Is it Time for a Revolution in Education?

Nick Boles, the former Tory Minister, in the Times this week wrote:
‘The pandemic, and the repeated closure of schools and colleges, have revealed that England’s education system is an unholy mess. The curriculum, the exams, the length of school terms, the length of the school day, the transition from childcare to school, the transition from study to work, the way teachers are trained and rewarded, the way that schools are regulated and assessed. The current system is a ramshackle hodgepodge combining the ideological projects of successive education ministers (like me) with institutions designed to do a different job in a different age for people who would lead different, and much shorter, lives and do different jobs in a society with different values and different needs. It requires wholesale reform.’
He wants a short and snappy royal commission, composed of the finest scientists, educationalists, economists and business leaders in the land. This would examine and make recommendations on our education system in the round and how it will be affected by the fourth industrial revolution and digitalisation and remote learning . Certainly, quite a few in education, and its fringes, see the Pandemic as a once in a lifetime opportunity to completely rethink the way we deliver education, and how we assess learning. In a nutshell, we should prepare our young for the brave new post-pandemic world, which will be a very different one from that which their parents and teachers entered after leaving school or university. Critical thinking ,some believe, needs to be the pillar of the new education system, perhaps along with more blended learning and different methods of assessment too . Too much time and effort is focused on the exam league tables and training students simply to pass exams rather than in developing deeper knowledge , the argument goes . Indeed Pearson has just launched a consultation, backed by a high powered expert panel, to look at the future of assessment, with an implicit assumption that the way we assess students must change .This in turn places a big question mark over the future of GCSEs. The pandemic also provides an opportunity to look again at lifelong and adult education ,as skills shortages and the impact of Artificial Intelligence reveal themselves. In the debate mix sits that old chestnut-should we focus on acquiring knowledge or skills , as if this is a self-evident dichotomy. Surely Knowledge is only relevant alongside the skills to interpret it; skills are only useful when there is a foundation of embedded knowledge from which to draw. But the debate still trundles on.
But others worry that one thing we really don’t need just now, after a year of massive disruption to our system, is even more disruption. Give children and teachers some slack ,they say. . Children’s long term learning and mental well-being is at stake . Teachers are also under a lot of pressure. Why add to it? Professor Alan Smithers is among those who worry about the patrician approach being mooted and the potential disruption . In a Times letter he notes ‘ The wholesale reform envisaged would itself result in more disruption than Covid has wreaked. The pandemic has forced us out of many of our habits, and getting it under control will provide a golden opportunity to take a fresh look at what we do. But as regards education let us build on and improve what we have already, and do this through our established democratic processes.’

Its important that we always keep our education system under review. It shouldn’t be carved in stone. It is inadequate, in many respects, and still reflects ,to an extent at least, the requirements of a bygone era. Our assessment system places too much of a premium on the ability to access short term memory. Not enough on demonstrating deep knowledge or critical thinking or, indeed, our pupils ability to work productively with others . Better use can be made of Artificial Intelligence, too ,to help personalise the education offer, and to free up teacher time from administrative tasks. . We still do not have a system that properly integrates and acknowledges sufficiently the need for good vocational and practical skills. Maybe, for example, in this respect, a broader baccalaureate, incorporating academic and vocational education at the age 18 could work better. We must accept that many individuals change their careers, often more than once, and therefore need to access education and training throughout their lives but the supply and funding of lifetime learning is a mess. All of this means change really is necessary. But it requires a level of strategic and joined up thinking and cross departmental co-operation that has been signally absent, so far, in education politics.
The timing ,of course, is important too. We now have to take into account the damage caused by the pandemic and how this will ,undeniably, impact on the priorities in education over the next few years .Just as Brexit narrowed the political bandwidth, so will the Pandemic and its consequences, in education and elsewhere .Experts, can of course, point us to the evidence that should inform policy development. But one thing the Pandemic has taught us, if we didnt know already, that experts have differing opinions and do not always provide consensus or clarity to point the way forward. . So lets be realistic. Revolution is not in the wings. Lets us hope instead for real, but more modest changes, over the short to medium term ,while we seek to help those students worst affected by the pandemic to make up their learning loss. Over the medium, to longer term, that is where we can be much more ambitious in our planning to transform, where it is needed, the system and its incentives, whether its in teaching, learning or assessment

Academic Freedom and the Failure of University League Tables

It’s a given that lawful free speech and academic freedom must be supported to the fullest extent at universities so that students, staff and visiting speakers feel free to explore a range of ideas and challenge perceived wisdom . Academics must be free to create new knowledge, that is then freely disseminated to their students and the wider academic community. Indeed ,if you think about it ,progress in the sciences and humanities depends on open informed discussion, on testing arguments and hypotheses, however difficult and uncomfortable. Nobody has a right not to be offended. And nothing should trump the unhindered pursuit of knowledge, in academe. Arguably ,if you are not offended at some point in your university career ,its probably not doing its job.
However, a number of recent reports have provided evidence of a range of threats to freedom of speech and academic expression at UK universities. A 2019 report by Kings College London found signs of a “chilling effect”; as 1 in 4 students reported that they were scared to express their views for fear of repercussions. A recent report by Policy Exchange found that some academics feel similarly reluctant to express their views, with some academics reporting that they face discrimination throughout recruitment and promotion processes as a result of their political views. A 2017 report by the University and Colleges Union found that UK academics believe they have worse levels of protection of academic freedom, compared to their colleagues in other EU countries. It is a quirk of our system, and the result of our unwritten constitution, that our laws really are not good, as things stand, at protecting academic freedom . Indeed, there are increasing calls to tighten up legislation affecting freedom of speech and academic freedom and its something that the government is currently considering.

