Perhaps it's a good idea to start rehearsing arguments and counter-arguments as we prepare for the curriculum review.
The experience of listening to the Radio 4 programme entitled 'Is it worth learning a language?' brought to light (for me) the problem of
(1) asking the right question [as Mike Elliot pointed out, the debate was sparked off by the falling numbers in GCSE languages .. perhaps a better title for the programme would have been 'Why are numbers falling?' .. the question tended to assume immediately that the fall was because of people questioning the validity of learning a language ..)
and
2) getting easily distracted from the key question / drawn into separate discussions
I must tidy my house and prepare lessons (!) ...but I'll use this blog again to plant an idea which might help others / might be something I can develop .. perhaps as a way of getting out of a vicious circle of debate. I prepared this list of arguments and counterarguments in the context of analysing exam results but the structure could perhaps be useful in this context as well:
Arguments and counterarguments
Key headings and arguments copied and pasted below ...
Time: It is argued that languages get less time than XXX (any of i) English, Maths / other subjects + issue of time at KS3 ii) what the QCA assumed iii)what they get in other countries)
Counter-arguments: subjects such as BS get no time at KS3; virtually all subjects get the same time at KS4, German / Spanish is more often than not a second language / starts later / gets less time and yet the gradings for those subjects are virtually identical to French. The disparity re grading goes back to before QCA / what evidence was used to match time to criteria. In other countries, time for non-English languages is often similar across the ability range to ours, and non-English teachers in other countries despair about the lack of interest in their subject.
Aptitude: It is argued that you need a particular aptitude to succeed at languages. This would make it similar to music, art and drama, but significantly, those subjects actually appear on the other side of the "difficulty" spectrum to languages. Also, studies such as CEM showed the lower correlation between subjects such as music & art and the "mainstream" (which endorses the "aptitude" argument) but MFL shows a good fit (same as History). This effectively undermines the aptitude argument as a reason for "severe grading" for MFL.
Motivation / being an "option" It is argued that if pupils are choosing a subject then they will do so because they wish to study that subject / will be better at it. This is where the situation with MFL in the last 4 years offers rich pickings for analysis, as the subject has moved from being "nearly compulsory" to "often optional". Often it is a local decision as to how optional MFL has become and the timescale involved. Appendix 1 offers a simple analysis to show that the exam boards have not acted consistently in what is a very difficult time to make judgements on standards, It is not surprising that complaints about fluctuations and inconsistencies in gradings have exploded as a result. The very fact that some exam boards are making some adjustments in some languages undermines the argument whichever way round it is being put!
Teaching and Learning (QCA example - Jim Knight's response). It is argued that the problem lies on the quality of teaching and learning in ML. Response:
There is a false logic in the QCA's position of implying that you should tackle teaching and learning INSTEAD of tackling severe grading (with its implicit assumption of criticising ML teachers relative to teachers of other subjects).The key point is that BOTH teaching and learning AND severe grading need to be tackled. ALL subjects should be focusing continuously on improving teaching and learning. Languages is uniquely disadvantaged because of severe grading at GCSE.
Urdu (QCA example) To bring in Urdu as an apparent comparator is surprising given the number of native speakers taking the exam and the minimal number of students who will have been taught Urdu from scratch in school.
Tuesday, 31 August 2010
You and Yours Radio 4 programme: Is it worthwhile learning another language?
I've just posted this comment to the Radio 4 You and Yours programme:
One important factor is that QCA confirmed officially in Feb 2008 that half of the students gaining a grade B in maths will get a grade C in French - half of those getting a grade C in maths will get a grade D in French. All the evidence shows that it's the setting of grade boundaries in French exams which goes back 30 years that is the issue - this is an in-built negative handicap - there should be a level playing field between Modern languages and subjects such as maths, science, history and geography. I have documented this here: http://www.all-london.org.uk/severe_grading.htm
One important factor is that QCA confirmed officially in Feb 2008 that half of the students gaining a grade B in maths will get a grade C in French - half of those getting a grade C in maths will get a grade D in French. All the evidence shows that it's the setting of grade boundaries in French exams which goes back 30 years that is the issue - this is an in-built negative handicap - there should be a level playing field between Modern languages and subjects such as maths, science, history and geography. I have documented this here: http://www.all-london.org.uk/severe_grading.htm
Monday, 30 August 2010
ML numbers at AL and GCSE, and “severe grading”
I've prepared a summary of the latest situation regarding the numbers taking ML at A-level and GCSE (+ spreadsheet with all the numbers and graphs, updated to include June 10 results), and also regarding “severe grading”.
