• Ministers in London move to address concerns about how GCSE and A-Level results have been awarded.
• The move is in response to the u-turn announced in Scotland, that unfairly reduced results for pupils from more disadvantaged backgrounds.
• Now, for students in England, pupils can apply to have their mock exam grade awarded, or attend an autumn exam.
• Minister says: This triple lock system will help provide reassurance to students and ensure they are able to progress with the next stage of their lives.
• Worries will still evident for students and their parents about attending the next stage of their education based on the initial results.

Following the u-turn and outcry over exam results in Scotland, UK Ministers have announced an extraordinary move to prevent criticism on how GCSE and A-Level scores in England have been awarded.

Under an urgent revision, the UK government has now announced that students could receive the higher result out of their calculated grade, valid mock grade, or autumn exam grade to ‘bolster fairness’.

Ofqual has been asked to determine how and when valid mock results can be used to calculate grades.

All outcomes will hold the same value for universities, colleges and employers, building on the significant number of students who will still progress as a result of their calculated grades. Similar arrangements will apply to vocational and technical qualifications.

The move comes as the Government also announces an extensive support package for all schools, colleges and further education providers to run a full exam series in the autumn.

Reacting to pressure from his cabinet colleagues, Education Secretary Gavin Williamson said:

Every young person waiting for their results wants to know they have been treated fairly. By ensuring students have the safety net of their mock results, as well as the chance of sitting autumn exams, we are creating a triple lock process to ensure confidence and fairness in the system.

No one wanted to cancel exams – they are the best form of assessment, but the disruption caused by Covid-19 meant they were not possible.

This triple lock system will help provide reassurance to students and ensure they are able to progress with the next stage of their lives.

The move might quell immediate initial concerns, but worries will still be evident for students and their parents about attending the next stage of their education. It is hoped that colleges and universities will show some grade flexibility in the offers that were made before the COVID-19 pandemic.

Any appeals for awarding different grades must be made by schools directly.

The Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment (CCEA) in Northern Ireland said it would ensure that GCSE, A and AS level standards were maintained. Schools can use mock exam results and some completed units of GCSEs in appeals if they felt a pupil had been given the wrong grade.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

• New guidance issued for England schools supporting the teaching of relationships, sex and health curriculum.
• All pupils should receive teaching on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) relationships during their school years.
• Secondary schools should include LGBT content in their teaching.
• Primary schools are strongly encouraged, and enabled, when teaching about different types of family, to include families with same-sex parents.
• The guidance includes support on building a school policy, required for inspection purposes.

New statutory guidance issued by the Department for Education this week has outlined updated requirements for the teaching of a relationship, sex and health curriculum for schools in England.

Schools will be required to teach:

• relationships education (all primary aged pupils)
• relationships and sex education (RSE) (all secondary aged pupils)
• health education (all pupils in state-funded schools only)

Once inspections return, Ofsted will evaluate the provision for relationships education, relationships and sex education and health education in line with Ofsted’s school inspection handbook and in the context of the updated guidance.

Independent schools are required to teach personal, social, health and economic (PHSE) education.

Sex education at primary school is not compulsory but can be taught if a school decides that it is appropriate to do so.

All pupils should receive teaching on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) relationships during their school years. Secondary schools should include LGBT content in their teaching. Primary schools are strongly encouraged, and enabled, when teaching about different types of family, to include families with same-sex parents.

The guidance includes information to create an inclusive classroom, taking into account, “what it is like for a diverse range of pupils to be taught about these topics and how individual pupils may relate to particular topics, including complex and sensitive subjects that might personally affect them.”

For primary schools, the guidance advises,

Primary schools are not required to teach sex education but must teach relationships education and have regard to the statutory guidance in full.

DFE, 2020

Schools are also required to produce School Policies covering what is being taught, with consideration to safeguarding, the curriculum and dealing with sensitive issues.

For more information and to read through the guidance, visit the UK government website by clicking here.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

The wellbeing and mental health of teachers in England is similar to those in other professions and teachers are less likely to report feelings of ‘low self-worth’, according to new research from academics at the UCL Institute of Education.

uch a large number of teachers to other professional groups, found that teachers had similar levels of anxiety, unhappiness and life satisfaction to other professional groups.

Overall, the study found that 22% of secondary and 20% of primary teachers were unhappy, compared to figures of 21% and 23% for demographically similar individuals working in other professional jobs. Relatively few primary (5%) and secondary (7%) teachers had low levels of self-worth, compared to around 11% for other professional workers.

The situation was even brighter for headteachers, who were found to be happier, have higher levels of life-satisfaction and were more likely to feel that their life is worthwhile than other occupational groups.

Co-author of the study, Professor John Jerrim (UCL Social Research Institute) added: “A myth seems to have emerged that teachers have worse mental health and lower levels of wellbeing than other groups. Our study provides clear, comprehensive evidence that this simply isn’t true. On the whole, teachers have similar levels of wellbeing to other professional employees.”

Co-author, Dr. Sam Sims (UCL Centre of Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities) added: “We should be encouraging graduates into the teaching profession, and not lead them to believe becoming a teacher is bad for your mental health. Like all jobs, teaching has its challenges—but not the excessively bad picture we sometimes hear about.”

Of the other professional groups included in the study, authors and writers, graphic designers, journalists and solicitors were found to be amongst the most anxious and with the lowest levels of reported self-worth.

On the other hand, accountants, IT professionals and Human Resources (HR) workers were amongst the happiest, least anxious and with high levels of life satisfaction.

The researchers note that the data they used in the analysis was collected before the COVID-19 pandemic hit the UK. It is not yet known at a detailed level how this has affected the wellbeing of different occupational groups.

Cheryl Lloyd, Education Programme Head at the Nuffield Foundation said: “By helping us to better understand the well-being and mental health of teachers compared to other professions over the past decade, this research can inform how we talk about teaching as a career path. However, it remains important to identify the causes of work-related anxiety and to offer mental health support to existing and new school leaders and teachers. Indeed, as previous research from this project has shown, anxiety has increased amongst headteachers since lockdown.”

Researchers based their analysis upon data gathered from 11 large-scale surveys collected over the last decade. Within these surveys, teachers and other professionals were asked questions about their wellbeing and mental health. This included subjective measures, as well as some surveys about the prescription of anti-depressant medication. The study authors analysed this large amount of data to provide the largest and most comprehensive assessment of how the mental health and wellbeing of teachers compare to other professional groups to date.

More information: John Jerrim et al. How does the mental health and wellbeing of teachers compare to other professions? Evidence from eleven survey datasets, Review of Education (2020). DOI: 10.1002/rev3.3228

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

Amid the Coronavirus pandemic with schools and colleges closing their doors in many societies, the education inspectorate of England has shared – what they think – is some useful advice for leaders and teachers, aimed at helping them develop their remote education offer.

