Education Policy

9 Feb 2016

Independent Writing and Independent Moderators

Teachwell Assessment, Education Policy Accountability, KS1, KS2, Primary School, Teachers 12

The teacher assessment writing exemplification materials for KS1 and KS2 have finally been released. As Michael Tidd points out in his blog, there are already questions about the extent to which the writing judged will be truly independent. In fact, it could be argued that writing in KS2 which has been planned and drafted over several sessions will have had much teacher input, feedback and corrections by the teacher. This is clearly not the same as independent writing.

As Tidd states, it is simply not as clear as previous guidance that explicitly stated the first unedited draft needed to be assessed. The old timed writing tests allowed for planning and editing, this is a far cry from teacher assessment of pieces of writing from across the year. It is even further from the idea that the pieces assessed will have been planned and drafted over several days. Maybe I’m wrong here, but surely the problems with controlled assessment will apply here. Which makes it even more ridiculous because no sooner has this practice ended in secondary, we are allowing it in primary!

The maladministration guidelines for moderators state they have to report the following:

a concern regarding the TA evidence and processes within the school
lack of independent work
changes to TA judgements by school staff to influence school assessment outcomes
a concern about the pattern of attainment

Source: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/2016-key-stage-1-assessment-and-reporting-arrangements-ara/section-8-teacher-assessment

Maladministration is further explained in the document which is used by those investigating as:

could lead to results and/or outcomes that don’t reflect pupils’ unaided work or actual abilities

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/key-stage-1-and-2-maladministration-investigation-procedures/key-stage-1-and-2-maladministration-investigation-procedures#definitions

This makes it clear that the results should reflect what the pupils are able to do without any help or support. This means that if the pieces used for teacher assessment are heavily scaffolded or include teacher feedback which changes the results, then the school is on shaky ground.

However, this will not deter schools who are desperate to avoid an inadequate rating from taking desperate measures and hoping they are not moderated. Local authorities moderate around 25% of schools and the moderation arrangements of free schools and academies are not really robust, given that they will be paying for someone to do the moderating. The reality is that it is quite easy to pay for the moderators who turn a blind eye rather than those who will report maladministration, especially if you are a school doing the maladministration on purpose!!

The DfE do need to clarify what can constitute an assessment piece. As much as some dislike the idea of cold, hot and lukewarm writes, the lukewarm write is children writing independently in a genre they have been previously taught. This gives the children a fair chance at getting the features correct as well as previous feedback to draw on. Guidelines would need to state how far apart it would need to be – so three weeks between the hot and lukewarm writes, but it would ensure a bit more integrity in the process.

Also, while in theory, allowing schools to select the pieces of writing sounds great regarding autonomy, in reality, it will lead to much distorting of data.

The exact number of fiction and non-fiction pieces of writing and types should be outlined. For example:

In KS1: One short story, one longer story, one poem, one recount and one non-fiction report, should suffice.

In KS2: two stories – one short, one long, two non-fiction reports – one chronological, one non-chronological, two types of poems (I don’t know enough about poems to decide which would be best here), one persuasive letter. (I am not persuaded (pun intended) by the idea of assessing posters to determine writing standards in Key Stages 1 and 2.) All of these types of writing are already taught in Years 3 – 5.

The cons of this approach would include:

less autonomy for teachers/schools.
more cross-curricular writing being used in assessments.
the question of independent ideas in writing.

However, I do think the emphasis on novel ideas is massively overrated in primary school. Most of us simply are not going to be writing prose and don’t need to either. I’m sure there will be many English teachers who disagree with this, and I am happy to stand corrected.

Even withstanding such a criticism, I would say that much more guidance and clarity is needed. There is a trade-off between autonomy of schools and reliability of results here. If we are going to assess children nationally, then the least we can do is make sure the arrangements are clearly understood, uniform and provide us with the information we are seeking.

In addition, we need moderators who are independent of schools, and therefore will report maladministration and take it seriously. It would require that more schools are moderated – mini-moderations during the year as well as full on ones at the end of a sample of schools. This is the only way to enable the system to set itself right again. If Local Authorities are paid by the state and Academies/Free Schools pay for the service, I don’t see why an independent body of moderators should not exist.

We must learn from the problems that have plagued Ofsted, but this may be a better means of supporting schools and the education system as a whole, as well as getting rid of some poor practice out there.