So ,it follows that protecting academic freedom is something for which universities must be held to account .They should be seen to guarantee the academic freedom of staff and students in their statutes and rules ; the principal or Vice Chancellor should have a duty to protect academic freedom of staff and students . All members of staff should be obliged to promote freedom of study, research, and teaching ; and students should have the right to freedom of study and research .

Some measure of accountability could be done, relatively simply , via university league tables. But it isn’t happening .Not at the moment ..

Given that some of the top-ranked international universities have poor reputations for defending these freedoms, it would refocus universities’ minds on their role in protecting these, as well as on the consequences of a failure to do so.

It is true, of course, that some of our own Universities would probably not rate as well as they do now ,if such a metric were introduced . Tough. Oxbridge are a case in point.There have been a number of recent cases where these universities have bowed to outside pressure and failed to protect their academics.

Then there is the rise of Chinese universities in these league tables. Its surely discomfiting to most that Chinese Universities, which have an abysmal record in protecting academic freedom, are effortlessly rising up, the League tables, year in ,year out.(look at the Times Higher Education League Table over the last three years).

Xi Jinping ,we know, has consolidated and centralized power and reasserted the CCPs control over information, education, and the media. Chinese universities are ultimately controlled by their authoritarian, interventionist government which has invested so heavily in them, and are not allowed to research a whole raft of issues, subject either to direct censorship , and interventions, or choosing to practise self-censorship, for self-preservation .Selected Chinese students are tasked with reporting errant academics who do not conform to what is expected from the party. The Chinese are now seeking to influence what is researched abroad by other universities , also using their students to spy on others abroad who may be critical of the party. These activities were highlighted recently by the Commons Foreign Affairs Committee.

As long as League Tables fail to take academic freedom into account , they should ,frankly, be taken with a very large pinch of salt. There is nothing more central to the very purpose of universities than the requirement to uphold academic freedom. So measure it. Simple.

Influence of China on UK Higher Education Institutions

Need for a  rebalancing of  the relationship

The Foreign Affairs Select Committees report, in 2019, on  the rules-based international system,  heard alarming evidence about the extent of Chinese influence on the campuses of UK universities. Despite the fact that there are now over 115,000 Chinese students in the UK, the issue of Chinese influence has been the subject of remarkably little informed debate here compared , for example,  to what is happening   in Australia, New Zealand and the US.

Chinese  students are important to   the UK, in terms of numbers (they comprise by far the largest group  of foreign students)  . China too, because of its expanding middle class , is  still seen  to  be a growing and lucrative    market for UK Universities.  And, of course, Chinese students fees are of great  importance to the balance sheets   of  many leading Universities .  Across the sector, as a whole, Chinese fees are likely to account for at least 5 per cent of all revenue. Last year, two-thirds of funding from Chinese students, around £1.4 billion, went to the  Russell Group of  universities, according to the Think Tank Onward.

 Universities UK says that “the vast majority of international partnerships are highly beneficial to all parties and augment the UK’s standing on the global stage ,” which is fair enough.

 Universities, of course,  have a strong incentive to establish overseas partnerships to secure funding and enhance collaboration on research projects ,particularly with China, which has a growing number of world class universities , researchers and state of the art research facilities . Professor Simon Marginson reminds us that while the US research system, the world leader,   remains well ahead of China’s in the total production of top 5 per cent high-citation science papers, in Computing and Mathematics research several Chinese universities now top the world table and Tsinghua is number one in Physical Sciences and Engineering, in front even  of MIT.

China is also a source of significant grant funding for research which may become even more important  to the UK with Brexit, as European  research collaboration is reduced.   But this has to  be balanced with the  potential risks and damage done  to our  academic freedom ,freedom of expression and our security interests . Dr Catherine Owen, of the University of Exeter, has highlighted  these competing  tensions underpinning  the  sectors relationship with China . She notes that tensions   are now  becoming  ever more acute as the commercialisation of global academia intensifies . She noted that “China’s internationalising trend in higher education has been accompanied by domestic attempts to curb the influence of educational norms and values associated with the West.” China is not only prepared to shut down debate,  and research, which it finds awkward ,  in its own back yard, but in keeping with its authoritarian predisposition,  and the  assertive   projection of its  soft, and hard power , abroad ,  it is also increasingly  prepared to seek to do the same on the international stage , including  here, in the UK.

 Professor Christopher Hughes of the LSE told the Foreign Affairs Committee  that he had seen Chinese students in London engaged in activities that undermine Hong Kong protestors and Chinese Confucius Institute officials confiscating papers which mention Taiwan at an academic conference. In addition Charles Parton of RUSI said that the Chinese Students and Scholars Association (CSSA), which is supported and partly financed by the Chinese Government,(Chinese  Communist Party)  was an instrument of this interference: “Its stated aim is to look after Chinese students, but it also reports on them to the embassy and authorities, tries to stop discussion of topics sensitive to China (Taiwan, Tibet, Tiananmen), and takes more direct action under guidance of the embassy.” SOAS Professor Steve Tsang  has said:

“In one Russell Group University a pro-vice chancellor was spoken to by someone in the Chinese embassy and as a result he stood a speaker who was already invited down… I am also aware of a vice-chancellor again under pressure from the Chinese embassy asking one of his senior academics not to make political comments on China at a specified period of time”.

