What exactly are T Levels for?
In October 2007 at the CBI , flanked by Richard Lambert of the CBI, Mike Tomlinson ,the former head of Ofsted and Steve Smith VC of Exeter University, Ed Balls, the then Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, pronounced , with much brio ,that the” Diploma range could become the qualification of choice over the next decade.”
He intoned “If Diplomas are successfully introduced and are delivering the mix that employers and universities value, they could become the qualification of choice for young people. But, because GCSEs and A-Levels are long-established and valued qualifications, that should not be decided by any pre-emptive Government decision, but by the demands of young people, schools and colleges.”
It turned out to be a big ‘ if’. The demand simply wasn’t there. Designed by a committee of ‘experts’, they were neither academic nor technical qualifications, but a hybrid instead . It was a qualification, moreover ,that no employer had ever asked for. Nobody ever said that ‘the one thing we really need now is a qualification that is neither academic, nor technical but somewhere in between? Yet that is what the Diploma was. With the demand not there, aswell as being expensive to deliver, Diplomas quickly disappeared from the qualifications landscape. The fear now must be that T Levels may well go the same way, unless some radical action is taken.
The government wants level 3 BTECs, which are taken by around a quarter of a million students each year, to be largely replaced by T Levels. So that we have a binary system either A levels or T Levels.
In late 2021, ministers asked universities “to accept T Levels for entry to, at a minimum, all courses of study for which you currently accept other technical qualifications”.
But as FE Week revealed last week, not all universities have responded positively to this .Indeed, less than half of all UK universities so far have confirmed they will accept T Levels for entry this year, with most Russell Group universities opting out. The most obvious reason why universities are not opting in, at the moment ,is fear of the unknown. T Levels are untested. It takes time for any qualification to bed in and demonstrate its relevance, and robustness. Universities will be concerned that the T Levels on offer may not adequately prepare students for their courses. As things stand students with BTEC qualifications are more likely to drop out of courses than those with other’ academic’ qualifications. The fear must be that the T Level students carry the same, if not greater, risk for universities. The Office for Students, which is taking a more robust stance on drop- outs and value for money in HE courses, will be all over any university like a bad rash, that is seen to be failing in these areas. So, universities are being entirely rational in showing some caution.
Mary Curnock Cook argued, last week in FE Week, that three things need to happen. First, they should make things much clearer to T Level students – many of whom might have expected a wealth of HE course opportunities on the back of the fanfare about UCAS points being awarded. Second, if universities have doubts about the suitability of T Levels, they should engage with the DfE to ensure that future waves of T Level development take those concerns into account. And finally , all of this would be easier for universities, she says , if the government were clearer about exactly what and whom T Levels are for. A qualification highly specified against occupational standards and clearly tilted towards specific job roles might never do well in supporting pathways to higher education.
Curnock Cook added that ‘Positioning T Levels as all things to all pathways is unfair to students when the choices they make at 16 are so critical to their future working lives’
HEPIs Nick Hillman suggests that Ministers should now discuss with universities whether there are enough resources to ensure applicants with T Levels will thrive on degree courses. In return, universities should, wherever possible, give the benefit of the doubt to those applicants who are , what he terms, ‘T Level guinea pigs’ .( I think we should also remember, at his juncture and with some sympathy, the Diploma Guinea Pigs! )Young People are adversely affected by these policy errors and there is also much waste of taxpayers money. (although one wonders given how much money is being written off by the Treasury in the wake of the Covid 19 Furlough scheme whether getting value for money for us taxpayers is a government priority anymore)
Hillman also shares others concerns over government attempts to create a simple binary qualifications scheme in the complex interconnected landscape that has evolved over the years, ie either A Levels or T Levels. It is premature, he argues (FE Week 25 Jan), to start shutting down the proven BTEC route. In this many would agree.
The Times Education Commission has just issued some interim findings of its Inquiry, (its full report is out this summer) which provides a depressing picture of the inadequacies of our education system and how it is failing both our children, and employers. On the vocational side it says that ‘ Despite government promises to boost technical education, there has been a 36 per cent drop in apprenticeship starts over the past five years. The new vocational T-levels are proving problematic in areas where it is hard for students to get the work placements that are required and many universities are not accepting the untested qualification.’
