Sound good?
One of the claws in the velvet glove is that the shorter programmes of study will be more academic and written, and practical subjects may not be as practical anymore. This could mean as you progress through the national curriculum and into KS4, music, Arts, CDT, and so on will end up being assessed by a single written paper…
Computer Science is going to be the first subject that is added to the eBacc since it’s introduction, as reported on the BBC here.
I must say congratulations to the computer industries for their lobbying and persistence, I’m happy to see the subject classed as a real science and getting the recognition it deserves. Geeks rejoice. It is pretty sad though for RE and the Arts who are once again snubbed and relegated to the bottom of the class, they have been lobbying just as hard and just as forcibly. I’m guessing this is true evidence that the Government still think the arts and RE are pointless.
In related news Good egg Kenneth Baker has just published his book “14-18 – A New Vision for Secondary Education” which questions the policy of forcing learners to stick to academic subjects until they are 16. I never thought I would agree with him but I quite simply do. Learners with a passion at 14 should be able to specialise…
Now I’m not sure yet on the mechanics of adding computer science to the eBacc and if that means you can drop the other science subjects or mix and match disciplines, so I will check on it and get back to you. I’ve also got Ken Baker’s book on order and will review it as soon as it arrives.
10 For x = 1 to 100000
20 Print “Just what on Earth is he playing at”;
30 next x
What do schools, teachers, students and parents want from universities to support kids to get to University?
Milburn expresses clearly, as the social- mobility guru, that there is much Universities can do targeted at students from under-represented groups such as disabled students, students from areas where there is traditional low participation in higher education, ethnic minority students and students from families where no one has been to university. While Universities are digesting Milburn’s report, OFFA has set out its vision and expectations for widening participation in its annual guidance for the HE sector and a page devoted to sanctions if a HEI fails to meet its HE access agreement. Now that many HEIs are charging the maximum fees they are increasingly accountable to ensure that their widen participation and access agenda is robust and takes on board the strong steers from external influencers especially OFFA.
The OFFA guidance quotes Milburn several times in a 40 page document, so the pieces of the jigsaw are coming together. What should HEIs do to widen participation and help the social mobility agenda? After all the research, including the Leach Report (remember Leach?), shows that a degree is a passport to better economic stability for the individual and supports the national skills requirements to successful participate in a global economy. Universities need to form strong links with schools, provide after school homework support facilities, set up subject study days, provide IAG on admissions processes, use contextualised data to inform admissions processes, run summer schools, provide mentors and in the main raise aspiration and attainment at KS 2, KS 3, KS4 and KS 5 and try to do this in collaboration with other HEIs. All of these activities targeted at students and schools that at the moment are under-represented in the undergraduate population – otherwise it is unaccountable by OFFA.
What do schools think about this? The independent school sector has strong links with selective universities and often these go back hundreds of years, if not more. They have a head-start, but now is the opportunity for state schools to say, in the absence of a national careers service, universities can provide my students with… Your voice needs to be heard?
I tend not to comment much on HE as there are others on here who have a lot more insight and experience than I. But the last post, at the end of last year, was on free schools and how I thought they had, by and large, not achieved much. A news story on the BBC today reports than the group behind the New College of the Humanities, in effect a rich kids private university, are to have a go at doing the same thing for secondary education.
The story is currently here.
The HE version is headed by a gang of well known professors, authors, ex-politicians and TV personalities and is recognisable by charging £16,000 a year as opposed to the usual £9,000. They can get away with it at HE because their degrees are ‘franchised’ from a different university and they don’t have to go through the rigmarole of setting up their own quality systems, they use their parent’s systems and procedures. In effect a private arm of a university with big name lecturers turning up once in a blue moon. The £16K doesn’t surprise me though. If you look at the fees charged by overseas establishments you might be surprised. I heard recently of Berklee School of Music being $60,000… not sure if that’s a year or for the entire course though.
The thought of a secondary school version of it makes me uncomfortable because what we’re basically doing is setting up a private school, not a free one. Setting up a private school is fine, if that is what you say you are doing, but setting one up with public money and calling it free when it is anything but, sounds like fraud.
I do still think that the current vision of education is completely flawed and I am desperately worried for learners, the arts, progression and the country as a whole in ten years’ time. I do like the idea of disruptive principles and challenging the curriculum. But there are only going to be rich kids benefitting from this, and that is not fair, honest or helpful.
So what are the four curriculum ‘things’ we need government education departments to be clear on?
1 – The Functional stuff. How to add up, communicate, operate a computer, calculate the size of a carpet and balance your cheque book… er.. online bank account.
2 – The Social Stuff. The stuff that defines the Englishness, Welshness, Scottishness, Britishness of our society. This would be Citizenship, Civics, PSHE, Shakespeare, RE and the like.
3 – The Stuff employers want. This is a little harder but it is the essential stuff that makes learners employable. It’s more likely to be the likes of project management, customer satisfaction, creativity, attention to detail and problem solving, but might also include some subjects like English, Maths, Science, MFL and so on. Maybe there are two routes here?