Pressure is exerted in other ways too.  According to one media report, managers at the University of Nottingham—one of two UK universities with a branch in China—pressured academics to cancel events relating to Tibet and Taiwan, at the university’s Chinese and British campuses after complaints from Chinese officials. Another reported that LSE halted a proposed China studies scheme funded by a pro-Beijing venture capitalist after academics raised concerns about its impact on academic freedom.

The FCO, though, appears to treat such obvious threats, with insouciance. The  protection of  UK universities from malign, foreign influence, from authoritarian regimes generally  ,and  a more aggressive China, in particular ,  really isn’t  seen as a priority,  despite the accumulating evidence that the Chinese Communist Party  and its proxies  seek to undermine academic freedom and the integrity of scientific research on UK campuses. The FCOs approach is to claim glibly that  it has   an  open dialogue with Vice Chancellors, in other words its kicking the issue into the long grass.  The FCO is prone to move slowly on most things, but its  not the only relevant department in this sensitive area -DfE BEIS and even MOD spring to mind. And it will be interesting to see how all this squares with our recently announced   International education strategy and for that matter the Study UK campaign, with the British Councils involvement.  

We cannot   disengage with  China.  But we have to develop a  more equitable relationship that ensures that the universal values  we cherish at the heart of western academe, are not compromised or trumped, by the authoritarian values and the  coercive tactics of the Chinese  government. More Kow Towing really is not an option.  There needs to be a more open debate and awareness about this developing relationship, with  a focus on the need to re balance it. A cross departmental, joined up approach  with  the University  sectors  involvement should be possible.  

We must be much more realistic about both the threats and opportunities from China, and its potential to pull the plug on its students  coming to the UK, as well as the possibility that it can, and at relatively short notice, withdraw research  co-operation.  We need also much greater transparency over the extent to which Chinese interests are involved with UK interests, whether in research projects or partnerships. The recommendation in Onwards report ‘Trading Places’, that ministers should urgently introduce a reporting requirement on universities to declare all non-UK research funding and contracts over £250,000 a year, seems sensible, as is its suggestion  of a published   summary of every institution’s foreign funding, broken down by country of origin and the nature of the partnership.

We should also be seeking to target non-Chinese students   with more aggressive marketing   and to meet ,head on,  the unmet,  growing demand from  the developing world for tertiary education.

Note- In what ways can foreign governments can impact on academic freedom-Foreign Affairs Select Committee

‘Financial, political or diplomatic pressure, to shape the research agenda or curricula of UK universities, whether at the macro level (for example, providing direct or indirect financial support for research or educational activities with explicit or implicit limits on the scope of the subjects that can be discussed) or at the micro level (for example, pressuring event organisers not to invite certain speakers);

Attempts to limit the activities of UK university campuses or joint venture universities abroad which constrain freedoms that would normally be protected in the UK, such as criticisms of foreign governments;

Pressure on UK-based researchers who focus on subjects related to the countries concerned, including through visa refusals, pressure on university leadership, pressure on relatives still living in that country;

Pressure on UK-based students born in the country concerned, or on their families, to inform on the speech or activities of other students, or to engage in political protest in the UK in support of the country’s objectives.’

References

 Foreign Affairs Select Committee Report -5 November 2019 ‘ A cautious embrace: defending democracy in an age of autocracies’ and China and the Rules Based International System: Government Response to the FA  Committee’s Sixteenth Report Twenty-First Special Report of Session 2017–19  18 June 2019

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201919/cmselect/cmfaff/109/10902.htm

Click to access 2362.pdf

Note

In 2004, the University of Nottingham opened the first Sinoforeign joint venture university in China (UNNC).

See also HEPI report

Universities and China

Trading Places

How universities have become too reliant on overseas students and how to fix it

Will Tanner-Onward 2020

Click to access Trading-Places-PDF.pdf

On 4th July, Bicentennial Day 1976-A Union Jack, not a Star Spangled Banner flew over the US Military Academy West Point! How Come?

At Muster Parade, 4th July, 1976 (Americas big Bicentennial birthday ), at Westpoint US Military Academy, a Union Jack, not a star spangled banner, flew proudly over the ramparts of Fort Putnam, overlooking the parade ground, as the officer cadets assembled. Attached to the base of the forts flagstaff , was placed a note . It read ‘ Its taken us 200 years but we are back ‘ Two British officers had put it there, earlier that morning, just before dawn. I was one of them.

As the cadets, began, in disciplined silence, to shuffle into regular lines, for the morning ritual, they were watched ,at a discreet distance, by me and Mike Reynolds, a British officer from the Kings Own Scottish Borderers, on attachment, at the time, to the Academy’s instructing staff. It wasn’t too long before someone in the ranks, eyes elevated , did a double take, and clocked that something was not quite right. Whispers, rippled through the ranks , heads bobbed, and there it was, a resplendent, ‘come and get me’ provocation, fluttering in the breeze .It was a deeply satisfying moment .Pay back time, after 200 years of hurt.