What is clear is that there are a number of issues that need to be addressed, short term, that require action and collaboration between the government, HE providers, FE Colleges ,trainers , UCAS and the Regulator too , if these teething problems are to be sorted out . At the moment the drop in Apprenticeships available , the drive to end BTECs , and the problems with T- levels and universities, paint a picture of some chaos in our technical and vocational education landscape , presenting a massive challenge for the new education secretary. It is far too important for this particular Can to be kicked down the road, yet again.
assessment
Need for Assessment Reforms
The Times -Letter Published 10 June 2021
Sir, It is comforting that Professor Louise Hayward (“It’s time to shake up the English education system”, Red Box, Jun 8) is looking at the future of assessment. The present system places a ridiculously high premium on students’ short-term memorisation while barely acknowledging the need for critical thinking or collaborative work to problem-solve, a requirement out there in the real world. The ability to get the best out of yourself and others in a collaborative environment is not valued, let alone assessed. We know that a scaffold of core knowledge and concepts is required by all students to problem-solve and progress in education, but a better balance can be struck. After formal education our young people have to work, not in isolation but with others, and with constant access to changing information. Hence it is essential that future accountability and assessment frameworks properly reflect this.
Patrick Watson
London SW8
Time to Shake up Our Assessment System ?
Louise Hayward, professor of Educational Assessment and Innovation at the University of Glasgow and chairwoman of the Independent Assessment Commission, this week informed Times readers that the Independent Assessment Commission (IAC), which comprises teachers, parents, young people, employers, policymakers, teacher educators and researchers, are seeking to develop principles for a qualification system that delivers Equitable, Reliable Assessment (ERA) . The idea is to inspire a national conversation around England’s qualification system. Some have been arguing that our assessment and qualifications system is no longer fit for purpose. The hiatus caused by the pandemic means that now may be the time for a fundamental rethink ,particularly around the nitty gritty of assessment. I agree. The commission wants ‘ a new ERA for our qualifications system to encourage all young people to learn throughout their personal and professional lives. Enabling a strong, stable and sustainable society where everyone can contribute and make progress and that meets the needs of all young people.
Professor Hayward also asked for help in gathering evidence. So if you are interested contact http://www.neweraassessment.org.uk.
As things stand the current system places a ridiculously high premium on students short term memorisation, while barely acknowledging the need for critical thinking or collaborative work to problem solve, a requirement out there in the real world. The system also elevates the importance of summative assessment above formative assessment, although, arguably, the latter is more valuable to both teacher and student ,enabling teaching and learning to be be adjusted continuously. The ability to get the best out of yourself and others, in a collaborative environment, is not valued, let alone assessed. We know that a scaffold of core knowledge and concepts is required by all students to problem solve and progress in education , but a better balance can be struck . After formal education our young people have to work , not in isolation, but with others and with constant access to changing information. It is essential, therefore, that the future accountability and assessment frameworks properly reflect this . So lets get on with it!
Memorisation and Learning- Paul A Kirschner at SSATs conference
Memory and Learning
Don’t confuse access to information with knowledge
William Faulkner said in ‘Light in August’ that “ memory believes before knowing remembers”. In recent years cognitive psychologists have established that the mechanics of memory have a big impact on learning. Professor Paul Kirschner, in a key note presentation at last weeks well attended SSAT Annual conference, described the difference between short term, or working memory, and long term memory(LTM) and its impact on learning .
Short Term and Long Term Memory
The long-term memory can be defined as a huge, virtually limitless repository of vocabulary, concepts and procedures. Human intellect comes from this stored knowledge and not from long, complex chains of reasoning in working memory. Everything we see, hear or think about, it seems, is dependent upon our long term memory.
The human working short term memory, on the other hand, is much more limited. It is the ‘space’ in which we think and process information immediately. The relationship between short term and long term memory and the cognitive processes that support learning are all vital to learning. Indeed, long term memory is seen as the single dominant structure of human cognition. Learning is defined as a change in long-term memory. And the human cognitive architecture is formed of both long-term and short-term memory “where the long-term incorporates a massive knowledge base that is central to all of our cognitively based activities”
Working memory can only hold, for a short time, a few items so 7+/- 2 items for less than a minute. When working memory fills its processing capacities, it slows down. Kirschner demonstrated this with an exercise in memorisation in which the audience participated, memorising basic sequences of related numbers and letters. The exercise starkly demonstrated the constraints of short term memory.