I’ve updated the pages on the ALL London site so that these documents can easily be downloaded. I have created 5 separate pages with up-to-date figures:
- numbers at GCSE ML over time
- numbers at AL and AS ML over time
- severe grading at GCSE
- severe grading at AL and AS
- the issue with the new A* at AL for ML
There is also a timeline relating to the last few years, with presentations, documents etc, including the presentation I gave at the Ofqual Inter-subject comparability seminar in Oct. ‘08
The issue with the new A* in A-level French (and to lesser extent in German and Spanish) is a new one, and worth pursuing vigorously before it becomes embedded. It is also one which is unlikely to have been noticed at an individual school level, and only becomes clear looking at the national statistics.
There are also links to:
BBC News article today about Ofqual’s brief to look at comparability of qualifications (but not the points equivalence).
BBC News article “GCSE results: Trends explained” - “CILT, the national centre for language learning, agreed with this [John Dunford’s] analysis, saying the trend was "less to do with student disaffection" and more to do with "performance table pressures".
“Rule of thumb”
Judging from the ML forums, the numbers and results in ML continue to be source of much anxiety and concern, incl. how they are judged. A further thought to help fair judgement would be to publicise a “rule of thumb” arising from the QCA report (Feb ’08): if all pupils took Fr (or Gn) and Maths, to get the cohort % who “should” get A*-C:
Take the Maths A*-C cohort rate e.g. 70%
take the Maths C grade percentage e.g. 30% ( and so 40% had A*-B), and halve it e.g. 15%
Add this to Maths A*-B rate e.g. 40% + 15% = 55% to get the French cohort %
Clearly if ML is optional, then this needs to be adjusted, esp as those choosing ML are likely to be better at it, but at least it is a quick “rule of thumb”
I hope the above help to give a factual basis for the situation.
I’ve updated the pages on the ALL London site so that these documents can easily be downloaded. I have created 5 separate pages with up-to-date figures:
- numbers at GCSE ML over time
- numbers at AL and AS ML over time
- severe grading at GCSE
- severe grading at AL and AS
- the issue with the new A* at AL for ML
There is also a timeline relating to the last few years, with presentations, documents etc, including the presentation I gave at the Ofqual Inter-subject comparability seminar in Oct. ‘08
The issue with the new A* in A-level French (and to lesser extent in German and Spanish) is a new one, and worth pursuing vigorously before it becomes embedded. It is also one which is unlikely to have been noticed at an individual school level, and only becomes clear looking at the national statistics.
There are also links to:
BBC News article today about Ofqual’s brief to look at comparability of qualifications (but not the points equivalence).
BBC News article “GCSE results: Trends explained” - “CILT, the national centre for language learning, agreed with this [John Dunford’s] analysis, saying the trend was "less to do with student disaffection" and more to do with "performance table pressures".
“Rule of thumb”
Judging from the ML forums, the numbers and results in ML continue to be source of much anxiety and concern, incl. how they are judged. A further thought to help fair judgement would be to publicise a “rule of thumb” arising from the QCA report (Feb ’08): if all pupils took Fr (or Gn) and Maths, to get the cohort % who “should” get A*-C:
Take the Maths A*-C cohort rate e.g. 70%
take the Maths C grade percentage e.g. 30% ( and so 40% had A*-B), and halve it e.g. 15%
Add this to Maths A*-B rate e.g. 40% + 15% = 55% to get the French cohort %
Clearly if ML is optional, then this needs to be adjusted, esp as those choosing ML are likely to be better at it, but at least it is a quick “rule of thumb”
I hope the above help to give a factual basis for the situation.
Friday, 8 January 2010
ALL LONDON JANUARY EVENT - Sat 23rd January 2010
PLEASE COME TO JOIN US AT THE ALL LONDON/LINKS JANUARY EVENT!!