Bicentennial year hadn’t been an easy one , if you were a Brit , in America. We had had to put up with a lot. Endless battle re-enactments, and endless fifes and drums. And then there was the re-writing of history. George Washington wasn’t, for the record, a general on a par with Napoleon. Arguably, he wasn’t really a general at all. The continental forces, aided in no small measure by France , still bristling from its defeat by the British in the Seven Years war, ultimately won, of course. But we should not forget that American forces were defeated in battle by the British on a ratio of three to one, in favour of the British . When I say the British, more accurately I should really be saying the Germans. Mercenaries from Hesse, Hanover and elsewhere, in what is now Germany, were brought in to do most of the fighting . They say that the victors write the history, it was ever thus. Challenging the American narrative at the time though, would have been impolite, bordering on rudeness So the Brits role had been to suck it all up, without complaint.

I really shouldn’t even have been at West Point, that summer. I had won an army scholarship to University. Part of the deal, in return for the Ministry of Defence paying my tuition fees and giving me a not ungenerous salary at university during my three years of study, was to spend a month training with my regiment each year. Luck would have it that that summer, my regiment, the Black Watch, was deployed in Northern Ireland , on an emergency operational tour. The province was quite lively at the time . Bombings and shootings were commonplace . Because of my lack of serious basic training-the full Sandhurst Officers Course came after graduation, not before – I, along with other undergraduate officers , was not permitted to go anywhere near northern Ireland, for our own safety, and indeed, its safe to assume , for everyone else’s.

The obvious alternative option was to be attached, instead, to another Scottish regiment, for a month. This did not appeal much , as, at the time that would have meant either Germany, or Scotland.

Fortunately my father, as luck would have it , was the British military attaché, in Washington DC. He was a busy man in 1976 . Apart from various military tattoos, that involved contributions from our great military bands, and of course our pipes and drums ,he had to manage increasingly deluded requests from the american military ,and battle re-enactment groups, for British soldiers to dress up in eighteenth century uniform, in order to surrender to american militiamen He busied himself with managing the americans expectations, rapidly downwards .

After some discussion, my father suggested an attachment to West Point Military Academy , roughly Americas equivalent to our own officers training institution at the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst ,although the respective institutions philosophies differ somewhat .West Point is beautifully situated in New York state , on a bend of the Hudson River and an easy drive to New York city, which was helpful.

As a sweetener , to seal the deal, for West Point to take on an undertrained student officer, my father persuaded his, and my ,regiment , the Black Watch, to part with an experienced piper to help tutor West Points pipe band . It all worked out well enough. It helped that the Black Watch was well known and popular in the States. Even to the extent that Jackie Kennedy had insisted that a Black Watch piper played at her husbands (JFK) funeral. The piper chosen for this attachment, Corporal Rafferty ,would later become Pipe Major of the Black Watch.

So, in late June 1976, I found myself standing on West Points parade ground (The Plain) with Corporal Rafferty to begin the joint attachment .The idea was that I would support the directing staff there in running the cadets basic training and assessment over the four weeks, that included section and platoon attacks, patrolling and ambushing.

For the duration of my stay I was billeted with a company of the tough as teak ‘82nd Airborne, or ‘the eighty deuce’ .They were a no- nonsense, elite unit, with a fearsome reputation, most recently reinforced through their exploits in Vietnam .(The Vietnam War had ended in 1975) They were the demo troops to put the cadets through their paces, acting as enemy during summer training and assessment . To be frank , I was a little apprehensive at the prospect .After all, I was a student and ,although I had done some physical preparation for the attachment I realised it was probably never going to be remotely sufficient to meet the Airborne’s stellar fitness standards. I had also been told that I would be doing everything they did. They were true to their word.

I shared a room with young platoon commanders, mainly southerners, who couldn’t have been more welcoming or supportive . The limey in their ranks was for them ,it seemed,both a curiosity, and a diversion . We bonded, over the month , exploring the Big Apple, and its more seedy underbelly .

After the 82nds reveille, each morning, we assembled for the Company run, in tight formation. I was relieved when the troops had a caller who would start singing “ Here we go all the way.. got to be rough and tough, Airborne all the way.. ,” or some variant . Singing and running are not easy bedfellows ,so although the pace was always testing , it was manageable. The run was routinely followed by other strenuous exercises to kick start each day rounded off with 100 press ups.

Above West Point and the Hudson River, stands Fort Putnam dating from revolutionary times. It overlooks ‘the Plain’. Like any Fort worth its salt, Putnam had thick defensive walls , but they were not particularly high, certainly in some places around its perimeter. This observation sparked the kernel of an idea.

Mike and I had to come up with a plan of what to do on the big day. We couldn’t just sit on our hands watching West Pointers celebrate and gloat.So on the evening of the 3rd of July 1976 , after supper, and having downed half a bottle of Mikes best Malt Whisky, we jointly hatched a plan.

We knew that early morning West Point cadets assembled on the Plain, for Muster parade at a fixed time. Whatever, we did it had to be witnessed by as many cadets and staff as possible and preferably at the same time. It had to have legs, and last for more than a few minutes. And it had to be an obviously British gesture, significant , but without being seen as insulting to our generous hosts.

Americans, we knew, loved and respected their flags, badges, symbols and ceremonies . We just needed to find a Union Jack that was sufficiently large and in good enough condition to do us proud. Not forgetting, of course, a long extension ladder. Fort Putnams gate was secured at night , and so we would have to scale its eighteenth century walls.

The early hours of 4th July saw us on a mini treasure hunt, in search of a flag and long ladder. Miraculously, we found both, quickly ( as far as the union jack was concerned ,remember there were battle re-enactments going on). We then scoured a map of the Academy grounds, planned approach routes and timings, taking into account, of course West Points security system-static sentry posts and mobile patrols. We worked out where the guard posts were , and a circuitous route around them and the mobiles routine. If we were challenged, the plan was to dump the ladder, but keep hold of the flag, split, running in opposite directions and RV at an agreed , predetermined spot. There, to regroup, and, if need be, to try again.