In the end, though, all children deserve to taught well enough to be literate and be able to communicate through writing. This should neither be distorted because of high stakes nor should it be left on the off chance that maladministration is reported.

27 Aug 2015

How Stressed are Children about Exams?

Teachwell Education Debate, Education Policy Accountability, Child-Centred, Children, Education Policy, Primary School, Secondary School, Teachers 1

In writing my earlier blog on Private Schools, Parents and Progressives – Why the Judgement, I ended up looking up the figures for exam stress and realised it was a post in itself!

This article quotes figures from Child Line (which is not the whole picture but it does give us an idea).

According to the projections based on the last Census there are roughly 8.8 million children of compulsory school age (5 – 16) although all may not be attending school, be taking exams and some start younger of course.

The combined figure for children who would be in Year 6 and Year 11 is 1. 4 million and if we include Year 10 (as some take exams early, etc.) it is 2.1 million. A lot of children in short.

Now look at the figures provided by Childline – 34,454 counselling sessions were held with children complaining about school and education problems – 58 per cent were about the impact of exam stress. So the actual figure is just under 20 000 counselling sessions. Or so you would think.

Except in their report it shows clearly that in only 12,911 of the 34, 454 session was education or schooling a reason for calling. In most cases education or schooling was an additional issue not the main one at all.

Presuming the 58% is an average for both main and additional concerns then roughly 7500 counselling sessions were given to children whose main reason for calling was exam stress. However, it is not clear that these sessions are for different children.

Even if we take it they are, then out of the school age children who are facing exams – the figure they represent is between 0.35% – 0.5% of children who would be taking exams. Even if we accept this figure is low – some children don’t seek help, some cope by themselves, some turn to families, etc. What is the true extent of ‘unhealthy’ exam related stress?

I ask because I don’t recall being that stressed out by it – anxious and nervous – but not so stressed it affected me negatively.

Here’s the crux of the matter – even if we double this figure we end up with 1% at most, triple it then 1.5% of children who are taking exams are under enormous stress.

Surely a solution needs to be found for this small minority of children – does changing an exam system that does not appear to cause any harm to well over 95% of children need changing? Really?

27 Jun 2015

Parents and Children as Consumers (Updated)

Teachwell Education Policy Children, Parents 5

I read the following article yesterday (here) in which Anthony Seldon, the outgoing head of Wellington College, stated his opinion on narcissistic parents who were hindering rather than supporting their child’s development and how they needed to show more respect to teachers (as well as teachers showing respect themselves to pupils).

To say that the comments section was interesting is an understatement. There were a few comments, from parents who send their children to state schools, insisting that it is teachers who need to show more respect to parents and that ‘as consumers’ they should be treated better.

I had to actually stop myself from laughing. It is true that both parents and children have been encouraged to see themselves as consumers of the product that is education and that they have rights extending as a result of this.

The Oxford Dictionary defines a consumer as: A person who purchases goods and services for personal use.

So I looked into consumer rights and the government have a handy guide here explaining what your rights are as a consumer.

So can these parents exercise consumer rights?

The first hurdle for these parents would be the fact that in order to be considered a consumer you actually have to pay for the goods. Many parents feel that they are through their taxes except for the fact that whatever their contribution may be it certainly does not pay the full cost of schooling.

Those who send their children to private schools can claim to be paying for their children to be consumers, however, even here the water is muddied by the fact that private schools have charitable status which is in effect a state subsidy.

On average the cost of sending ones child to a private school is £12 000 + a year while the likes of Eton charge in the region of £30 000. The average cost of paying for children to attend state primary school still runs into £5000+ a year on average.

The original post included figures based on the contribution that parents would make based on only 12% of their tax being spent on education.

12% of tax goes on education. Parents could only pay this cost fully if they were paying £42 000 in tax. To pay this amount of tax would mean that you would be earning at least £111 000 a year. Less than 2% of UK workers earn this. As a household you would need to earn £132 000 (individually £66 000) which only the top 10% of households earn. The parents individually would need to be in the top 5% of earners. Oh and by the way this only for one child’s education at primary school, it would need to be more for secondary.

The median salary is roughly £19 000, of which you would pay £3000 in tax and 12% of that would mean that your contribution to the education bill is £360. Nowhere near the cost of sending a child to school.