Within the guidance, myths and explanations are shared about what remote learning is, along with seven factors that educators need to consider:

1. Remote education is a way of delivering the curriculum
2. Keep it simple
3. When adapting the curriculum, focus on the basics
4. Feedback, retrieval practice and assessment are more important than ever
5. The medium matters (a bit)
6. Live lessons aren’t always best
7. Engagement matters, but is only the start

Further explanations, guidance and resources are also offered, along with setting out that the remote education curriculum should be aligned to the classroom curriculum as much as possible, and carefully sequenced to ensure pupils obtain the building blocks they need to move on to the next step. It suggests that whether learning is delivered through worksheets, textbooks, or via an online platform, it is a good idea to keep resources simple and straightforward to use.

Within England, from 18 January, Ofsted will resume monitoring inspections of schools judged to be inadequate at their previous inspection, as well as some schools graded ‘requires improvement’. Monitoring inspections look at the progress a school is making and encourage improvement. Unlike full inspections, they will not result in a grade.

Inspectors will look at how well schools are educating pupils in the current circumstances – which for most pupils means being educated remotely. Unlike during the first lockdown last year, the government has set a clear expectation that schools must provide remote education, so pupils can continue to learn away from the classroom.

Inspections will be carried out in line with the operational note published in December. A new framework for inspecting remote education is not required, as inspectors will be looking at it as part of the overall quality of education.

Inspectors will consider the school’s remote learning provision, to give reassurance to parents. They will also consider any complaints made by parents about remote education, to help resolve issues and make sure children are being well-served. If parents feel their child’s school is not providing suitable remote education, they should first raise their concerns with the teacher or headteacher. If issues are not resolved, they can report the matter to Ofsted.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

A fear of poor SATs results is driving headteachers to separate pupils by ability despite the impact on children’s self-esteem and confidence, according to a study by researchers from UCL published in the peer-reviewed British Journal of Sociology of Education.

The findings, based on a survey of nearly 300 principals of primary schools in England, provide new evidence of a high-stakes culture around testing where some pupils are prioritised above others and physically segregated from them. 

More than a third (35%) of headteachers said SATs were the reason for grouping children into different ability sets for English, and just under half (47%) for maths, according to the results which also include in-depth interviews with school principals. 

Other practices adopted by schools include targeting resources at pupils on the borderline of passing SATs at the expense of ‘hopeless’ cases. The most significant finding was the growth of ‘intervention’ sessions where children are removed from normal lessons or playtime to plug gaps in their learning and be ‘fixed’ academically. 

The authors warn that these approaches are part of a ‘potentially damaging’ system where some children are made to feel inferior and which raises questions about how groupings ‘might exacerbate inequalities’. 

A debate is needed, they say, about the consequences for primary school children of high-pressured learning assessments, and also for staffing and resources.

“These forms of disciplinary power are encouraged by the disciplinary function of SATs themselves,” says Dr Alice Bradbury from UCL Institute of Education.

“They place pressure on headteachers to prioritise results over the broader purposes of education.

“The SATs are in themselves a practice of division, designating children as at age related expectation (ARE) or not. This binary between success and failure, passing or failing, is a brutal division of children at age 11. 

“Early evidence from teachers suggests that there is a strong desire for change following the (Covid) crisis, including the removal of testing.”

Standard Assessment Tests (SATs) are used to assess a child’s educational progress and form the basis of school league tables. The most significant (Key Stage 2) take place in May of the final year of primary education (year 6). For this type of testing, the focus of recent research has been largely international, not on how schools in England are affected or on headteachers’ views.

This study involved an online survey from March to June 2019 of 288 heads about the impact of SATs in general and on issues such as staffing and extracurricular sessions. Comprehensive interviews were also conducted with 20 headteachers at a range of schools across England. 

Education leaders at faith schools, academies and community primary schools were among those who took part, with ‘good’ the most common Ofsted rating. 

The research focused on the impact on teachers and children from assessment policies which put pressure on schools. 

The findings showed evidence of three approaches towards separating children in relation to SATs. The first was dividing by ability into sets, despite what the authors say is ‘increasing evidence of the disadvantages’. In some schools, pupils physically moved from their normal class to different rooms/teachers, and some were even streamed permanently.

Several heads expressed concern about putting children in sets and some rejected the practice. One headteacher commented that ‘pupils get into a psyche of failure because they’ve always been in the bottom set’. 

Another approach which was commonplace involved ‘booster’ sessions – singling out children on the cusp of achieving a benchmark SAT grade. These are a feature of educational ‘triage’ where students are sorted into who will fail, pass with help, or succeed without extra support.

The authors also identified a new variant of this triage system which they say has been triggered by the ‘increasing complexity of school league tables’. These involved pupils on the borderline of reaching ‘greater depth’ (above the expected level for year 6) who are given special support, for example, before school and during holidays. 

The final practice was what the authors call ‘intervention culture’ where some pupils are withdrawn from normal lessons to resolve ‘gaps’ in their learning. They say this intensifies division by excluding those children in need of additional help from other parts of the curriculum. 

The authors acknowledge that divisions created by these practices would not disappear entirely without SATs, which are currently suspended because of the pandemic. However, they suggest these tests might be replaced with ‘more nuanced ways of understanding a child’s attainment’. They add: “There can be no triage or ‘cusp’ if there is no benchmark to judge them by.”

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

The latest review draws on our education inspection framework (EIF) and other religious education (RE) literature to identify what contributes to high-quality RE curriculum, assessment, pedagogy and systems in schools where we inspect RE.

Click here to read the RE research review.

The review recognises that there is no single way of constructing and teaching a high-quality RE curriculum. However, it does identify some common features:

• The curriculum should cover substantive content and concepts collectively (or ‘collectively enough’), rather than covering excessive amounts of content superficially. Content is sufficient for pupils to grasp a bigger picture about the place of religion and non-religion in the world.
• What is taught and learned in RE is grounded in what is known about religion or non-religion from academic study. This helps prevent pupils from developing misconceptions about religion and non-religion.
• Pupils study certain areas of the RE curriculum in depth and acquire a range of detailed knowledge of different concepts and ideas, which they remember long term. Drawing on this prior knowledge enables them to consider more complex ideas about religion. Leaders and teachers select this ‘depth of study’ from contrasting religious and/or non-religious traditions so that pupils avoid developing misrepresentations.
• The curriculum is well sequenced to ensure that pupils learn the knowledge they need for later topics.
• There is a consideration of when pupils should relate the content to their own personal knowledge (for example, their own prior assumptions).
• How the curriculum is taught and assessed focuses pupils’ attention squarely on the knowledge they need to learn.
• Adequate curriculum time is given to RE, so that leaders can deliver an ambitious curriculum.
• There is sufficient training and professional development so that teachers have appropriate subject professional knowledge.