Raising flags, to the uninitiated , can be awkward. Speed is not the essence. Take it slowly or it will jam halfway up the pole .Mike, thankfully, claimed more expertise in this area than I So, I kept Cave and had responsibility for the worryingly rickety extended ladder, ensuring that it was sufficiently stable for Mike to climb. Because of vehicle patrols we couldn’t be around for more than 10 minutes, once we had the ladder against the forts wall. Mike had to be up and down the ladder in a flash.

Once the flag was up, the Americans couldn’t simply take it down ,and raise the Stars and Stripes . There were formal protocols to be observed, in lowering a nations flag. We knew this . So, the Union Jack fluttered above West Point on 4th July 1976 for several hours until a military detachment formally lowered it, with due ceremony.

We were not entirely sure how West Points staff and cadets would react to it all. In the event, they were marvellously good humoured, and took it all in the spirit that was intended, warmly congratulating us for our efforts.

Note
A few years ago , I came across John Keegans ‘ Fields of Battle: The Wars for North America’. Buried deep in its pages was a brief account of this incident but with no names attached. So, in a sense, this is an exclusive.

DONT JUDGE PEOPLE IN THE PAST BY TODAYS STANDARDS . THEY HAD DIFFERENT VALUES. REALLY?

We cant really judge people in the past They had different Values. We are projecting our own values on them. Really?

There is an argument that we cant possibly judge historical figures of the 17th ,18th and 19th centuries and their actions by todays standards and values. They were of their time . They had different values. It was a very different context . We need to understand this. Except, of course, todays values were around in those days . They are the values of the enlightenment . And even before the enlightenment, as early as the 17th Century, Quakers and other evangelical groups were , for example, preaching against the sin of slavery .
The American Declaration of Independence (1776) states: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Similar too ,was the French Revolution’s 1791 Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen .

True some of those who signed the Declaration of Independence were slave owners, and didn’t quite understand the consequences of what they were signing up to But the values in the Declaration are unambiguous .

Of course, to many at the time, it wasn’t a self-evident truth that all men were equal. Not to a slave owner, nor trader. But it was to an educated few. The man most associated with ending the slave trade was William Wilberforce ,in the late 1700s and early 1800s. He was old, a white male, for sure, a member of the patriarchy even, or at least on its fringes, but he was also ,along with all this , humane and enlightened , informed by the values of the enlightenment . He understood that all men are equal. More important, unlike some of those who earlier had signed the declaration of independence, he understood what this meant for how people should conduct their lives, relate to others and manage their politics. He had a vision of what a more civilised and just society looked like. In this he was not alone. So, don’t make the mistake of assuming that people then didn’t share the values we do today. Some, clearly did. But not enough

Careers Guidance must be in the Governments Post Covid 19 Employment Stimulus Plan

Careers Guidance needs to be part of Governments Employment Stimulus
The Career Development Policy Group has set out detailed proposals to the government arguing that it is important to scale up the volume of career guidance on offer, over the next six months, to help the UK to come out of Covid-recession. The government is currently working on a plan to develop an employment stimulus for this autumn.

It is vital ,in this context, that resources are made available so that our young people have easy and equitable access to independent, professional careers advice and guidance, in what is a fast changing, unpredictable environment. Many are seeing initial pre-pandemic job offers being withdrawn, as well as reduced scope for internship and training opportunities. Analysis of the economic impacts of career guidance highlights its clear financial benefits . Empirical evidence demonstrates that the provision of career guidance to citizens results not only in benefits to the individual , but also to employers and companies (e.g. increased productivity and reduced staff turnover), and national benefits (e.g. increased labour market participation, decreased unemployment, reduced skills shortages and increased GDP)
There is less than a month now to influence what will be in the governments stimulus plan .
In this paper the Career Development Group argues that government needs to respond to the Covid-19 crisis by taking the following actions.
• In the short-term. A £26 million fund should be created to ensure that allow education leavers, unemployed workers and those being made redundant following furloughing can access high quality career guidance between now and the end of 2020. This money could be channelled
through existing agencies and used to take on additional careers professionals to deliver support where necessary. If 1 in 89 people who received a careers interview was able to find and keep a job that they otherwise would not have found, this service would pay for itself.
• In the medium-term the infrastructure for career guidance needs to be enhanced so that career guidance can be more consistently embedded across the lifecourse. A new careers strategy should be published in January 2021 to replace the current strategy which ends in 2020.
• In the long-term England needs a review of the current, fragmented career guidance system and the creation of a more robust lifelong guidance system.

Note
The Career Development Group comprises- The Career Development Institute, Careers England, the Careers Research and Advisory Centre (CRAC), the Institute of Student Employers, and the International Centre for Guidance Studies. The note was drafted by Professor Tristram Hooley, chief research officer at the Institute of Student Employers.Professor Hooley is among those urging stakeholders to lobby their local MPs to act, to ensure that careers guidance is integral to the new stimulus package.