It always goes really well, and we get very positive feedback .. and this is usually down to not only having really good speakers who people have asked to hear .. but also to there being such a nice crowd of positive, friendly people who get up early on a Saturday to meet with other like-minded people! It’s just really nice to meet people face-to-face. Here’s a link to the pictures from last year when, despite the snow, 80+ brave souls came along! http://www.all-london.org.uk/february_20091.htm
Below is a link to the latest invitation to the ALL London January Event which has some minor adjustments to the previous versions
… people have offered to do sessions twice so there will be more choice
.. ..I’ll do the GCSE spec ‘challenges of controlled assessment’ talk again (the one I did at CILT) at the end if anyone wants it.
… we have included an extra session for students on how to apply for your first job -
.. . we have a special reduced rate for students (£5)
Link to website: http://www.all-london.org.uk/january_10_programme.htm
Link to Facebook group (THANKS Cat for setting this up.. and those of you on Facebook, please please join .. !!): http://tinyurl.com/yhaqgaa
We still have the same great speakers ..
* Sara Sullivan who is an incredibly successful HOD in Essex and loads of practical, ‘do-able’ ideas for increasing take-up and attainment …
* Vincent Everett whom we all know well from the mflresources forum .. again, an excellent HOD brimming over with ideas (I know we benefit loads from his written input to fora, but you’ll get even more by coming along to the talk!!!) ..
* Gill Beckett will do a repeat of the excellent talk I saw her to at the CILT 14-19 conference .. a really comprehensive overview of all the accredited courses available and a chance to follow this up with her ..
* and Johann LeCalvez who is a really smiley, friendly member of the BBC web team and will give an overview of all that the BBC has to offer
There will be stands from Sanako, The Ardmore Group and CILT, and goodies and information from the London Links into Languages Team.
Finally, I have put myself down to do a repeat of the GCE controlled assessment talk in case anyone wants that … but I won’t cry if no-one does! I’ll do it after the other sessions so it is just an extra if you want to stay.
I have visited the venue .. it’s really good .. (photos on the website) … we can fit loads of people in to the big talks, and having repeats available for 2 of the talks should make it possible for you to go to the ones you want to go to.
I know a lot of people tend to leave it to the last minute to book (I’m one of them!) .. but it would be really really helpful to have an idea of numbers as soon as possible as we have to book the catering.
Hope to see people soon. Of-course we’ll post stuff up on the website later.
Please put Saturday 19th June in your diary for the next one .. to be held at the French Institute.
Best wishes
Helen
Helen Myers
ALL London Chair
It always goes really well, and we get very positive feedback .. and this is usually down to not only having really good speakers who people have asked to hear .. but also to there being such a nice crowd of positive, friendly people who get up early on a Saturday to meet with other like-minded people! It’s just really nice to meet people face-to-face. Here’s a link to the pictures from last year when, despite the snow, 80+ brave souls came along! http://www.all-london.org.uk/february_20091.htm
Below is a link to the latest invitation to the ALL London January Event which has some minor adjustments to the previous versions
… people have offered to do sessions twice so there will be more choice
.. ..I’ll do the GCSE spec ‘challenges of controlled assessment’ talk again (the one I did at CILT) at the end if anyone wants it.
… we have included an extra session for students on how to apply for your first job -
.. . we have a special reduced rate for students (£5)
Link to website: http://www.all-london.org.uk/january_10_programme.htm
Link to Facebook group (THANKS Cat for setting this up.. and those of you on Facebook, please please join .. !!): http://tinyurl.com/yhaqgaa
We still have the same great speakers ..
* Sara Sullivan who is an incredibly successful HOD in Essex and loads of practical, ‘do-able’ ideas for increasing take-up and attainment …
* Vincent Everett whom we all know well from the mflresources forum .. again, an excellent HOD brimming over with ideas (I know we benefit loads from his written input to fora, but you’ll get even more by coming along to the talk!!!) ..
* Gill Beckett will do a repeat of the excellent talk I saw her to at the CILT 14-19 conference .. a really comprehensive overview of all the accredited courses available and a chance to follow this up with her ..
* and Johann LeCalvez who is a really smiley, friendly member of the BBC web team and will give an overview of all that the BBC has to offer
There will be stands from Sanako, The Ardmore Group and CILT, and goodies and information from the London Links into Languages Team.
Finally, I have put myself down to do a repeat of the GCE controlled assessment talk in case anyone wants that … but I won’t cry if no-one does! I’ll do it after the other sessions so it is just an extra if you want to stay.
I have visited the venue .. it’s really good .. (photos on the website) … we can fit loads of people in to the big talks, and having repeats available for 2 of the talks should make it possible for you to go to the ones you want to go to.