The review refers to 3 different types of subject-specific knowledge that pupils learn in RE. Each of these is powerful and should not be confused with ‘mere facts’. The first is ‘substantive’ knowledge about various religious and non-religious traditions. The second type is ‘ways of knowing’, where pupils learn ‘how to know’ about religion and non-religion. The third type is ‘personal knowledge’, where pupils build an awareness of their own presuppositions and values about what they study. The review suggests that improvement in RE at both primary and secondary level includes knowing more of these ‘pillars of progression’. This prepares pupils to engage in a complex, multi-religious and multi-secular world.

In the spring term of 2022, we will be publishing a report on the quality of RE curriculums taught in schools. We will gather the evidence for this through subject ‘deep dives’ during inspections under the EIF.

To find out more about Ofsted’s curriculum work, read the principles behind the research reviews and subject reports.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

Supported by Crown House Publishing

Sometimes a book will land on the desks of the UKEd team sparking curiosity, and although we know not to judge a book by its cover, the title of this book caught a lot of attention as the title itself made us wonder how this specialised medical field related to education. As any quick search on the internet will tell you: Obstetrics is the field of study concentrated on pregnancy, childbirth, and the postpartum period. Hence the curiosity among the team.

But no – this is no book about pregnancy and childbirth. It is a book that presents a powerful manifesto for school leaders and teachers setting out how they can bridge the advantage gap and deliver positive outcomes for all pupils. The author’s – Rachel Macfarlane – main concern is about disadvantage and closing the gaps in education. Starting with a quote from Marcus Rashford, Rachel sets out that the book is about righting wrongs and offers a grim set of statistics highlighting the educational disadvantages to groups of young people that negatively impact on their lives and the wider society they grow into. So, why the reference to obstetrics within the title? Rachel justifies the title by referring to the child mortality rates of the 1800s, which were so alarmingly high that something had to be done about it. As a result, the link between the high rates of educational underachievement are made, therefore requiring similar political action, educational transformation and creating opportunities to inspire our younger generations.

Each chapter of the book focuses on a key potential barrier to success and offers school leaders and practitioners a range of strategies to help dismantle them. Calls to build strong relationships with students, acknowledging the importance of relationships and the role of leaders in developing relationships is highlighted early on. Attention to positive and supportive climates and cultures in classrooms that will determine outcomes for young people. Similarly, attention is given to impactful parental engagement as well as creating an environment of high-quality teaching and learning. The book also provides guidance on strategic planning, as well as a variety of ideas and inspiration for staff training.

Rachel also highlights the importance of metacognition and self-regulation (see details here about our 5* rated online Metacognition Teaching Strategy here), offering reflections, audits and explanations on how to start exploring this impactful approach to teaching and learning. Of concern in recent years has been the poor levels of oracy that are evident when children embark on their schooling, and the importance of supporting learning to develop critical oracy skills. The book also explores poverty-proofing your school, developing cultural capital, and preparing learners for successful transitions. However, none of these strategies will work unless we get to the root of the problem. Rachel offers four key steps required for an impactful action plan:

1. Showing clarity about the barriers faced by learners.
2. Agreeing objectives, targets, success criteria and milestones.
3. Designing an effective implementation plan.
4. Reviewing, evaluating, adapting and re-implementing.

So no, this is not a book about childbirth and pregnancy, but it is an important book that highlights the disturbing educational disadvantage gaps evident in the England education system. The book concludes that staff in schools need to recognise the barriers which are placed in the way of our young people succeeding, and believing in the potential of all learners to achieve outcomes that may exceed the expectations of themselves, their families, and their communities.

The book is essential reading for school leaders and teachers at all levels of education, and although the book focuses on England’s education system, there are clear messages which are applicable to school systems in other countries.

*RRP – Correct at time of review publication

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

The review draws on Ofsted’s (England’s inspection regime) education inspection framework (EIF) and other literature to identify factors that can contribute to a high-quality maths curriculum, assessment, pedagogy and systems. We will use these findings to examine how maths is taught in England’s schools, before publishing a report about what we have learned in the autumn.

Click here to read the maths research review.

English pupils, on average, gain higher attainment in maths than pupils in many other countries, and mathematics continues to be the most popular subject to study at A level. However, the attainment gap between the lowest and highest achievers is wider than the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average. Likewise, disadvantaged pupils in England are much less likely to achieve a grade 4 at GCSE, or to meet the expected standards at the end of the early years foundation stage (EYFS), or at key stages 1 and 2.

In addition to highlighting approaches that could raise the attainment of all pupils, a core theme of the maths review is how to prevent struggling pupils from falling further behind their peers.

There are a variety of ways that schools can construct and teach a good maths curriculum, and Ofsted recognises that there is no singular way of achieving high-quality education in the subject. However, the review identifies some common features of successful, high-quality curriculum approaches:

• Teachers engineer the best possible start for all pupils by closing the school entry gap in knowledge of basic mathematical facts, concepts, vocabulary and symbols.
• The teaching of maths facts and methods is sequenced to take advantage of the way that knowing those facts helps pupils to learn methods, and vice versa.
• Throughout sequences of learning, pupils benefit from teaching that is systematic and clear.
• The aim is for pupils to attain proficiency. Pupils are then more likely to develop motivation and confidence in the subject.
• Pupils need regular opportunities to rehearse and apply the important mathematical facts, concepts, methods and strategies they have learned.
• Assessment is most useful when it focuses on the component knowledge that pupils have learned. This aids pupils’ confidence and makes it easier to analyse and respond to gaps in learning.
• Teachers can support pupils’ progression by ensuring written work is of a high quality. This is important because when pupils’ calculations are systematic and orderly, they are better able to see the connections of number and to spot errors.
• School leaders can develop teachers’ subject and pedagogic knowledge through opportunities to work with and learn from each other.

Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector, Amanda Spielman, said:

Mathematics is an integral part of every school curriculum. It is a foundation of many disciplines and a source of interest and enjoyment in itself. It also unlocks the door to further study and employment in a vast range of fields.

However, for too many children and young people, maths is mysterious and difficult, and this has implications not just for their future attainment, but also for their self-esteem. Our education inspection framework is clear that schools should ensure the maths curriculum is designed to help pupils to gain increasing mathematical proficiency and build confidence in their ability.

We hope this review is useful to school leaders and teachers as they continue to design and develop their maths curriculum.

The review emphasises the idea of engineering pupils’ success in maths, underpinned by systems thinking. This type of approach will seek to transform an offer of content into a guarantee that content can and will be learned.

The review concludes that variation in the quality of mathematics education in England is likely to be the result of the absence of systems and systems thinking, as well as possible gaps in content, instruction, rehearsal, assessment and the plans for their evolution over time.