Click to access an-emergency-career-development-plan-to-maintain-productivity-and-progression-post-covid-19-cdpg_3_1.pdf

The Future of Assessment-Post Pandemic

Coronavirus affords us time to reflect
With exams delayed ,and new forms of assessment brought in, through necessity , because of the Pandemic, it is worth reflecting on whether our assessment systems are really is fit for purpose.
There are three mutually supporting pillars of education: pedagogy, curriculum and assessment.
Assessment is supposed to enable our children, teachers (and parents) to understand what has been learnt. What has been retained. How much of what is being taught in the classroom is actually sticking? And, can it be usefully accessed and applied, at some time in the future.Good assessment identifies specific areas where a student has not understood the information , or the process, and where more explanation, or practice may be needed. Good assessment is accurate, and provides good information, to both teacher and student, and tells them something they didnt already know.

But its important to note that assessment serves several , ( not one), purposes. For example, as well as determining whether a student is learning, it can also tell you how well a student is doing ,relative to others ,and it can help predict grades in future tests and exams. So the purpose of the assessment determines what type of assessment is used.
Formative assessment helps ensure, continuously, that students are learning. It makes teachers aware of whether or not learning is taking place and is being embedded as well the progress being made by that student and allows them to adjust their teaching accordingly . Summative assessment , is the testing at the end of the process or programme of learning , assessing how much the student has learned throughout the course.
If you look at most assessments systems, though they tend to be weighted heavily toward measuring student ability to memorise. and instantly recall facts. They have tended too to elevate the importance of summative assessment .
The capacity to retrieve information is important, and clearly you need a scaffold of key information to problem solve, but only up to a point. Nowadays, after all, more than ever you can access high quality information that you need in the very short term. And with the development of AI this will be even more prevalent.

So while short term memory has its utility once you get into the employment market , there is a higher premium put on other skills. and abilities. Employees generally work as part of a collaborative team, rather than in isolation , they use knowledge in collaboration with others, and often have access to bespoke online tools that support them . Good memorisation and rapid retrieval of information from your memory bank is not as essential as the assessment system would have us believe .
Employers are more impressed with the self-discipline and the ability to carry out a series of longer-range projects and an ability to correct courses, to adapt , and show flexibility along the way. Assessing individual’s capacity to collaborate with others, to achieve specific objectives though is not assessed or, very rarely. Yet that is what you are going to be doing, day in day out ,when you are in a job. Team based learning and a project based approaches, for example can, arguably, give students ownership of learning and more agency.

Sitting by yourself, in an unfamiliar environment , working to a tight deadline , under pressure, desperately trying to retrieve information from your memory banks, apart from being immensely stressful, is an artificial environment in which to place young people. It is also, probably, not telling us nearly enough about a students real abilities, aptitudes and indeed potential. And an off day , (we all have them), can blight a students life chances.
Preparing for this world does not require constant practice in regurgitating crammed knowledge from memory. Instead, students would surely benefit from more staggered assessments, based on medium-range coursework, as well as online “open book” exams — with safeguards against plagiarism — and exercises in teamwork and co-operation, of the sort that business schools have been offering for years. Of course memorisation and working under pressure could be retained as part of the assessment process.
Harvard’s Professor Eric Mazur describes what he refers to as “ Inauthentic tests” and assessment . We test, he says, the facts instead of actual problem solving. According to him , the student is merely expected to memorize the course materials and regurgitate it during the test. But, rather, obviously “A computer can do this! And do it much better than us. During tests, students are cut off from other people and sources of information. This is in sharp contrast with real life situations, in which Google, books and the help of colleagues can be used. High stakes exam instead call for cramming a few days in advance of a test, which means information is only stored in the short-term memory. Professor Mazur says “We must rethink assessment. If we fail, we will continue to educate the followers of yesterday instead of the leaders of tomorrow.” Research has shown that that if you cram information over a short period, within a few days, much of that information will not be retained.
The current crisis can provide us with an opportunity to rethink many things in education including assessment , Just before the GCSEs were cancelled, the Association of School and College Leaders published a poll of 799 headteachers in England. Only 13 per cent said the exams should be retained in their current form, warning that reforms to make them harder had added to stress and anxiety, particularly among lower-attaining and special-needs students. After the exams’ cancellation, the association told its members that for those teachers “who believe that the current system . . . is inappropriate there is a chance here to show that an alternative universe is possible”.Food for thought. What could be the new normal? Can we re- imagine assessment?