When students are working on a task – be it reading, writing, solving a maths problem or throwing a ball – they are mainly relying on the representations of these experiences in their long-term memories. When we solve a new problem, we are not really working it out. We are remembering it. This is because the space in the working-memory is so small. And, It is easy to overload this short term memory. Its constrained ,unlike long term memory, which is virtually limitless.
The encouraging thing though is that long-term memories can be brought back to mind when they are needed/ The point about this is that if nothing has been changed in long-term memory, then nothing has been learned. If you know your times-tables, for instance, this knowledge can be employed to help in the solving of more complex problems without placing any extra stress on working memory. Therefore, the more developed our mental schemas – the vast repositories of concepts and procedures in our long-term memory – the easier it is to learn new information.
So what? How does this impact on what teachers do ? Well, teachers want their students to retain what they are being taught and apply it later on. They get frustrated that their students forget vital information so quickly. So, teachers should ease the load on their students’ short term, working memories. Too much information leads to cognitive over-load. So how do you get information to embed in your long term memory? In short, the more students practice something, the more likely it will be that this stays in the long term memory. Broadly its called the Test Effect. Teachers need to free up short term memory to ensure that more information gets s stored in long term memory.
Schema
So, teacher instruction must consider how this information is stored and organised in LTM so that it is then accessible when and where it is needed. This is where schema theory comes in. Knowledge is stored in LTM in schemata. Schemata is about categorising information elements according to how they will be used , A schema can hold a huge amount of information, yet is processed as a single unit in working memory. Schemata can integrate information elements and production rules and become automated, thus requiring less storage and controlled processing. Skilled performance consists of building increasing numbers of increasingly complex schemas by combining elements consisting of lower level schemas into higher level schemas. . In summary, schema construction aids the storage and organisation of information in long-term memory and reduces working memory load so avoiding cognitive over-load. (If you’ve missed it , this is the new big idea in cognitive psychology.)
Multi- Tasking and Distractions
Well, at least we can all multi-task (especially women!). Well actually we can’t. Or at least not at all well. Because our short term memory is so constrained, we are not good at multi- tasking, although we may think we are. What we actually do is shift from one task to another. And we are particularly bad at functioning in basic tasks if we are in any way distracted while carrying out that task. Those who claim to to multitask at scale show an enormous range of cognitive deficits. They’re basically terrible at all sorts of cognitive tasks, including multitasking.
If ,for example, a car driver is distracted by using his/her mobile phone ,even hands free, Kirschner revealed an experiment that showed drivers reaction times and the distance it takes to stop a car, is badly affected by mobile phone use. (the data was pretty shocking) Using a mobile phone was considerably worse, as it happens, than if someone is impaired by alcohol.
Kirschner made it clear that the use of computers and mobiles during his presentation were distractions and should be switched off. Much better to use pencil and notepad. Some teachers in the audience were inevitably caught out .The broader lesson for teachers though is to reduce distractions, and that includes technology, for learners to a minimum because we cannot multi-task and our short term memory has significant constraints and is prone to overload.
The Testing Effect
The testing effect was referenced as means of embedding information and knowledge in long term memory (LTM). It is the finding that long-term memory is increased when some of the learning period is devoted to retrieving the to-be-remembered information through testing with proper feedback. The effect is also sometimes referred to as retrieval practice, practice testing, or test-enhanced learning. Testing has a powerful positive effect on future retention. If students are tested on material and successfully recall or recognize it, they will remember it better in future than if they had not been tested. . Frequent testing leads students to space their study efforts, permits them and their instructors to assess their knowledge on an ongoing basis, and—most important —serves as a powerful mnemonic aid for future retention.
Actually, the limitations of working memory mean that we have to have a store of facts in long-term memory, in order to be able to think. Not only that, but in order to use reference tools like Google and Wikipedia effectively, you need a great deal of knowledge to begin with stored in your long term memory .Those who think that you simply need access to the internet now and don’t need to learn and store facts are simply wrong. They clearly confuse information with knowledge, not uncommon among Edutechies. Who can disagree with that? Making knowledge stick, so you can apply it later on matters to us all .Because that is what learning is really about. Memorisation and applying knowledge over time , is learning. And the more we know, the more we can think.