To find out more about Ofsted’s curriculum work, read the principles behind the research reviews and subject reports.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

Whenever a teacher is asked what they do for a living, the response to their answer tends to be the same “Oh that sounds like hard work, but must be very rewarding” (closely followed by a remark about holidays, but that’s for another post!), the assumption being that teaching is a vocation, a calling, similar to medical professions or religious orders, for which one will tolerate the difficulties of the job to feel that glow of wellbeing. Teaching still has its rewards, of course, but in these times of data-driven enhanced accountability, the room for individual creativity in the classroom seems to be getting squeezed out, and with it, many of those rewards.

The attraction of teaching as a vocation may have driven recruitment in the past, but these days the reasons one gives for being in the profession are just as likely to be job security, career progression and receiving a decent wage. The disorganised and dishevelled, courdoroy-wearing but inspirational English or History teachers we remember from the Eighties and before, seem now to be a relic from the past.

We all know those famous teachers of film and literature who had the power to transform lives. Mr Keating (Robin Williams) in Dead Poets Society, or Hector in The History Boys (for all his flaws) were inspirational and that’s what their pupils remembered. Perhaps that’s what Michael Gove was aiming for with his Free Schools – harking back to a different time when the all-powerful teacher had the freedom to use their own methods (although with measurable, evidenced progress and accountability still top priority, it remains to be seen whether Free Schools really offer what their name implies). Currently, there seems little room for the inspirational speeches which characterised those fictional teachers. Instead, if you were to pop into any mainstream school tomorrow morning, you would see all-singing all-dancing lessons packed with mini learning episodes linked to assessment objectives – the only accepted way of achieving the elusive “outstanding” grade. Fantastic for those learners, who no doubt will make good progress, but will it be memorable, or inspirational?

Many of us have been taught by uncompromising characters such as the ultra-strict but brilliant ballet teacher, gymnastics coach or musician. These stereotypes prevail in sport and the arts, with much success. But the didactic, personality-driven approach is frowned upon in schools nowadays. Maverick teachers are few and far between, largely due to the standardisation of the profession, and its high levels of accountability (I imagine Hector would have given short shrift to any inspector wishing to see written evidence of progress in every lesson!). In addition, shared pedagogy and practice, regular lesson observations and the ever-changing curriculum leave precious little time to go off-piste.

Many teachers have left the profession as they find their creative opportunities replaced by data entry requirements and obsessive box checking to prove progress has occurred. Yes, a standardised pedagogy achieves a level of consistency across the profession which was most certainly lacking in the pre-Millenium, pre-National Curriculum age (with some truly appalling characters putting us off certain subjects for life!) but the question remains – have we lost something in the quest for consistency?

So where do the non-conformist teachers go when the classroom is too restrictive? That personality who wishes for greater freedom, autonomy and creativity that used to be the hallmark of excellence? Some teachers seek a different environment – moving to the private sector, to special schools, or to alternative provision (where the national curriculum is not a requirement). Alternatively, there is tuition.

Successful tuition is all about personality and rapport. If a successful working partnership is formed between teacher and learner, the results will speak for themselves. There is no standardised code of practice, in fact, a tutor’s unique methods can be precisely what makes their lessons desirable. Consider how Ivan Lendl helped Andy Murray to Wimbledon success. Murray chose him for his unique qualities, not for his standard practice.

Tuition, coaching, instructing, call it what you will. It is the one place guaranteed to provides the freedom to be creative, to be experimental; inspiring and educating through personality.

This article originally appeared in the June 2017 edition of UKEdChat Magazine.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

Today’s review is part of a series of research that examines different subjects across the curriculum. It draws on the evidence from the education inspection framework (EIF) and other literature to examine the contributions that can make a high-quality music curriculum, pedagogy, assessment, and the impact of school leaders’ decisions on music provision.

Click here to read the music research review.

In England, all pupils should study music until the end of key stage 3. This expectation is reflected in the national curriculum and is at the heart of the EIF.

However, the number of pupils taking up music at key stages 4 and 5 continues to decline. Key stage 3 music provision has also been reduced and trainee primary teachers are offered shrinking amounts of musical training. And with reduced lesson time, this has been accompanied by lower levels of staffing to support a school’s rich musical life.

Therefore, it is more important than ever for schools to find ways that put high-quality music at the core of the curriculum.

Our review starts from the assumption that a central purpose of a good music education is that it enables pupils to perform the work of others, explore their own creativity through composing work and, through wider listening and engagement, come to a broader understanding of musical culture and meaning.

There are various ways that schools can construct and teach high-quality music curriculums. Our report identifies some common features that schools may want to consider in developing their music education, including:

• Curriculum content that might reasonably be mastered in the time available, remembering that sometimes less is more.
• Plentiful opportunities for pupils to return to and consolidate their short-term learning, with repetition of key curricular content and gradual introduction of new ideas, methods and concepts.
• Curricular scope that includes enabling pupils to develop technical control over the sound they are producing through the voice or instrument.
• Extensive listening opportunities to help develop pupils’ musical understanding.
• Space and time for pupils to explore the constructive components that build musical compositions and use these effectively to compose their own music.
• Opportunities to gain knowledge of how music over time and across cultures has been a conduit for human expression.
• High levels of guidance for beginners, remembering that pupils in every key stage are sometimes novices, with increasing freedom as pupils gain greater competence.
• Judicious use of summative assessment to identify pupil misconceptions or inaccuracies.
• Adequate curriculum time and regularity to allow musical learning to take place.

Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector, Amanda Spielman said:

Music touches the heart of our humanity and its sense of wonder has influenced human societies throughout history. For many pupils, the music they love will be part of the narrative of their lives.

Music is part of the curriculum but simply ‘doing’ music is not enough. We shouldn’t be satisfied with just having music on the timetable. We need to be ambitious about what we expect for music in the classroom and make sure that time is well used. So I hope the review provides helpful guidance for schools on designing and developing a high-quality music curriculum.

Ofsted plans to publish a report on the quality of the music curriculum taught in schools in 2022. We will gather the evidence for this through subject ‘deep dives’ during inspections under the EIF.

To find out more about Ofsted’s curriculum work, read the principles behind the research reviews and subject reports.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

Every now and then the buzzword CREATIVITY pops up in Education circles. It was mentioned again by former Education Secretary Nicky Morgan. Quite unsurprisingly, she advocated that the Government wished to promote creativity in their Curriculum whereas critics predictably dismissed the claims. Standard.

My thoughts on this blog come from my own experiences in the classroom and the way I think the school I work at promotes creative learning through a stimulating curriculum. Every day is fun at our school! It has to be!

First of all, I’ll rewind to my days at the University of Northampton. It was there that I was introduced to Sir Ken Robinson. Unfortunately via Youtube, and not the man himself.  I would love to discuss his views with him. Sir Ken did make some very key and valid points.