I know a lot of people tend to leave it to the last minute to book (I’m one of them!) .. but it would be really really helpful to have an idea of numbers as soon as possible as we have to book the catering.
Hope to see people soon. Of-course we’ll post stuff up on the website later.
Please put Saturday 19th June in your diary for the next one .. to be held at the French Institute.
Best wishes
Helen
Helen Myers
ALL London Chair
Monday, 14 December 2009
Vetting and barring review - response to fora comments.
http://publications.everychildmatters.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/DCSF-01122-2009.pdf
Could I strongly recommend people read ‘recommendation 7; host families’ page 17 onwards para 46 – 54.
Unfortunately the wording of the recommendation and its punctuation are ambiguous. In the recommendation itself there is a comma after days and family which could be interpreted as giving a different nuance to para 54. However if you read the totality of the paragraphs 46-54, it is clear that Sir Roger is recommending that exchanges of fewer than 28 day should be regarded as ‘private arrangements where overseas parents accept the responsibility for the selection of the host family’ and therefore would not require registration.
In view of the ambiguity of the phrasing and punctuation, it may be wise for schools to ask overseas families to sign a form confirming that they accept the responsibility. Do note also that para 54 says that his recommendation would not prevent an individual school from asking host parents to register if it wished to offer that additional measure of protection, but it would not be a statutory requirement.
In view of the carefully phrased caveat,it would probably be wise for schools to consult with governors and perhaps the wider community so that if something were to go wrong, and the schools had not undertaken such a check, then they would not be found guilty in ‘trial by the media’. There are clearly many nuances to this issue and it would be wise to reflect carefully and await further developments before rushing into action.
Hope this helps.
(I realise there are loads of 'it would be wise' phrases .. hopefully this covers me!)
Could I strongly recommend people read ‘recommendation 7; host families’ page 17 onwards para 46 – 54.
Unfortunately the wording of the recommendation and its punctuation are ambiguous. In the recommendation itself there is a comma after days and family which could be interpreted as giving a different nuance to para 54. However if you read the totality of the paragraphs 46-54, it is clear that Sir Roger is recommending that exchanges of fewer than 28 day should be regarded as ‘private arrangements where overseas parents accept the responsibility for the selection of the host family’ and therefore would not require registration.
In view of the ambiguity of the phrasing and punctuation, it may be wise for schools to ask overseas families to sign a form confirming that they accept the responsibility. Do note also that para 54 says that his recommendation would not prevent an individual school from asking host parents to register if it wished to offer that additional measure of protection, but it would not be a statutory requirement.
In view of the carefully phrased caveat,it would probably be wise for schools to consult with governors and perhaps the wider community so that if something were to go wrong, and the schools had not undertaken such a check, then they would not be found guilty in ‘trial by the media’. There are clearly many nuances to this issue and it would be wise to reflect carefully and await further developments before rushing into action.
Hope this helps.
(I realise there are loads of 'it would be wise' phrases .. hopefully this covers me!)
Wednesday, 22 April 2009
Speaking tests - response to TES forum
My response to the TES thread on Speaking tests... hopefully better formatted than on the board!
Warning – this is long – have been off the forum for a while and have only just caught up and cannot resist joining in, so skip this if you want!!! Also, lost the first version when I clicked the wrong button.
Just taking a break from the stress of 'the last lesson before the oral' with my Year 11s .. this is a very interesting thread with lots of subthreads and although I haven’t anything really to add to my earlier post about the issues - , I find it reassuring to see that there are so many of us who agree from across the spectrum .. whether teaching male / female / able / not so able.
[ALL] Aligru …I’m not sure whether I’ve missed some reference here, but ALL is consulted on initiatives, and the nature of the GCSE is one of the most recent. As an ALL member you would probably know about his through ALLnet or the publications which are sent.
[Content] Re: what is taught, and its link with future study, I am with asisehace on this. The aims of the General Certificate for Secondary Education do include preparation for further study and working life, but they also include enjoyment and being prepared for things which a 16 year old might expect to need to do. If we were to provide a curriculum for all which was targeted for those who are going to be specialists at university, there is a risk that the majority would be left out, numbers would drop, courses would not run and the supply to university would be drastically reduced. I find it helpful through ALL/ISMLA contacts to be able to talk with people from other sectors so that we can all understand each others’ perspectives. In particular, I was interested by a talk from GCHQ at the ISMLA conference. I had the impression that they did not expect the schools and universities to be providing the ‘finished product’ and that they provided intensive courses to bring people up to the level needed for some jobs, in particular with respect to lesser taught languages. It was also encouraging to learn that they really valued the generic skills of linguists, and found them highly employable across the service.