Memorisation and Rote Learning
Rote memorization actually encourages surface learning, rather than anything deeper “Cognitively passive” study methods, are based on repetition and rehearsal, i.e., rote memorization. While these techniques can make it easier (and faster) to recall information within a narrow window of time, when it comes to application, analysis, and other higher-order types of knowledge, they may be worse than useless because they consume valuable time that could/should be spent on deep learning approaches
There are a list of techniques that can help LTM which Paul Kirschner briefly referenced in his presentation .There are quite a few .But here are just some:
Retrieval practice
Self-quiz frequently by recalling information from your memory. Every time you access a memory, you strengthen it. So, not only does self-quizzing help you identify your areas of weakness, it also helps you retain the information for later recall by strengthening the neural connections.
Elaborative rehearsal
Link new information to things you already know. Access to memories is greatly improved when the information being learned is meaningful. To aid in recall, study methods should involve deliberate creation of logical, intuitive, and even fanciful associations with existing knowledge. Make sense of new information and develop an organizational scheme/framework; information you understand rarely needs to be “memorized.”
Generation effect
Retention and recall are improved when you actively participate in the creation of your own knowledge. So, Create your own summaries, study guides, tables, flow charts, diagrams, etc.
Dual coding
Create both a visual and a verbal memory for the same information.
Associate words with pictures
o Use your own words to describe a picture/figure/diagram
o Translate a written passage into a drawing or diagram
Distributed effort
Spread studying out over several days, rather than cramming. Say you’re going to spend 10 hours studying a particular topic, rather than spending one marathon 10-hour session, it is far more effective to spend that time as 10 one-hour sessions, or 5 2-hour sessions, or even 2 5-hour sessions, spread out over two or more days. This is why it is so very important to review everyday. Obviously, you cannot review everything everyday, but make sure you frequently review the things that are most challenging to you.
For more information on Paul A. Kirschners thinking and research
Knowledge, the Curriculum and the Substance of Education
A joint pamphlet has just been published by ASCL and Parents and Teachers for Excellence (PTE)- The Question of Knowledge- practicalities of a knowledge-based curriculum’. It reiterates just how important the curriculum is , and how it is increasingly seen as central to education reforms, reinforced by the backdrop of recent speeches and commentaries from Ofsteds Amanda Spielman, in which she has made it clear how much she rates the importance of the curriculum –“One of the areas that I think we sometimes lose sight of is the real substance of education. Not the exam grades or the progress scores, important though they are, but instead the real meat of what is taught in our schools and colleges: the curriculum.”(23 June 2017)
There has long been debate about what the curriculum in schools should look like and offer . With Nick Gibb as Schools Minister there is much promotion of the knowledge based curriculum, heavily influenced by the thinking and teachings of ED Hirsch. Gibb firmly believes that the pendulum has now swung towards knowledge, and away from skills .The alternative ‘progressive’ view of the curriculum is that it should be more about skills development and cross cutting thematic approaches, in which core content is more about activities and skills, fitted specifically to the needs of the 21st century , rather than relying so much on traditional, detailed subject-based content ,and the need for memorisation that goes with it.
Leora Cruddas ,until recently Director of Policy and Public Relations, ASCL, now Chief Executive of FASNA , says of ED Hirsch “The influence of E. D. Hirsch on educational thinking has been profound. At its heart is the idea that returning to a traditional, academic curriculum built on shared knowledge is the best way to achieve social justice in society. His work has also encouraged schools to focus on the concept of building cultural capital as a way to close the attainment gap.”
This booklet arises from a series of lectures, publications and public panels in England over the last two years on the subject of the knowledge curriculum.’ The centre right think tank Policy Exchange for example published a pamphlet on Hirsch in 2015 (see link) When PTE and ASCL decided that they wanted to commission and publish this booklet, their aim , apparently, ‘ was to give a voice to the many educators who have attempted to answer these questions in their schools. We hope it is a useful contribution, particularly for those school leaders who are looking to explore the question of knowledge and the practicalities of a knowledge-based curriculum.’
Michaela Katib, Head of Cobham School, articulates the thinking behind the knowledge based curriculum well when she says “ We believe that students need a knowledge-based curriculum to ensure they have solid foundations across a range of subject areas. We feel that a structured, well-planned curriculum, which offers appropriate progression and builds on prior learning, is the best way to prepare students for success in public examinations and equip them for their future careers.” And she introduces an important caveat “ The focus on imparting knowledge does not mean that we dismiss the value of pupils acquiring skills and, indeed, we feel that schools should offer a balance of approaches. However, we also recognise that pupils cannot be taught skills in a vacuum and benefit from expert, teacher-led instruction in order to acquire secure subject knowledge as a platform for their learning.”