Sir Ken talks about the squeeze that was put on creativity in Education in 2007. Fast forward to 2015 and I’m sure his opinion hasn’t changed with the new Curriculum! But is Sir Ken right? Do Primary schools really suppress the creativity of the children in their care and if so, why? At the BETT show in 2015 he furthered his ideas when he quite rightly suggested that as soon as the classroom door closes, it is up to the teacher themselves to provide the children under their care with the opportunities. And that is the important point. Teachers have to create the opportunities. Curriculums don’t suppress creativity, teachers do. If they choose to do so.

I really do think it is that simple. VALUE creativity in your classroom, provide the opportunities, be prepared to fail (but learn from it), encourage failure and you will have enthused children who are engaged in the learning you provide. What is stopping you?

ALERT: The classroom can sometimes be a place where getting things wrong doesn’t look good. Don’t encourage this. Failure is often a good thing! It is how we learn from a very young age.

I had an interesting conversation with my fellow Year 6 teacher on the day we broke up recently. As part of our leavers’ assembly, we always ask the children to share their favourite school memories. He mentioned that whenever the children talk about them, they always mention the fun stuff. It’s not always the creative stuff they mention, I would be lying if I said they did, but they always mention the fun stuff.

They mentioned making a 1/4 scale Viking longship, being involved in sporting events, going on residentials, doing massive art projects, or creating their own acts for charity events. No mention of SPAG, maths operation strategies, or the such like! Now don’t for one minute think I am advocating that some of these are very important because they are. But it is really important to offer children a balanced curriculum. School should be there to be enjoyed!

And when children are enjoying school, they are enthusiastic and they become more creative! Simple right? I think it is! Don’t hide behind the ‘the curriculum suppresses creativity’ excuse. Get out there and make your classroom a fun place because I can guarantee that you will enjoy teaching it just as much as the children will learning it!

Remember, positive energy! Less time wasted on educational debate = more energy to make a difference!

This is a re-blog post originally posted by Wayne Chalmers and published with kind permission.

You can read more articles via Wayne by Clicking here.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

Supported by Bloomsbury Education

This must-read guide to being a primary headteacher is filled with practical guidance, tips, and advice on all aspects of headship to support and inspire new, current and aspiring headteachers.

Written by a headteacher with over 14 years of experience at the helm, The Headteacher’s Handbook is the indispensable manual to understanding the role as both an instructional coach and community leader. With a kind and compassionate tone, Rae Snape presents invaluable advice, models, research, motivational quotes, and self-reflection questions on a wealth of topics. This includes:

• developing and communicating the vision for your school
• building a staff team
• handling an Ofsted inspection
• ensuring inclusion, equality, and diversity in your setting
• curriculum and assessment design
• managing the day-to-day – the finances, health and safety, behaviour, and everything in-between!

The book features examples from Rae’s own experiences as well as contributions from some of the most influential and forward-thinking school leaders.

*RRP – Price correct at the time of review publication.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

National Curriculum Key Stage 2 tests taken by 10- and 11-year-old children in England to assess progress in English and Mathematics do not seem to affect children’s wellbeing, according to new UCL-led research.

The peer-reviewed study, published today in Assessment in Education, analysed data from around 2,500 children who live in England (where the KS2 tests are conducted) and in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales (where the tests do not take place) and are all participants of the Millennium Cohort Study (MCS).

The study found there was little difference in the wellbeing and happiness levels reported by the children regardless of where they lived and whether they took the KS2 tests or not. Additionally, among those who did sit the tests, there was no significant change in how they felt about themselves, their school or their family life in the weeks preceding and following the tests.

Study author Professor John Jerrim (UCL Social Research Institute) explained: “There is growing concern about the mental wellbeing of young people, including how this is related to national tests at school. However, the study found that happiness and wellbeing levels among children in England and the rest of the UK were very similar to one another and often overlapped.

“The research also found there was little evidence to changes in wellbeing around the time of Key Stage 2 tests, or that children in England become happier—either in general or about school—once these tests are over. Equally, there was no evidence to show that pupils who were happier or more self-confident in the build-up to the tests achieved higher scores.

“Taken together, these findings provide an important counter to conventional narratives about how the Key Stage 2 tests can have serious negative impacts upon children’s wellbeing.”

Children were asked a series of questions on how they felt about themselves and their lives in the lead up to and weeks following the Key Stage 2 tests. For example, 24% of school children in England said they felt unhappy about their schoolwork prior to the tests and this figure was 28% for children in the rest of the UK. This figure did not significantly increase or decrease in the weeks prior to and after testing.

The study highlights that Key Stage 2 tests are considered “high-stakes” for schools whose results get published in school league tables. However, they are not necessarily “high-stakes” indicators for pupils. For example, no educational decisions about the secondary school a child will attend or the subjects they might study depend on achieving certain scores in Key Stage 2 tests.

The author notes that as with every study there are limitations. The study uses MCS data from 2012 and although it is unlikely to undermine the key findings, several reforms have been made to national assessments so stronger effects on pupil wellbeing could be found if the importance attached to these tests has increased.

Professor Jerrim added: “When we turn to education policy in England what do these results mean? Given what we found, there does not seem to be strong enough evidence to support Key Stage 2 tests to be scrapped on wellbeing grounds.

“The tests play a fundamental role feeding into school accountability metrics and our findings suggest they should continue in their current form for the foreseeable future. We need more high-quality research to better understand both the positive and negative effects these tests have on young people, especially in light of the challenges teachers and pupils have faced throughout the pandemic.”

More information: John Jerrim, National tests and the wellbeing of primary school pupils: new evidence from the UK, Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice (2021). DOI: 10.1080/0969594X.2021.1929829

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

Looking back over the last 70 years of education within England highlights some fantastic achievements within the system but, more notable, some of the magnificent failures that have helped widen the achievement gap for generations of pupils. Not too many people are in a strong position to reflect back on post-war education in such a personal, reflective, and critical way as Les Walton, who climbed many professional educational ladders through his vast career.

Proud to be from the North East of England – and rightly so – Les was well placed to see how different tiers of education impacted individuals who were held back in life through circumstance, rather than ability. Early on, Les highlights the obvious glaring omissions of the education system (within the UK). He points out (page 10),

“The window of opportunity to learn languages is wide open during the first ten years of life. Why does the education system invest most in foreign language education after the age of 10, when many dispositions for learning a language have shut down?”

So…..why? Some obvious answers include – curriculum priorities – curriculum time – teacher confidence, but are we doing our pupils a disservice by ignoring developmental science?

Les has not written this autobiographical review of his experiences within the education system through rose-tinted spectacles. His experiences of education at various levels has put him in a strong position to inform what an education system should be, for the benefit of all young people – no matter what circumstances life has offered.