[Validity and reliability] I think the point asisehace makes is right. Pupils and parents will expect the teacher to prepare the candidates as well as they can for the given test so that they can show their ‘true ability’. I don’t think that the current test fairly allows people to show their ability - the range of speaking skills they have. It will be interesting to see whether the new régime will be better (I have yet to view the DVD which I have received).
[Analogies] There have been some excellent analogies drawn e.g. El Hombre’s music/ drama .. and I love the samenerve analogy with driving – great! I’m tempted to suggest another … I notice that many politicians (not sure whether this includes Nick Gibb) prepare and read aloud what they say in the house. I suspect that sometimes their researchers / assistants help them to write the scripts. I’m sure their researchers prepare them pretty thoroughly for what might come up, and an even better technique is perhaps to learn a formula for avoiding the question and saying what you have prepared anyway. And that’s just in English. [actually – just re-read El Hombre’s post – so my analogy isn’t original – but I’ll leave it anyway!!](I realise the analogy breaks down a bit, but analogies often do, and I couldn’t resist this one!)
[Solutions?]. Not sure what the solutions are, as we can see from this thread alone, let alone all the other threads about the changes to GCSE that there is no single view from the teachers. Certainly I think it is helpful to keep channels between govt/DCSF/ofqual/qca/exam boards / professional body of teachers/media open as much as possible and be really clear about what the role is of these bodies and honest about what we can realistically expect. I have to say that I was pretty impressed by Isabel Nisbett’s (ofqual acting i/c) openness about the complexity of putting together valid and reliable exams which meet the expectations of the users .. and I agree with her. A big problem for all of these bodies is dealing with what the public expects of exams, and in her speech to a Westminster forum I attended she gave a good overview of what she felt was reasonable / not reasonable to expect. (At least I think it was Isabel .. could have been Prof Timms .. will check and report back!) But the professional body which has the most direct impact of unrealistic expectations of what results can tell you is the teaching profession … our own and our schools’ reputations are publicly affected by the results, and the results are issued by the government and the media without all the theoretical ‘caveats’ which are discussed at a political forum.
One thing I’m sure about though is that a radio programme is not the best way to discuss and resolve issues in the first instance. I haven’t heard the programme, but if we feel Nick Gibb is ill-informed, we can easily contact him and give him the information.
Warning – this is long – have been off the forum for a while and have only just caught up and cannot resist joining in, so skip this if you want!!! Also, lost the first version when I clicked the wrong button.
Just taking a break from the stress of 'the last lesson before the oral' with my Year 11s .. this is a very interesting thread with lots of subthreads and although I haven’t anything really to add to my earlier post about the issues - , I find it reassuring to see that there are so many of us who agree from across the spectrum .. whether teaching male / female / able / not so able.
[ALL] Aligru …I’m not sure whether I’ve missed some reference here, but ALL is consulted on initiatives, and the nature of the GCSE is one of the most recent. As an ALL member you would probably know about his through ALLnet or the publications which are sent.
[Content] Re: what is taught, and its link with future study, I am with asisehace on this. The aims of the General Certificate for Secondary Education do include preparation for further study and working life, but they also include enjoyment and being prepared for things which a 16 year old might expect to need to do. If we were to provide a curriculum for all which was targeted for those who are going to be specialists at university, there is a risk that the majority would be left out, numbers would drop, courses would not run and the supply to university would be drastically reduced. I find it helpful through ALL/ISMLA contacts to be able to talk with people from other sectors so that we can all understand each others’ perspectives. In particular, I was interested by a talk from GCHQ at the ISMLA conference. I had the impression that they did not expect the schools and universities to be providing the ‘finished product’ and that they provided intensive courses to bring people up to the level needed for some jobs, in particular with respect to lesser taught languages. It was also encouraging to learn that they really valued the generic skills of linguists, and found them highly employable across the service.