Luke Sparkes and Jenny Thompson, of Dixons MAT say the secret to success isn’t the socio-economic make up of your cohort or the location of your school. For them:
“A knowledge-based curriculum is about harnessing the power of cognitive science, identifying each marginal gain and acting upon it; having the humility to keep refining schemes of work, long term plans and generating better assessments.”
The Question of Knowledge practicalities of a knowledge-based curriculum –Parents and Teachers for Excellence and ASCL
See Also
Knowledge and the Curriculum: A collection of essays to accompany E. D. Hirsch’s lecture at Policy Exchange Sep 17, 2015
Note
Parents and Teachers for Excellence (PTE) is a new movement to promote reforms within the education system and to spread good practice to help deliver excellence in schools across the country focused mainly on academy and free schools as engines of change
OFQUAL -ALL CHANGE?
Since 2008, departmental select committees have had a formal role in the appointment process of some designated public posts which fall under the remit of their respective Government departments.
The term of office of the current OFQUAL Chief Regulator, Glenys Stacey, came to an end in February 2016. Amanda Spielman, the respected Chair, has been in charge in the transition ,as the stand in chief regulator . Following its evidence session, the Education Select Committee will publish a report of its opinion on the government’s preferred candidate, Sally Collier’s suitability for the role. Its expected to give her the nod.
Sally Collier is the government’s choice as new head of Ofqual, She has been CEO of the Crown Commercial Service (CCS) the Cabinet Office agency responsible for government purchasing. Her qualifications and experience for this new job are not obvious. Her expertise lies in procurement not in qualifications or anything to do with education . Critics of the CCS , under her, and there are many, say it has failed to move with the changing times and that it persists with old-fashioned, commodity-oriented practices no longer appropriate in a world where agility and flexibility are required. . “They are perhaps the last and least-forward thinking people in government,” said one source to Computer Weekly recently. There are legitimate concerns over the significant rises in staff costs and budgets at the Crown Commercial Service, also known by some who have dealt with it as “A Procurement Organisation on Steroids”. There are also continuing allegations that it has favoured large companies ( the likes of Capita, for example ) rather than SME’s. The Cabinet Office, remember, is supposed to have been promoting more procurement with SMEs.
The world of qualifications and their regulation is complex and challenging, some might say byzantine, and needs a safe pair of hands. Ofqual has been widely criticised for delays in its accreditation of new GCSEs and A levels. Ministers are seeking to lay the blame at the door of the exam boards for not producing high quality specifications quickly enough, although the boards have their own story to tell. Collier’s appointment could signal that it is the government’s intention to develop a new model for Ofqual, focusing much more on the procurement side. Nicky Morgan, the Education Secretary, said, significantly, “ Sally has significant experience in the complex environment of public procurement and in leading and managing large teams through periods of significant change “. But if Ofqual is in future going to resemble a procurement organisation more than just a regulator, many in education will have serious reservations.
If this is the case, it’s worth reminding ourselves of Ofquals goals and objectives (taken from its Development Plan for 2015 to 2018)
Goal 1: Regulating and reforming general qualifications
Objective 1: Regulate for the validity of general qualifications throughout their life cycle.
Objective 2: Oversee the introduction of reformed general qualifications.
Objective 3: Regulate for the validity of National Assessments.
Goal 2: Regulating vocational and other qualifications
Objective 4: Regulate for the validity of vocational and other qualifications throughout their life cycle.
Objective 5: Promote a healthy vocational qualifications market.
Goal 3: Developing our people, resources and systems
Objective 6: Build our capability and capacity.
Objective 7: Invest in better information management to improve the quality and accessibility of information.
Objective 8: Efficient and effective use of resources.
There are two big questions here. Is Collier being brought in to fundamentally change the Ofqual model? And, whether this is the case or not, given the patchy performance record of the CCS and its escalating cost base during her tenure (we still live in austere times remember) is she the right choice as Chief Regulator?
IF INNOVATION IS SO IMPORTANT-WHY DONT WE INCENTIVISE IT IN EDUCATION AND ACROSS THE PUBLIC SECTOR
Growth of output per head determines living standards and innovation determines the growth of output per head. So, what determines innovation?
Innovation depends on creativity, new insights and entrepreneurship. It’s the entrepreneurs who are central to creating jobs. But how do we help create more entrepreneurs? Part of the answer must lie in the education system. And ,interestingly, part of the answer may lie too with a broader role for government .