This book is an easy, enjoyable and fascinating read that I would encourage all educators to find time to read. The wisdom shared within is gold. Perhaps there are a couple of politicians who should also find time to read about how political mistakes can impact young lives. We all have a responsibility to the young people in our society, then we need to ensure that their education serves their need to welcome opportunities.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

In recent times it’s hard to find contemporary research into English as an Additional Language. Is it time for the government to begin an in-depth review of EAL provision across England? Regularly in schools children experience limbo, they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place. The rock being grouped with SEN or lower ability children and the hard place of learning the English language as well as all the other parts of our curriculum.

To me it seems unfair that we ask children, whatever age, to attempt this daunting task of learning a brand new language the child has little or no academic experience of and also learning things like how day and night occurs for example or phonemes of a word. If teachers are to truly understand a child’s viewpoint they need to visit a country for a considerable amount of time and attempt to learn something extremely important.

It is only then, they understand what they need to do in order to provide effective pedagogies and experiences relevant and meaningful for children who have EAL. I call on teachers everywhere to put themselves in the child’s shoes, just once.

This ‘in brief’ article first appeared in our free UKEdMagazine, which is available to view by clicking here.

@mrmattbuckley Primary Teacher – Ormskirk

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

Supported by Crown House Publishing

Long before the first reported case of COVID-19, doubts were growing about the ability of present-day schooling to meet the future needs of accelerating change. Our schools and schooling system need to be sure they are preparing all our present and future pupils to live confidently in a world affected by climate change, population growth, AI and robotics, as well as the expansion of the World Wide Web. All of this will have profound implications for curriculum, pedagogy and assessment as well as for deciding how to handle the revolution in human communications.

In light of all this, Tim and Mick say that “we thought now might just be the right time to find a ‘gap in the hedge’ when it comes to school improvement and leadership”.

Many interviewees have been forthright in their opinions. Charles Clarke states that “the biggest failure of the Blair government was not implementing Tomlinson. And then Brown’s government pushed up the school leaving age without thinking what to teach.” Robert Peston adds that:

“It looks from the outside that too much teaching is essentially turning kids into robots. In an age where robots can do the thinking, you will need children who are creative.”
Tim and Mick pose several key questions in these revealing interviews, including:

• Do politicians help or hinder schools?
• Are our exams and assessment systems fit for purpose?
• Are our teachers good enough?
• Why do we exclude the children who often need learning the most?
• Are teachers doing the right things for our children?
• Why do some schools have to carry the children that others do not want?
• Do we test what our children can do or what they can’t do?
• Are head teachers in charge of schools?

Taking all the evidence they’ve gathered from their interviews and drawing on their vast experience in the English school system, Tim and Mick set out their agenda for reform.

Their recommendations include:

• Overhauling the exam and assessment system, replacing compulsory GCSEs with a balanced baccalaureate at age 18
• Reforming Ofsted
• Abolishing fixed-term exclusions – exposing the shocking exclusion rates in English schools vs the rest of the UK
• Introducing a private school equity tax
• Reforming governance
• Capping salaries of MAT leaders
• Implementing new ways to improve social justice and equity, including national grants and fairer admission systems

The book, which emphasises the need for ipsative assessment based on ‘improving on previous best’, contains six foundation stones for a reformed system – including the establishment of an Open School accessible to all and run independently of government, and the creation of consultant expert teachers (analogous to hospital consultant physicians) to fulfil the authors’ belief that too much talent among too many children is lost and that teachers are the key to unlocking it.

Just as there was no wish to return to the 1930s after 1945, Tim and Mick believe that, “after the pandemic, there should not be a wish to get back to the schooling world before COVID. Instead, we need a determination to create a new educational age – a time of hope, ambition and collaborative partnerships. In our new book About Our Schools, we signpost the changes that will lead us to that world as we seek to improve on previous best.”

*RRP – Price correct at time of review publication.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

With a change to ‘no levels’, it is fundamental for schools to go back to basics and think about how the marking and feedback policy ties into the overall philosophy of assessment in the school.

During our discussions about marking we have continued to contemplate the theme of ‘purpose’.  (A theme that continues to recur since the Commission Report was released.)

As mentioned in a few previous posts, schools have fallen into a habit of doing certain ‘things’ purely for the benefit of Ofsted or for senior leaders.  Our school does not do things for Ofsted……we do things for our children…..things that actually fit the ethos of our school and serve a real ‘purpose’.

Marking and feedback have become one of those things.  In fact, so much so, that many headteachers expect to see such intricate marking, that I am surprised anything else gets done!  Teachers can spend hours every evening on just one set of 30 books.  You multiply that by another two sets and you can see why teachers get so burned out that they end up leaving the profession…..and that is only the marking……

I keep talking about ‘work-life’ balance and some of the systems that I have observed in other schools ensure that a ‘balance’ can never be a reality.  Many of us have fallen into the trap of marking work not just for helping children to move on, but to ‘prove’ that we have looked at their work.  Why?  For what reason?

You can already answer that question…..

In our school, we are completely redesigning our policy.  We are now asking our teachers to give every child in their class verbal feedback at least one time a week in both maths and English.

The reason?

Because verbal feedback is by far the most effective and powerful form of feedback that can be given.

When we were doing our first book trawl back in September, the deputy and I were talking about one of the children in his class whose book we were looking at.  He had written a similar comment for a few pieces of this child’s work and they still hadn’t applied the concept that he had referred to.  This was even after the child had been given opportunities in lessons to respond to the marking and to improve their work.  So, we decided a case study was in order.  He decided to go back to the child and give them verbal feedback.

From the conversation that he had with this child, he quickly realised that even though the child understood the ‘principle’ of what he was asking for, they didn’t know how to specifically apply it in their own writing.  The child was then able to ask further questions to clarify exactly how to use the feature he was asking for and had time to practice it in front of the teacher.  A five minute focused, specific and detailed dialogue allowed this pupil to fully understand what was being asked of them and then to apply it in their own work.  The progress seen in this one session of verbal feedback may have taken quite a few lessons of written feedback for similar progress to have taken place.  Therefore, if verbal feedback can address this in just one session, surely it should be carefully considered.

Similar case studies were undertaken in the same class to see just how much impact verbal feedback would have.

Recently, I went into this class to talk to the children about their experiences of marking and feedback.  When the whole class was surveyed, 100% of the children agreed that a combination of verbal and written feedback was most useful, but that verbal feedback really helped them to understand exactly how they could improve and make progress.  The children explained that having the verbal feedback ‘conversation’ allowed them to ask questions to the teacher during their lesson time to immediately help improve their work or to fully understand what targets they were being asked to apply.  They also said that having the time ‘face to face’ with the teacher put more pressure on them to focus on their improvements.