[Validity and reliability] I think the point asisehace makes is right. Pupils and parents will expect the teacher to prepare the candidates as well as they can for the given test so that they can show their ‘true ability’. I don’t think that the current test fairly allows people to show their ability - the range of speaking skills they have. It will be interesting to see whether the new régime will be better (I have yet to view the DVD which I have received).
[Analogies] There have been some excellent analogies drawn e.g. El Hombre’s music/ drama .. and I love the samenerve analogy with driving – great! I’m tempted to suggest another … I notice that many politicians (not sure whether this includes Nick Gibb) prepare and read aloud what they say in the house. I suspect that sometimes their researchers / assistants help them to write the scripts. I’m sure their researchers prepare them pretty thoroughly for what might come up, and an even better technique is perhaps to learn a formula for avoiding the question and saying what you have prepared anyway. And that’s just in English. [actually – just re-read El Hombre’s post – so my analogy isn’t original – but I’ll leave it anyway!!](I realise the analogy breaks down a bit, but analogies often do, and I couldn’t resist this one!)
[Solutions?]. Not sure what the solutions are, as we can see from this thread alone, let alone all the other threads about the changes to GCSE that there is no single view from the teachers. Certainly I think it is helpful to keep channels between govt/DCSF/ofqual/qca/exam boards / professional body of teachers/media open as much as possible and be really clear about what the role is of these bodies and honest about what we can realistically expect. I have to say that I was pretty impressed by Isabel Nisbett’s (ofqual acting i/c) openness about the complexity of putting together valid and reliable exams which meet the expectations of the users .. and I agree with her. A big problem for all of these bodies is dealing with what the public expects of exams, and in her speech to a Westminster forum I attended she gave a good overview of what she felt was reasonable / not reasonable to expect. (At least I think it was Isabel .. could have been Prof Timms .. will check and report back!) But the professional body which has the most direct impact of unrealistic expectations of what results can tell you is the teaching profession … our own and our schools’ reputations are publicly affected by the results, and the results are issued by the government and the media without all the theoretical ‘caveats’ which are discussed at a political forum.
One thing I’m sure about though is that a radio programme is not the best way to discuss and resolve issues in the first instance. I haven’t heard the programme, but if we feel Nick Gibb is ill-informed, we can easily contact him and give him the information.
Saturday, 28 March 2009
Some interesting links from Twitter this morning which follow on well from a discussion going on at the moment over on mflresources forum about deep learning /length of lessons / assessment. Am currently listening to video referenced by Terry Freedman: Lord David Puttnam of Queensgate - his keynote speech at a conference on using games for education. I'm pleased that he acknowledges that teachers are hampered by the 'mendacious press' - he says: (0833 - 0901)
*****************************
In many senses, we the active influencers of change are underachieving as a result of (stifling?) our creativity, our ambition, our imagination for what the future of learning might come to look like. And in this sense, I must stress (and I hope this has come up in the last couple of days) we are desperately hampered by the scare stories in the Daily Mail and elsewhere. Never ever underestimate the degree to which educational progress in this country has been hampered an in some cases badly distorted by a mendacious media. I have no idea why they do it, I have no idea what their agenda is but I certainly do think it's been remarkably destructive.
********************************
It was in the question / answer time that I feel a key issue was partly explored: the critical role of government / DCSF / QCA in allowing teachers to follow 'good practice' (.. it tends to grate when you hear people saying 'the education world ought to .... ' 'teachers should ...' etc etc. Teachers and their managers are seriously constrained by the assessment system and above all by league tables.
Thanks so much to Lilian Soon (??) (3135) who explained the dilemma of awarding bodies / DCSF / Government passing the buck ... and asked David 'what can the politicians do about this?' .. she said that everyone is able to take forward the ideas of the conference BUT .. we can't get past that ... the problem is assessing the curriculum ..
David's said it was not a question of 'throwing away the curriculum' .. he likened the curriculum to a spine .. the body does not get very far without it .. instead he focussed on assessment:
****************************************************
The problem is not throwing away the curriculum, it's assessing the curriculum. (.referred to the earlier criticism of the role of the press .....) the other issue that bedevils education is that we are trying to evolve a 21st century education system but we're still stuck with what looks horribly like a nineteenth century assessment process - we've absolutely failed to develop assessment processes which can take advantage of what you can do - the things you can to - and translate them into something which parents at home can understand so how do we explain to parents that actually the work that your so or daughter has been doing on his or her Blackberry is translated into something that they tangibly see as points or certificates or something that they can go out into the outside world and boast about .... the emotional leap has befuddled us .. [ we need to ]make absolutely sure that as we do it the assessment processes for that curriculum remain contiguous with the development of the curriculum - if we don't do that we will always have a drag anchor wherever we are going - so I would say on balance that there is more work to be done on assessment than there is to be done on curriculum at present.