The current education model does little, if anything, to encourage creativity, innovation, new insights or entrepreneurship. With respect to students such are the requirements and demands of the accountability and assessment frameworks, that the system incentivises conformity and teaching to the test. It doesn’t reward creativity and innovation. Politicians will tell you that here, in England our autonomous schools system encourages schools to innovate to improve outcomes and gives them the freedom to dream up new approaches to personalizing education. But there is slender evidence that this is the case, across the system. Nor has there been real efforts to design reliable metrics to examine the relationship between educational innovation and changes in educational outcomes. And it fails to take into account two basic factors. Firstly, schools are not nearly as autonomous as politicians would like us to believe. They have to operate within a tight regulatory framework,; they often cant invest resources in the way they would like, and professionals operating within the system feel dis- empowered . Secondly, the accountability and assessment regimes and the inconsistencies and lack of predictability inherent in these systems, can act as a straitjacket when it comes to enabling creativity, innovation, new insights as well as in the development of the kind of non-cognitive skills that are valued by society and employers.
Yong Zhao, a US academic at Oregon University , is among those who argue that globally (ie its not just our problem) creativity, entrepreneurship, and global competence are the new basic skills that will bring the “coming prosperity” to the world. But that the educational paradigm has little or no chance of preparing the talents and citizens we need in the 21st globalized century, We are neither generating the necessary jobs particularly for young people nor filling the skills gaps that are essential for sustained economic growth and prosperity into the future. So, we have to change the education model .
But, what about other policies outside education? .
Mariana Mazzucato, a Sussex university professor, says in her new book – Entrepreneurial State: Debunking Public vs Private Sector Myth- that the state has an important role here. This is counter-intuitive. It’s the private sector that’s creative, risk taking and entrepreneurial, isn’t it? However , Mazzucato claims that the entity that takes the boldest risks and achieves the biggest breakthroughs is not ,in fact, the private sector, but it is the State.
But how come the bureaucratic state has a role in fostering entrepreneurship? One has to look at the nature of unpredictability, risks and rewards. The huge uncertainties, long time scales and costs associated with fundamental, science-based innovation are hugely significant . Private sector companies, unless they are huge , (and its small and medium sized companies that dominate economies and provide the most employment), cannot and will not bear these costs, partly because they cannot be sure to reap the returns, and partly because the returns may be very long term. Investors tend to seek shorter term returns and short-termism is endemic.
Mazzucato argues that the state in fact has an indispensable role in support of both research and development but also as an active entrepreneur, taking risks and accepting some of the failures that inevitably follow.
What seems clear is that our education systems are far from efficient and are not doing enough to help develop the range of skills in young people needed in society and the job market. It is also the case that collaboration between the private and state sectors to get the best out of both is important but underdeveloped. I would also suggest that the public sector needs, if it has such an important enabling role in research and development and as an active entrepreneur, to focus more on the skills sets and competencies of its civil servants, not least in better understanding project management, understanding research and data and in the workings of the market. And there needs to be more attachments and engagement, both ways, between the sectors.
Note
More than 50 UK university leaders are currently lobbying European policymakers against possible cuts to research funding.The EU is considering plans to divert some research money to a more broadly based strategic investment fund. Universities across Europe say this would harm research and innovation.
ARE LESSER TAUGHT LANGUAGES UNDER THREAT?
Exam Boards intending to drop some languages
But if they are so important to the government shouldn’t they subsidise them ?
A brief Commons debate this week (24 March) reminded us that a number of exam bodies have decided to pull out of teaching GCSE and A-Level for what is termed ‘lesser-taught’ modern languages.
It seems that from 2016 or 2017 we will lose a large number lesser-known languages. These include Arabic, modern Greek, Japanese, Urdu, Bengali, modern Hebrew, Punjabi, Polish, Dutch, Persian, Gujarati and Turkish. The decision by exam bodies has been made on the grounds of low uptake and/or financial viability
A report by the CBI published in 2014 found that 65% of businesses say they value foreign language skills, most importantly for building relations with overseas customers and overseas suppliers.
Minister Nick Gibb confirmed that “some exam boards have announced their intention to discontinue their qualifications in some languages. Those decisions appear to have been driven more by short-term commercial interests than by a robust analysis of the language skills our economy will clearly require in the future.”