Marking and feedback has now changed in response to the research we have been carrying out in class.  When children are telling us that having ‘learning conversations’ help them to really understand how to improve their work, how can we not adapt our practice to allow for this?

From this, we have asked teachers to begin giving feedback to all of their children in maths and English at least one time a week.  Ideally, if time allows, they should get through even more.  So, not only will children be given timely and specific feedback, but teachers will have considerably less marking to do.

Now, before sharing this with your senior leadership team, it is imperative that everyone follows a consistent format.  The ‘learning conversation’ must focus on what needs improving.  It should be a dialogue between teacher and pupil – they need to fully understand what they are doing well (their successes) and what things they need to work on (their challenges).  During this, children should be given the opportunity to apply what you have told them so that you can give feedback on this as well.  It is about ensuring that children fully understand what it will take to improve their work and how they can continue to make progress.  As a school, I would suggest coming up with a format that everyone will work towards so that there is the consistency of ‘impact’ and it doesn’t just become a ‘discussion’.  For feedback to be most effective it must be timely, specific, clear, purposeful and focused.

In our school, we will have teachers give verbal feedback and where possible, have the children write notes regarding what the teacher is saying.

You may now be asking, but how are you able to make time for this?

The answer?

When you know something works and really has ‘impact’, you make the time.

Look through your school books.  What is the purpose of all the comments, the colours, the symbols?  Does it move children’s learning on?  Does it help the teacher?  Does it inform assessment or planning?

If not, why are you doing it?

And you want to know how you monitor it?

Not through excessive marking and stamping but by going and actually talking to the children…..they tell you the ‘whole’ honest story.

This is a re-blog post originally posted by Flora Barton and published with kind permission.

The original post can be found here.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

The statutory programmes of study issued by the Department for Education in England provide the sequence of knowledge and concepts that children must be taught, this includes ‘Working Scientifically’ (WS). The purpose of WS is to learn how enquiry can be used to answer scientific questions; it should not be taught as a separate strand but, be interlaced with the learning of chemical knowledge and concepts. The table Key Stages 1 shows the development of WS skills from Key Stages 1 to 3, ages 5 to 14. (Reference bit.ly/uked16oct15)

Clearly, there are many opportunities to develop these skills prior to GCSE, demonstrating the importance associated with their development. Why then, are vocabulary; units, symbols and nomenclature absent from the skills developed at Key Stage 2; surely a bike without wheels? In addition, the descriptors provided for this section fail to provide any indication of what vocabulary, units or simple scientific language should be introduced.

The acquisition of the language of Chemistry and, the precision and fluency with which it is applied both in oracy and literacy is a source of concern. Yet children as young as 5 are introduced to and confidently use terms such as graphene and alliteration; is it the expectation, rather than the ability to learn and apply words correctly, that holds students back? In this article, I will suggest vocabulary that should be used at a particular stage of the curriculum for exploring the chemical concepts through WS. I will not suggest activities or experiments as entering a term such as “materials” and selecting “primary” as the age range on rsc.org/learn-chemistry will yield an array to choose between. I propose that we begin to employ the language of measurement (Reference bit.ly/uked16oct16) and introduce terms such as fair test, control variables, categoric variables, data, evidence and conclusion, from the outset.

The chemistry content at Key Stage 1, requires that students are able: to distinguish between an object and the material from which it is made, identify and name a variety of everyday materials and describe the simple physical properties of these materials. I suggest that: asking questions; developing keys to classify materials; recording data in tables and bar charts would be more advantageous than trying to measure quantities such as; mass added before breaking into kilograms or mass of water absorbed in grams; don’t try to use units. Instead use terms such as; categoric variables, results, tables, bar charts and keys, when carrying out investigations to avoid confusing qualitative and quantitative data. The nature of materials can be described simply as rough/smooth; hard/soft: shiny/dull or in greater complexity; flexible/ridged; elastic (stretchy)/inelastic; transparent/opaque, here the focus should be speaking and listening rather than recording vocabulary.

Early Key Stage 2 introduces rocks, fossils and soil in Year 3. Physical properties are investigated again; materials, such as rock, can be compared and grouped together on the basis of their appearance and simple physical properties. Judgements of these properties are made; hardness describes how easy or difficult it is to scratch the mineral; shiny/dull are developed as lustre, a description of how the mineral surface looks when light reflects off it; cleavage and fracture are descriptions of how a mineral breaks into pieces; streak refers to the colour of a mineral when it is crushed to a powder. The variables remain categoric but, new terms; predictions, fair tests, and conclusions, are introduced. It makes sense to include these terms; control variables, so that a fair test can be explained in terms specific to the planned investigation; hazard and risk to encourage thinking about what could cause harm and how to reduce the risk by using eye protection when investigating cleavage and fracture; evaluation, provides the opportunity to reflect on what has been done and what needs to be done next. The term “evaluate” introduces the idea that investigations are cyclic in nature; an observation leads to a prediction, a “hypothesis” could be used, which is investigated and, from which data is generated and a conclusion is drawn, the investigation is evaluated to determine confidence in the outcome and further predictions can be made and so on.

The chemistry tackled in Year 4 represents a huge conceptual jump from, physical properties to states of matter, this marks the beginning of Chemistry’s departure from a purely macroscopic world; miscomprehensions ahoy! Measurement is now specified in the chemistry curriculum so introduce the terms scale, interval, and units when investigating the temperature (°C) at which state change occurs. Talk about a fair test, name the variables; independent, dependent and control variables. The thermometer offers the opportunity to discuss scale perhaps even resolution and precision, a line graph may be drawn from the continuous data generated and the evaluation can name measurement errors and suggest improvements related to intervals. Using these terms in discussion and written work will reinforce understanding and provide a basis from which investigations and their conclusions can be judged; the essence of working scientifically. If this vocabulary seems daunting remember the purpose at this age is familiarity, not mastery. I have found making concept cards, shown below, rather than vocabulary lists really helpful; if these are made as PowerPoint slides they can be easily referred to and altered for a specific experiment. Laminated cards work well in small groups but PowerPoint slides can be used with the whole class.

Chemistry concepts have been omitted from the year 6 programme of study, the opportunities discussed here refer to year 5 content which begins with materials. Now the list of properties has expanded to include solubility, transparency, conductivity (electrical and thermal), and response to magnets. The opportunity to plan and write up an experiment using technical language is offered by the statement, “Demonstrate that dissolving, mixing and changes of state are reversible changes.” I would suggest that there is a lot of important vocabulary linked with this work such as solution (solute/solvent), mixture, filtering, sieving, evaporating and reversible change, furthermore; the techniques should be used to illustrate that separation can be achieved by different means depending on the nature of the materials to be separated. Having introduced and reinforced scientific language through oracy now is the time to develop literacy in Chemistry.