Teachers Autonomy-and the Quest for Professional Status

We know the best way to improve school systems is to focus on the quality of teachers and teaching. We need a high status teaching profession , employing well- trained, highly motivated and engaged teachers, progressing within a proper career structure , retained in the system over the long term. This much we know. But although we know it, we are not terribly good at delivering it .For starters, we don’t recruit enough teachers . The NFER reported, in 2018, that the government had missed its target for training the number of newly qualified secondary teachers (NQTs) that the system needs, for five consecutive years. In recent years, the overall number of teachers has not kept pace with increasing pupil numbers and the ratio of qualified teachers to pupils has increased from 17.8 in 2011 to 18.9 in 2018.
The system also manages to haemorrhage talent ,at scale. Too many good teachers leave the profession early. Statistics from the Department for Education show that around 30 per cent of new teachers left the classroom between 2012 and 2017. Over time the  five year wastage rate  has varied between 25-32%. Yearly wastage varies between 9-10.5%  In 2016-17, 9.9 per cent of teachers left the workforce, compared to 9.2 per cent of the workforce in 2010-11. Around 42,000 full-time equivalent qualified teachers left the state-funded sector in the months to November 2018, a ‘wastage rate’ of 9.8%. 
So, why might this be the case?
We know that teachers complain about their workload, with some justification. But there are other issues at play, though also related, to some extent, to workload issues. We don’t treat our teachers as professionals, or afford them the professional status they deserve.
The Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS), run by the OECD, reports on the conditions of teaching and learning. It defines a “professional” as ‘ someone who is able to make autonomous and expertise-based actions and decisions about their work. Their actions and decisions are grounded in a specialised set of knowledge and skills stemming from both quality training and constant collaboration and dialogue with peers and other stakeholders.’ So, are our teachers enabled to ‘make autonomous and expertise based actions and decisions about their work? ‘ Rarely, seems to be the fairest answer to this.
In 2020 , NFER research established that there is a clear link between perceived teacher autonomy ,and higher job satisfaction, and an intention to stay in teaching. Job satisfaction is directly linked to teachers’ perceived influence over their professional development goal setting . And, significantly, the average teacher reported a perceived lower level of autonomy, compared to similar professionals.
Indeed an extensive body of research points to professional autonomy as a key dimension of job characteristics that affect workers’ sense of self-efficacy, their satisfaction and intrinsic motivation (OECD, 2013; Hackman and Oldham, 1976), Teachers’ autonomy in the classroom, i.e. the extent to which they are entrusted with exercising professional judgement over curricular choices, instructional planning and classroom practices, appears to be a central component of professionalism (OECD, 2016, p. 33.) Teachers’ involvement in decision-making processes that affect their work is another significant dimension of their autonomy. The degree of staff involvement in school-level decisions too,  plays a critical role in strengthening teachers’ perceived professionalism.
TALIS gives us some sense of what autonomy means. It implies the capacity and freedom to take control of ones own teaching, through self-directed professional action. David Little (1995) defined teacher autonomy, as the teachers‟ capacity to engage in self-directed teaching.”
In practice, autonomous teachers should be enabled to- use their initiative, to innovate , use new technology to support their teaching, develop and refine new pedagogy, to undertake their own research , and, to be able to utilise the latest research to inform and improve their practice ,while collaborating with their peers. The latter is important, because autonomy does not imply isolation. Quite the opposite in fact .
Autonomous teachers also need the space and time, to exercise their autonomy with support, in this ,from their schools leadership.
Arguably, as things stand, the schools system does not ,afford teachers sufficient autonomy and, if anything, undermines rather than enhances their professional status. Government policies and interventions , the assessment, regulatory and accountability regimes, and overriding audit culture (the product of governments policies), place teachers in a position in which they simply have to apply centrally driven prescriptions . They are passive rather than proactive actors. Their room for manoeuvre, and the space available to them to exercise their judgement, is heavily circumscribed. Likewise their leaders, whose preoccupation tends to be in anticipating the next Ofsted inspection, tend to be risk averse. Far from generating diversity of practice and opinion, instead, the system , promotes ‘safe ‘ and risk -averse practice.
Trapped in an endless quest to jump through the hoops, presented by the audit culture , teachers have to compete with themselves, and against others, leaving little time or energy to engage critically or meaningfully with each other, or with their wider potential role as autonomous professionals.
This could be seen as an argument against accountability and inspection. Its not. Both remain important. Its more about pointing out that the sensitive educational eco-system may have lost its delicate balance .
It doesn’t balance the obvious need for accountability with the need to incentivise, professional teachers to improve their teaching and their students learning, and to keep them motivated and in the system.
Some have ideas about how teachers autonomy and professionalism could be very much greater than they are . There is an untapped , unrealised potential for teachers in the system to be more activist and transformative.
Judyth Sachs in her book Activist Teaching Profession (2003), talks about transformative professionalism and explains the contradictions around autonomy, at the heart of much education reform. She identifies two sets of discourses .First The managerialist discourse -this gives rise to an entrepreneurial identity in which the market and issues of accountability, economy, efficiency and effectiveness shape how teachers individually and collectively construct their professional identities. On the other hand, there are ,what she terms, democratic discourses, which are in distinct contrast to the managerialist ones , giving rise to an activist professional identity in which collaborative cultures are an integral part of teachers’ work practices.
The activist teachers professional identity gives rise to new forms of association of teachers among themselves and others and new work practices and more flexible ways thinking about their practice.
There is a perception among teachers of a lack of autonomy and of respect for them as professionals. This hardly helps recruitment, or retention in the profession . Nor does it help motivate and incentivise teachers to play a much more positive role in improving teaching, learning outcomes and in generating impactful innovation and research.
We need to think much more about how we balance and calibrate the need for accountability ,in the system, with enhancing and exploiting teachers professional autonomy.

Teacher Professional Identity: competing discourses, competing outcomes
Judyth Sachs University of Sydney
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e84f/86545eb4e8429ef8c83c5d8682bd95286985.pdf

The Value of a University Education-Beware, the McNamara Fallacy!

Undoubtedly the issue of value for money in higher education is becoming increasingly important . But the treatment of the issue is dangerously simplistic.

 The McNamara fallacy has it that we tend to measure things that we can easily measure, but disregard that which we cant easily  measure . The fallacy also posits that we  think that if we cant measure it easily, it cant be important. And we presume that which cannot be measured, doesn’t exist. This is all relevant to the way we approach value in higher education.