*******************************************************
He does acknowledge that there are well-meaning people at QCA who want to address this.
So what is the answer? What is the purpose of assessment? Is there a middle way between the extremes of education being for a state purpose / allowing the teacher free rein? How can we veer assessment so that we strike some sort of balance? I don't know ....
But perhaps it would help to make more explicit the connection between the two 'thorns' David identifies of (1) the nature of assessment and (2) the press:.............. the league tables. [he may have mentioned this earlier .. this is a quick reaction to a first hearing ....]. Perhaps if we could abolish league tables our hands would be less 'tied'. But is there any chance of that happening? Which political party would be brave enough to put this in a manifesto and have a chance of being elected?
(And 'PS' .. I admit to having been rather overwhelmed by a visit to the House of Lords this week when Lord Puttnam passed right in fron tof me and I squealed.. a bit ..hope he didn't notice!! .. will blog about the visit later!)
*****************************
In many senses, we the active influencers of change are underachieving as a result of (stifling?) our creativity, our ambition, our imagination for what the future of learning might come to look like. And in this sense, I must stress (and I hope this has come up in the last couple of days) we are desperately hampered by the scare stories in the Daily Mail and elsewhere. Never ever underestimate the degree to which educational progress in this country has been hampered an in some cases badly distorted by a mendacious media. I have no idea why they do it, I have no idea what their agenda is but I certainly do think it's been remarkably destructive.
********************************
It was in the question / answer time that I feel a key issue was partly explored: the critical role of government / DCSF / QCA in allowing teachers to follow 'good practice' (.. it tends to grate when you hear people saying 'the education world ought to .... ' 'teachers should ...' etc etc. Teachers and their managers are seriously constrained by the assessment system and above all by league tables.
Thanks so much to Lilian Soon (??) (3135) who explained the dilemma of awarding bodies / DCSF / Government passing the buck ... and asked David 'what can the politicians do about this?' .. she said that everyone is able to take forward the ideas of the conference BUT .. we can't get past that ... the problem is assessing the curriculum ..
David's said it was not a question of 'throwing away the curriculum' .. he likened the curriculum to a spine .. the body does not get very far without it .. instead he focussed on assessment:
****************************************************
The problem is not throwing away the curriculum, it's assessing the curriculum. (.referred to the earlier criticism of the role of the press .....) the other issue that bedevils education is that we are trying to evolve a 21st century education system but we're still stuck with what looks horribly like a nineteenth century assessment process - we've absolutely failed to develop assessment processes which can take advantage of what you can do - the things you can to - and translate them into something which parents at home can understand so how do we explain to parents that actually the work that your so or daughter has been doing on his or her Blackberry is translated into something that they tangibly see as points or certificates or something that they can go out into the outside world and boast about .... the emotional leap has befuddled us .. [ we need to ]make absolutely sure that as we do it the assessment processes for that curriculum remain contiguous with the development of the curriculum - if we don't do that we will always have a drag anchor wherever we are going - so I would say on balance that there is more work to be done on assessment than there is to be done on curriculum at present.
*******************************************************
He does acknowledge that there are well-meaning people at QCA who want to address this.
So what is the answer? What is the purpose of assessment? Is there a middle way between the extremes of education being for a state purpose / allowing the teacher free rein? How can we veer assessment so that we strike some sort of balance? I don't know ....
But perhaps it would help to make more explicit the connection between the two 'thorns' David identifies of (1) the nature of assessment and (2) the press:.............. the league tables. [he may have mentioned this earlier .. this is a quick reaction to a first hearing ....]. Perhaps if we could abolish league tables our hands would be less 'tied'. But is there any chance of that happening? Which political party would be brave enough to put this in a manifesto and have a chance of being elected?
(And 'PS' .. I admit to having been rather overwhelmed by a visit to the House of Lords this week when Lord Puttnam passed right in fron tof me and I squealed.. a bit ..hope he didn't notice!! .. will blog about the visit later!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)