Lastly, chemical changes such as burning and the action of acid on the bicarbonate of soda are introduced, offering the ideal opportunity to distinguish observation from inference. Begin to explore how to describe what is being observed; the description froths could become bubbles of gas are released; burning, which is a mystery to many, could become a reaction with oxygen which releases energy light and heat, distance burning from smoke. Why not write basic word equations to describe a chemical reaction that shows products forming reactants? Once again, depending upon the choice investigation, fair tests and variables can be highlighted; line graphs, bar charts and classification keys could be generated but most importantly the language of chemistry can be used both in discussion and in written work, developing understanding, confidence and familiarity.

Finally, I ask you to look ahead to how working scientifically develops at Key Stage 3, imagine how hard it would be to meet, understand and master without having first laid the groundwork in primary school as we’ve discussed. How can children be expected to work scientifically or ratify concepts without the words needed to express the chemistry?

This article originally appeared in the October 2016 edition of UKEdMagazine

Naomi Hennah @MrsHennah is a teacher of Science with a Chemistry specialism at Northampton School for Boys. Having taught for more than ten years Naomi is convinced that language is pivotal to successful science education “developing literacy and oracy skills empowers Students, deepens their understanding and raises attainment.” Naomi is a member of the Royal Society of Chemistry and is indebted to them for their support of schools and teachers.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

Schools with consistently less than “good” Ofsted grades will find it difficult to improve without further support, according to new research led by IOE, UCL’s Faculty of Education and Society.

Published today, the report “‘Stuck’ schools: Can below good Ofsted inspections prevent sustainable improvement?” explores the underperformance of 580 schools in England that consistently received less than “good” Ofsted inspection grades between 2005 to 2018. It found that schools that receive a series of below “good” Ofsted grades, so either “requires improvement” or “inadequate,” often end up in a cycle of challenging circumstances—including higher teacher turnover, higher levels of disadvantaged pupils and pupils with special educational needs—with limited improvement.

However, the report also found that schools of this kind are not unique, and while many other schools share most of these challenges, a continuous cycle of less than “good” inspection judgements is possible to avoid.

To establish the findings, the researchers identified and analyzed the data behind 580 ‘stuck’ schools, compared with schools that were not “stuck.” This was combined with stakeholders’ experiences and focus groups with 16 case study schools. 

The team found that after the initial negative Ofsted grade, the intake of a school tends to become more disadvantaged, with an increase in teacher turnover—both of which contribute to the difficulty in reversing the negative Ofsted judgment. The longer the school continues to have the less than “good” rating, the harder the process of school improvement becomes. 

Yet, the research also reveals that a “requires improvement” or “inadequate” (“poor”) inspection judgment is only a modest contributing factor to the lack of improvement or decline of “stuck” schools over time, with the presence of “good” or “outstanding” neighbourhood schools more important in predicting whether a school will become “stuck” than the performance of the ‘stuck’ school.

The report reveals that joining a multi-academy trust showed small positive effects for secondary schools, in relation to lower teacher turnover and a lower chance of remaining ‘stuck’ in subsequent Ofsted inspections. However, there were no similar, positive effects for ‘stuck’ primary schools that joined a multi-academy trust.

The researchers highlight that the findings show academization is not a silver bullet to delivering school improvement—and urge the government to consider these results to help inform its future policies around academization and school improvement. 

Lead researcher Dr. Munoz-Chereau (UCL IOE) said: “How to solve the stubborn underperformance of around 580 ‘stuck’ schools in England is high on the government’s agenda.

“Our mixed-methods study is robust and expands Ofsted work by combining quantitative and qualitative methods to better understand patterns of change over time and stakeholders’ experiences in ‘stuck’ schools and their comparison group.

“Its results are timely as they show that inspections can have a detrimental effect, but also that ‘stuck’ schools can get ‘un-stuck’ given the right time and support.” 

Researcher Jo Hutchinson (The Education Policy Institute) said: “Stuck schools face many challenges such as increasing deprivation, professional isolation and very high teacher turnover.

“While their continuing struggle with poor inspection outcomes was not determined by these challenges, nor by the experience of receiving an adverse grading, there were nevertheless clear signs that these could make recovery more difficult.

“While academization has helped many secondary schools to reduce the challenges they face, having a change of head teacher made things more challenging in the short term, and for primary schools, the same benefits of academization were not evident in our analysis.”

Ofsted grades schools on a four-point scale: Outstanding, Good, Requires Improvement and Inadequate.

More information: Read the full report 

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.

The release of the latest school absence data (bit.ly/uked14nov20) from the Department for Education in England revealed positive news, with declining overall absence rates and persistent absentees (those who miss more than 15% of sessions). In fact, absence is at its lowest since data was first collected in 2006.

This is obviously positive news; however, the inequality in attendance between the most disadvantaged children and their peers has remained stubbornly high. A child eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) or with Special Educational Needs (SEN) is over three times more likely to be persistently absent than their peers.

This inequality in attendance is mirrored when we look at the attainment of these disadvantaged children. In order to close this attainment gap, we need to take a look at the child’s whole environment and not just see schools as silos.

We know that a number of schools are funding services to go and pick children up from home to bring them into school to ensure that they are attending. This is a positive step; however, once in school, it is important that a child is ready to learn and not worry about what is happening at home. Research by School-Home Support found that children who were persistently absent faced a number of multiple and overlapping needs within the home, including substance misuse, mental and physical health issues, housing issues, poor family relationships and poverty.

In a recent report (bit.ly/uked14nov21), the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission highlighted the importance of strategies to engage parents in their child’s education. They noted that outreach and integration with other services are important steps to increase engagement. As highlighted above, many families face a number of complex needs, requiring support from many different services and agencies. School outreach workers or school-home practitioners are ideally placed to ensure that families receive the support they need, giving children a more stable home environment.

We have found that when a parent isn’t engaging with the school, it is often linked to their own experiences as a child. They see teachers as authority figures and are worried about what will happen if they open up about their challenges. This is when independent practitioners are able to break down barriers and bring parents into the school community.

Whilst persistent absence has decreased to 4.1%, there are still 262,255 children across England who are missing over 15% of their schooling. Persistent absence is a major factor in determining future life chances. Persistently absent pupils are four times less likely to achieve five A*-C grades at GCSE. Once leaving school, these children…

Click here to continue to read this article freely in the November 2014 Edition of UKEdMagazine.

This article was originally printed in the November 2014 edition of UKEdMagazine

Click here to freely read the full version

Jan Tallis is Chief Executive of School-Home Support, a national charity that tackles the underlying issues that affect a child’s ability to make the most of their education. Jan has worked across various roles in the third sector and is currently Chair of Governors at a secondary school in East London. Find Jan on Twitter @JanTallis.

You need to Login or Register to bookmark/favorite this content.