4 – The stuff learners want. This might be the stuff to get them to FE or HE as well as the stuff that burns their interest and focusses their passion. It might be subjects, maths, physics, chemistry, music and art. But it might also be engineering, robotics, computer gaming/programming/hacking, agriculture, plumbing or tap dancing.
So what proportion of each and in what school and when?
Very interesting to see the engineers fighting back and arguing to keep their engineering diploma in face of the race to academia currently underway in English schools. If you missed the article it’s here.
Engineering was in the very first phase of diplomas that were introduced, at huge expense, by the last Government and sadly wherever I go I hear of schools and colleges dropping them and learners not wanting to take them. The diplomas were complex, weird, government designed, unusual, and new, not a single redeemable feature. Except, well, they were a breath of fresh air, they had great sector support, full employer buy-in, university progression, a modern approach and were a genuine alternative. It’s only natural, therefore for them to get squished.
Now, full disclosure, I was the director of a diploma development project and although ours never even had the opportunity of being launched, it had all the positives in place and was well on the way to being a great addition to the rather staid and bland A level curriculum. There was much talk of rescuing the bulk of each diploma and turning it into a separate stand alone qualification, we even had an offer from an awarding body, but the government now own the IP and it’s going to be stored in Warehouse 13 for evermore. Right next to the Ark of the Covenant and Edgar Allen Poe’s pen.
The diplomas were a wonderful first step, version 2, which was already being planned, would have been better still and version 4 or 5 could have made a real impact on education in England. So I salute the engineers and look forward to a similar response from the other 16 sectors.
No? Anyone? Dust….?
Many thanks to good mate Doug for pointing me to this Radio 4 documentary which you can catch up with on the BBC Radio iPlayer (go to BBC iPlayer radio and search for “Analysis – The School of hard Facts” just in case this link doesn’t work out.)
The programme goes into the work of E.D. Hirsch, who developed the concept of ‘cultural literacy and core knowledge’ that our current education secretary thinks is the best thing since sliced bread. It’s a fascinating prgramme, see how long you can go without loosing your temper…
This video was used to provoke debate in staff development sessions. It asks a very simple question about learning, school, examinations and life. Do you ever step off the straight? The film always provokes some good discussion, and a lot of comment, particularly about the cyclists breathing!
Please feel free to use the film in your own staff development sessions, here are some questions and prompts to get things going.
1) In this school, what is the straight? Just how much is set down and formally required? Just how flexible is the curriculum?
2) The cyclist clearly has a sense of adventure as a lot of risks are taken and there is a lot of potential danger. What are the risks in stepping off the straight in this school? Is there really, truly, any danger?
3) Who would you need to speak to about stepping off the straight? Is it right that you have autonomy in your classroom and the freedom to do what you want without clearing it with anyone? Head of year? Head of department? Headteacher? What would the headteacher say anyway?
4) Why do you think the film is called “The Straight” and not “The Straight and Narrow”?
5) How do you measure it? Everything is measured in school so how do you measure a journey where you are not sure where you are going? What would OFSTED say? How do you show the value of using your own initiative?
6) You may know of some alternative approaches to education that value ‘the journey’ more than ‘the destination’. Why do we not value these approaches more in this country?
You may be interested to see that Sir Kenneth Baker is the Chair of the Edge Foundation, there are lots of pics of him at the Six Steps for Change launch on their flickr feed http://www.flickr.com/photos/edgefoundation/ Yes, that Kenneth Baker, tory minister under Thatch, he who gave us “Baker Days”, the National Curriculum and SATs. Having said that though he also deeply understands the vocational world and is doing a great job at Edge. Some Conservatives do understand the real world, I was sorry to see John Hays go from his post in charge of FE and Skills in the last re-shuffle and worry deeply about his replacement.
He’s not my favourite Ken Baker though, that is Kenny Baker, the actor who was inside the R2-D2 costume in Star Wars.
On a similar line to Edge’s initiative is Free Education, http://free-education.org who are trying to wrestle education from the hands of the politicians and are currently fund raising and mobilising. As long as education is in the hands of people who don’t understand it we will never really make any true progress.
All good stuff.
I’d like to welcome “No Full Stops in Education” to our team. You will immediately spot that she is far more intelligent than I because she’s keeping her identity secret. Very wise. So just to say she’s in a senior position in HE, with a deeply impressive and knowledgable history in education, policy and qualifications behind her. I look forward to her posts.
What a summer! I was lucky to be able to watch and attend the Olympics, what a privilege! I am still reflecting on the skills and talents of the athletes; what was it that made these people not only be good enough to get to the Olympics but for some of them to actually be the best on the day and get either a bronze, silver or gold medal and a few more than one? This was a celebration of people that had gained skills and became the best in the world.
So what has the DfE learnt from this summer of the excellent displays of vocational and knowledge-based skills in perfect balance? Oh yes, there was some awkwardness around school playing-field statistics and policy, and competitive sports was being debated again! For me this was an opportunity to say yes, children can benefit from a balance of academic and vocational study, both of which they will need in the work place along with personal skills.
Is the debate for this tripartite of essential skills over as we move into Autumn and the demand for academic rigour is met? Or will the placement of David Laws in the corridors of Sanctuary Building make a difference?