We have a particularly poor record in this country when it comes to learning the main foreign languages, let alone ‘the lesser known languages’. The Government through its Ebacc and other measures has sought to address the challenge of protecting the main modern languages, but this measure doesn’t much help the lesser ones. Language learning is facing a ‘difficult climate’ in schools as take up at GCSE and A-Level remain low, according to a recent report from the CfBT Education Trust and the British Council, while attracting enough pupils to study a language post-16 is seen as the ‘most widespread challenge’ for language teachers’.
Its an interesting point made by Gibb about the skills requirements of the economy but since when have exam boards been responsible for analysing the language skills our economy will require in the future? They react to demand, and incentives, and are currently not incentivised to protect these lesser taught languages .You can provide incentives either through the accountability framework or through financial rewards.
Exam boards have to make decisions that are commercially sound. Take Turkish, an example used by Gibb. Turkish GCSE attracted only 1,403 entries last year, and for the Turkish A-level there were only 354 entries. How does it make commercial sense to continue with these qualifications? Polish was mentioned several times in this debate. In 2013/14, the number of pupils at the end of Key Stage 4 attempting GCSE Polish was 3,321. In 2013/14, 700 students were entered for an A-level examination in Polish.
Gibb has promised to raise the issue with the Heads of the exam boards and invite them “to consider their positions “and ,rather grandly, added ,with all the gravitas he could muster ,that he wanted the boards “ to subordinate what I believe to be a commercial calculation to the far more significant long-term economic and cultural considerations for this country.” The latter is his job. And if he and the government think it so important they should provide the incentives rather than insist that the exam boards take a hit.
Gibb, at an early point in the debate, suggested that “compensation” (ie some form of subsidy) might be an option . suggesting he would address this issue later on in the debate ,but then never did.
OFSTED –HEADING FOR REFORM? YOU BET
Steve Munby, the Chief Executive of CFBT Education Trust, writing in the Daily Telegraph on 10 February, said that it is increasingly clear that Ofsted has become too open to political interference and that the judgements Ofsted makes are ‘contestable’. He pointed out that both the Labour government and the coalition Government have changed the Ofsted framework regularly (it has changed every year for the past three years), with the consequence that time and money has to be spent on inspectors and schools being trained and retrained accordingly.
Steve is surely correct in his view that Ofsted, which has played a vital role in holding schools to account, has now become too politicised
The autonomous ‘self-improving’ schools system allows politicians, by definition, less scope to influence what happens in schools, so inevitably they use Ofsted as a lever to exert what influence they can . The latest drive to ensure that schools promote British values is just the latest Whitehall driven initiative that has left school leaders bemused and fearful as they have no clear idea of what is expected of them
Crucially the inspection system must be seen to be fair, transparent and consistent by stakeholders’ .Arguably it is none of these.
There is more than anecdotal evidence that points to inspection teams being less objective than they should be. There are now grave doubts that snap inspections can fairly grade either the quality of teaching, or whether or not students are learning. There are long running concerns over the quality and accuracy of lesson observations , which can be unreliable and prone to the ‘cognitive biases’ of individual inspectors . David Didau’s argument that stand alone lessons don’t provide evidence of much except the performance of the teacher and the students at that particular moment , resonates across the profession.
Having first denied that its inspectors favoured a particular teaching style (ie progressive/Traditional) Ofsted then quickly issued additional guidance to inspectors, on this issue, which rather gave the game away. Ofsted’s latest cunning plan ,is to have two separate inspection teams going in quick succession to schools , with the second team double checking the first teams findings
There couldn’t be a clearer example of an organisation that has lost confidence in itself and its own judgements.
Ofsted will almost certainly face reform after the next election, whoever is in government. It is not about to disappear, nor should it, because school inspections are vital for any credible accountability framework.
Apart from moves to reform Ofsted it is likely that Sir Michael Wilshaw, an outstanding former Headteacher, but perhaps less sure footed at handling what has become a highly political job as Regulator , will almost certainly , and doubtless with some relief, move on to pastures new after the election.
ERIC MAZUR- CURRENT ASSESSMENT MODELS DO LITTLE TO ADVANCE THE APPLICATION OF KNOWLEDGE
Harvard Physics Professor Eric Mazur challenges the way we assess students
System encourages short term memorisation but not 21st Century Skills
We must move away from measuring pupils’ powers of recall towards the application of knowledge
Comment
Professor Eric Mazur a physicist from Harvard University spoke at SSATs annual conference last week.