However, as QT kindly pointed out below – it is unlikely that if parents had the full amount of tax to spend at their disposal that they would only spend 12% of it on education. I take that into account and while I think the figures above illustrate the point that I was trying to make in the current context, it is important to highlight what salary would be needed if parents were free to spend the tax money on their own priorities (rather than the percentage the government chooses to spend).

On the median salary of £19 000, parents would not be able to afford to send even one child to school or would have to do so in a school that was spending £2000 per year less on each pupil. In order to pay £5000 a year in tax you need to be earning £36 000.

If we go further and take into account what the figures would be if parents were able to keep both tax and national insurance then in order to fund one school place you would need to earn between £25 000 t0 £26 000 individually or as a household. That would of course mean you would have to find the money for healthcare for your family from the rest of your income. 64% of households earn less than £26 000 and therefore would be in no position at all to afford an education for their child. (Source: 2013 Average Household Income Figures).

As for the other 36%, the 18% who earn between £26 000 and £35 000 would struggle to support one child at school while also paying for private insurance, never mind the loss of all the other benefits that are afforded to parents and/or children which they would need to find the money for.

That leaves us with those earning £35000 + as a household income who would currently pay in the region of £8 000 for NI and income tax. This group would be able to send one child to school comfortable but would not be able to pay for another out of this money.

To be able to afford that you would need a household income of £42 000 + which would cut out most of the 11% earning between £35 000 and £50 000. So to be able to afford to send one child to school comfortably each year you would need to be in the top 18% of households, in order to send two to school you would need to be in the top 10%. None of this takes into account tax credits and the like as they would not exist if we were not taxed.

The reason why all children have access to education is due to the fact that people who have no children or whose children are adults contribute as much of their tax as those who do currently have children. We do so for the good of society and the children in question. As such parents, under, working or middle class, need to be a bit more grateful for the opportunity that is afforded to their children rather than walking around with a sense of entitlement.

There are those that would suggest that these children will be paying for my pension. Well the state pension will only get disproportionately lower and my own employee or private pension will contribute far more to what I will live on than what the state will give me. There are plenty of parents and their children who live off benefits and the reality is that I am better off contributing to allowing more immigrants to come over, who will actually work and pay their taxes, than subsidising children who are being brought up to believe that life on benefits is acceptable.

Furthermore one of the parents suggested that parents should be allowed to spend the money for their child’s education where they choose. I have only got two words in response – the second is off and the first is whatever expletive is favoured by the reader.

Seriously, why should any parent have access to thousands of pounds of taxpayers money to spend on children they have chosen to have. Where does such a right or entitlement even come from? Is this not completely backward, surely as taxpayers we are contributing to support parents to enable them to bring up their children, provide appropriate healthcare and an education. This is not an entitlement, it is a welfare benefit that all parents are given. It’s not ‘their’ money.

Part of me is still livid at the attitudes of such people. Even £9 000 tuition fees do not actually pay the total cost of university – look at Buckingham University which charges over £12 000 a year in fees. In the US and other countries where the state does not fund courses at all the cost runs closer to £20 000 + a year and leaving three years of university with £100 000 debt is not unheard of. Not to mention the fact that university researchers bring in money independently that pays for their research and the cost of administration of the university, which is also a subsidy to those attending university.

I am honestly at the point where i think if parents want to bring up their children to be well-rounded, empathetic, intelligent members of society then fine I am happy to contribute. If, on the other hand, they want to bring them up to be self-centred, naval gazing ignorant narcissists then they can find the money for it themselves.

Be careful what you wish for – if the parent who wanted to spend the money as he sees fit then that’s fine, he should be given exactly what he pays in tax towards education and see where that gets him. Parents need to realise that this is a two-way streak and they need to keep up their end of the bargain if they are to continue enjoying the benefits they currently do with regards to their children.

If they want to be selfish, well the other members of society (who are contributing towards the cost of bringing up their child) can play that game too. Trust me there will only be one loser but then some people need to learn the hard way what their idiocy will lead to.

Using either sets of figures, the fact remains that the vast majority of parents would not be able to afford a place in a primary school never mind a secondary. Additionally, all families with children who attempted to send their children to school would see a very steep and sharp downfall in the income and lifestyle they currently enjoy. If parents wish to be treated as consumers in the process then they may very well get their wish.. and undoubtedly regret it.