will have been won and the interested, well-rounded and skilled citizens of the future will lie dead, underneath a car park full of cars parked by knowledgeable but ultimately useless eggheads.  

Term 2 data…why do I put myself through it?

What better way to start Term 3 than settling down to examine your school’s data. Now, every year I ask myself the same question…why is end of term 2 data always so bad?

APS scores showing advancement of approximately 0.1 points, children who ended the year as a 3A writer now sitting in the 2B column, being unable to see a cohort on one page as there are now too many names crowding around the ‘in danger of not meeting age expected outcomes’ section.

To address my own issues I have these musings..

1. Having age expected outcomes is a massive pain in the tracker as every teacher now knows where their class should be at the end of the year. When children arrive in September already there this causes concern…they’re not meant to be there so as logic dictates they will sit there until enough time has passed under the watchful eye of the teacher to justify moving up regardless of the actual progress seen when  flicking through the books.

Now that is isn’t very current teacher friendly so….

2. Last year’s teacher might call that a 2A but in my class you’ve got to do a little bit more, after all you are in year 3 now. A year 3 2A is different to a y2 SATS  2A. No, you will sit at a 2A until you are a proper 2A. Which as luck will probably have it will be after a year with me.

Wow, that’s not very current teacher or last year’s teacher friendly….hmmmm what about…

3. Teachers worry! If these children are already where they should be and I let them continue to make progress and up attaining highly next year’s teacher will kill me!

Now I’m having a go at next year’s teacher. How about…

4. We don’t really want to show great progress straight away that won’t be sustainable, how about we show things down a bit and they can make up the progress later on.

This is getting me nowhere. Instead I think I should just clarify a few points

1. Kids don’t go backwards over the summer.
2. If last year your class made poor progress in autumn but made it up during spring and summer how about agreeing that whatever yout do in terms 5 and 6 that allows for outstanding progress you do that in terms 1 and 2 as well.
3. Don’t wait until Christmas to tell someone that progress isn’t happening…if you’re worried do something differently or ask for help.

So far so teacher beating. It’s not all their fault it’s the system… so ideologies and the system needds to change.

In terms of next year I think I will change when we collect data…
Term 1 (to get the lack of progress out of the system)
Term 2 / 3 (As and when progress put into the tracker over term 2 and 3.)
Term 4 (That way we can judge the effectiveness of  what you put in place to support poor progress and attainment in the previous terms)
Term 6.

Transition periods between year groups should be longer (maybe half of term 6 should be spent in new classes with new teachers) and most importantly of all collaboration with teachers at the end of the year to agree levels going through to the next academic year.

Will this have any impact? Check out my January 2014 blog to find out!