  A University is not just about preparing young people for the jobs market  and affording them entry to  the top cohort of high earners. A university education is a good in itself. It benefits the individual and is also a public good. It offers  space where you can grow and develop as an individual  and  into a rounded citizen.It is  not just about  cultivating a  potential ‘productive’  employee.  Simply putting monetary values on degrees is crass. Utilitarianism  and philistinism  are two sides of the same coin.  Universities are not there to teach, for utility. They are teaching- for life.  Studying the arts, for example,    helps us to understand and reflect on what it is to be human, tapping  into our subjective experience of the world, making sense of our lives . It helps us to observe, to notice,  to think, to think critically  and laterally too, to apply reason , to develop insight, to communicate. And to grow up,

How do we value ,or put a value, on  a job ? Should it be just based on  a future salary, or other metrics ? And we really dont seem to value anything that is not easily measurable and can slot neatly into some clunky ranking system.  Often,  in society, we place too little value on essential, caring occupations. The type of occupations that determine whether or not we are civilised. Too often though these receive little remuneration  and have little status,  yet  are vital .  Maybe this goes some way to explaining why social care is in such a perpetual  state of   crisis.

I also wonder why so  many universities are so bad at making sure that their students know about their values and what they are trying to achieve  for them, for society , for their communities. The idea of a civic university, rooted in its local community but also outward looking is gaining currency.

But it seems, more broadly ,that universities rarely bother to enter the argument about their broader benefits and the value they provide. Much  attention is paid to admissions, of course, to  get bums on seats, in a competitive market. but once students  are signed up , insufficient attention is paid to students  needs and in supporting their  transitions to the next phase ,   ensuring  that the student voice is heard and acted on. Nor is much  attention and resource invested in ensuring students are made aware that the university ,as an institution, stands for values beyond the requirements of the employment market and their role in it .

We need a more adult ,and less simplistic debate ,on how we value our universities ,a university education  and the  outcomes we seek from these institutions .Do not let the philistines prevail.

What to do about Dom?

 

Dominic Cummings, the Prime Ministers top adviser is  much in the news. We know that he stirred things up at the DfE when he was special adviser to Michael Gove ,urging his master to take on  the left wing conservative  education establishment, (conservative, with a small c), otherwise known as the Blob. As  he saw it  the Blob  were busy obstructing reforms and protecting  established producer interests. Cummings was  forceful,  rude ,  an intellectual bully, and did not suffer fools gladly and delighted in puncturing egos. Famously not deferential to experienced civil servants and politicians,  he  quickly gained a reputation as a disrupter, keen on the idea of not just reforming policy but obsolescent structures too . He had , lest we forget, been prevented initially from becoming Goves adviser by Camerons NO 10 because they thought of him as a loose cannon. Gove, despite the perceived success, among Tories at least , of   his significant reforms, was eventually sacked, mainly, it seems because he had alienated too many in the sector.

Cummings  sees himself as a revolutionary, not in an ideological sense,   but rather in the sense of seeing the need to fundamentally transform the way the country is governed ,  and administered. Its about efficiency, cross cutting approaches, improving and speeding up  delivery , and outcomes,  and informed , creative  policy making.   He shares  little in common with traditional Tories .They want to preserve what is best in our institutions and in the way we do things, combining this  with incremental,  managed changes ,with a nod to modernity, but without frightening the horses. There is not much that’s incremental in Cummings approach.

Cummings has, according to Sir  Anthony Seldon,   adopted a “hub and poke” model. So  this implies centralised control  in NO 10,  poking Minsters and departments to get on with delivering NO 10s wishes. This style doesn’t make  for a comfortable life either for Ministers or  their advisers.

His involvement with managing the successful Leave campaign, in which he harnessed the power of algorithms and social media to micro target and message  voters, transformed him into a political megastar, though  more respected than liked by the political establishment and media (although his private persona is much more accessible than his very   bolshie public one.)

The thing about Cummings is that quite a lot of what he says makes sense. There is a shortage of specialists and project managers in the civil service. There are not enough people with deep expertise in specific fields. Governments must be much better at tapping distributed expertise.  We need more, and better computer – savvy, digital and AI  experts embedded in the higher echelons of government. We need better longer term planning, and free,  lateral  creative thinkers capable of  thinking well outside the box .

But Cummings recruitment  of Andrew  Sabisky  revealed the pitfalls of his  unorthodox approach. Cummings extols the virtues of super-forecasting but , his forecasting didn’t seem to have picked up Sabiskys  apparent support of eugenics, questioning  whether black people had lower IQs and  off the wall idea of  “universal contraception”to prevent the existence of a “permanent underclass” might  be a little risky ,provocative  and  lead to a backlash  against No  10 . One of his jobs is managing risk and protecting the PM. In fact this could represent the public failure of Mr Cummings’ attempt to bring unconventional minds into the heart of government. It also   suggests this government, like its predecessors , may  not be  entirely immune to traditional political norms.

The fact is Cummings makes mistakes and he is not  always on the winning side of the argument, even within NO 10. He was opposed , for example to HS2 .  And his ideas for the future of the BBC do not seem to  be gaining traction in NO 10. Currently he is useful to the Prime Minister and is probably vital support over the coming difficult months, as we negotiate  the terms of our exit from the EU .  But it  would be wise  for him to listen to  the advice of Ken Clarke and  Sir Anthony Seldon   and to step back out of the limelight. Once advisers become the news, they are vulnerable. Mr Clarke suggested the ‘exotic aide’ will only survive in the job if his ‘personal appearances stop’. Seldon says that   if Cummings continues to be the story, he will not last till the summer .

Cummings would do well to remember that the   the political  graveyard is  overflowing  with  ‘indispensable’ advisers