In his keynote presentation he asked- ‘Why is it that stellar students sometimes fail in the workplace while dropouts succeed?’
One reason he offered is that most, if not all, of our current assessment practices are inauthentic. Just as the lecture focuses on the delivery of information to students, so does assessment often focus on having students regurgitate that same information back to the instructor. Consequently, assessment fails to focus on the skills that are relevant in life in the 21st century. Assessment ,claims Mazur, has been called the “hidden curriculum” as it is an important driver of students’ study habits. Unless we rethink our approach to assessment, it will be very difficult to produce a meaningful change in education.
Mazur argues for a radical overhaul of the traditional exams system to ensure children are properly prepared for the world of work.
He said at SSATs conference that forcing teenagers to memorise, by rote, facts to pass tests no longer had any bearing on life outside school, where children can of course use Google to search for information in seconds.
Instead, teachers should spend more time promoting a “deep understanding” of key subjects rather than prioritising “short-term memory”, he said. Teachers of course do what the assessment and curriculum (and Ofsted here ) demand that they do.
What current systems for assessment test is predominantly lower order thinking skills. The main demand, and for which students are rewarded, is good short term memory -that is remembering and retention of information, over the short term. But this information is quickly forgotten, indeed within days rather than weeks or months. This is why learning by rote flash cards (ie cards used for revision, with a brief question on one side of the card and the answer on the other,) which is something of a fad in the States is bad and symbolizes just how wrong our assessments are . Higher order thinking skills include the ability to understand, to apply ,to analyse, evaluate and create.
Thinking Skills can be envisaged as a pyramid ( ie Blooms Taxonomy) with Creating at the apex ie the highest order thinking skill, with Remembering at the bottom or base , with Understading next ascending the pyramid , then Applying etc
Assessment ,says Mazur, is currently about ranking and classifying, rather than identifying 21st Century skills.
What are the purposes of assessment?
rate students
rate professor and course
motivate students to keep up with work
provide feedback on learning to students
provide feedback to instructor
provide instructional accountability
improve teaching and learning
Grading students though is incompatible with problem solving. Students are largely tested and assessed in isolation, denied contact or interaction with their peers, and denied access to information. But why? In effect its their short term memory and ability to cram that is being rated or assessed , not their ability to problem solve. Not their ability to apply information. ‘High stakes’ tests promote isolation and cramming. Yet in the real world of work people operate collaboratively and although there is a basic requirement for some facts to stick with individual students , students can easily look up key information they need to solve problems and ,crucially, we all routinely collaborate with colleagues in the workplace to find solutions. Collaboration is also at the core of all invention, innovation and creativity( a point made by Charles Leadbeater at the same SSAT conference) .
Grading pupils is a measure of their standing relative to others. While feedback, on the other hand, reflects on what has been learnt. So lets focus more on feedback.
Assessment can also deliver a conflict. Your teacher or coach is often your judge or marker. Does that happen elsewhere? This conflict is supposedly resolved by professional objectivity and fairness. However, only lower order thinking skills can really be judged in this way, says Mazur ie Remembering facts. And there are other problems around this, with grade inflation and cheating.
So what about solutions? We should mimic real life, says Mazur. Assessment should not be about isolating anxious students. We should have open-book exams you can go into any test with access to sources and notes. And yes you should be able to access Google.
And, as far as testing goes ,while you could have an individual elements students could also be assessed as working in a team and engaging with others to find solutions ie like the real world. In terms of marking group activity, one example was given by Mazur – called Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique (e-testing). Scratch cards have answers to multiple choice questions. If your team gets the correct answer, with their first choice, you get full marks ie four points . If you get it wrong but consult and get it right, at the second attempt, you get 3 points and so on.Mazur has reservations though about the multiple choice format but there are other ways of testing group work he says.
Earlier this year, Tony Little, the headmaster of Eton, insisted the UK education system was “peculiarly uninventive” and the country must row back from its tradition of “ritualised, mechanical” exams.
But Tim Oates, head of research at Cambridge Assessment, who led the government’s review of the national curriculum, defended the exams system to the TES, saying it was not purely intended to prepare pupils for life.
“I believe that examinations are critical; that a form of external assessment is vital and should be administered in the most valid and robust way possible,” he said.
Montrose42 Blog 