Gove Has Been Busy

Michael Gove, the Secretary of State for Education, is really earning his corn at the moment. There is barely a day that goes by when he doesn't come up with a new idea to "improve" education in the UK. But, stop press, because he's actually come up with a reasonable idea:

Unify all the exam boards at GCSE level to avoid "dumbing down" as the different exam boards attempt to get schools' business by setting easier papers and therefore better grades for your school.

This is a superb idea, and one that many teachers have been shouting about for a while. The fact is that in this results driven business, schools understandably shop around for the "easiest" board. They can't change every year because that would be too expensive, but every 10 years they can probably afford it, and this can't give employers a huge amount of confidence in the calibre of the potential recruits wandering through their doors with C grades oozing out of every orifice.

The problem is that Gove wants to take education back to the 1970s by reintroducing the O-Level and CSE system at the same time, which is a two-tier system, although apparently not in the opinion of the government who must have chosen an exceptionally easy Maths GCSE exam board as they clearly can't count to two. I'm not sure of the point of this policy - the GCSE would be fine once there was only one board. Also, those sitting the CSE will automatically know that they have been labelled as "thick", which is hardly a motivating factor for them.

Govestill  maintains that academy status is the way forward for schools, but continually fails to give any concrete reasons for this. The actual reason is that it is in order to save government money, and potentially allow schools, or the companies who run them, to make money out of education. Not even public schools like Eton and Harrow do this as they have charitable status and therefore are not allowed to make a profit - everything they get in has to be spent eventually. One year's surplus goes on improving facilities, as it should be. Academies do have feedom from the national curriculum though, which suggests that the government penned national curriculum is rubbish. But there's the other point here, all the kids have to take the same exams at the end of day, so there's no incentive to do that either. He neglects to mention that schools originally went for academy status because they got a golden handshake, but now there is no extra money.

What it boils down to is the following:

Michael Gove is a pompous arse with an unfathomable desire to turn back the educational clock 40 years, but every now and then one of his extensive, and probably expensive team of advisors has a reasonable idea.

Maths Teachers Are Rubbish

In his latest assault on the teaching profession, the Chief Inspector of Schools, Sir Michael Wilshaw claims that maths teachers are letting all children down. The school system is so focused on the C grade that the best mathematicians are not being stretched, those who fall behind early in their educational career are just left to flounder, and exams are getting easier.

As a maths teacher I would like to try to justify, maybe defend, the maths teacher's predicament.

1. C grade being a Holy Grail - whose fault is this? Ofsted's, the very body Sir Michael heads. Schools are judged on their A* to C grade percentage, and for some reason the government and public seem to think that Ofsted know what they are talking about. Smell the coffee people, Ofsted don't have a clue what they are on about. The quango is made up of failed and ex-teachers who have little idea how modern classrooms work. Wilshaw himself has had success at a local level, but that's because he got rid of people who didn't toe his line. That's the path the Children's Minister told me our school should go down, and is easy to do on a local level, but what they all forget is that the children have to go somewhere. They can't be left to roam the streets surely.
2. Those children who fall behind are always going to flounder, because if they struggle with the basics, they are going to struggle with the tougher stuff - obvious, no? Not everyone can get a C grade (a pass in real terms), or the pass mark would have to be raised. This government, and in that breath I include Ofsted, who although apparently independent, are just a government vehicle, are fixated on getting everyone a C grade or higher. It's not going to happen I'm afraid - some people just aren't very good at maths. Fact! Not the teachers' fault.
3. Exams are easier - not the teachers' fault either.Government have allowed exam boards to be privatised, which has led to exam boards trying to attract customers. The more A* to C grades candidates achieve, the more customers you have, the more money you make. Simples.

The "celebrity" mathematician Alex Bellos was on BBC Breakfast this morning and hit the nail firmly on the head when he said something along the lines of:

The problem with maths in this country is cultural. People are happy to say that they are rubbish at maths, but they would never admit to not being able to read.

Spot on Alex - not teachers' fault! Wilshaw - shut up you idiot!

Examiners - Cheating?

The Daily Telegraph has been running a story all week regarding examiners of various exam boards telling teachers who attend £200 per day courses what is going to be on the forthcoming exam. There are a few issues I'd like to bring up about this:

1. This is clearly not on - presumably this is how they encourage schools to opt to take the exams provided by the board. Exams are big business, with each major one costing around £30 per head - one average-sized school would spend thousands of pounds per year, per subject on exams. I suppose any carrot they can dangle in front of a school needs to be exploited I suppose, but telling teachers the questions is a step too far.
2. What the press are clearly expecting is that pupils will take everything their teachers tell them is taken on board. As most teachers will tell you, this is just not the case in general, especially if you only say it once. It also assumes that all the children in those classes actually care, which again, most teachers will tell you is not always the case.
3. The press have made out that those attending the course were told what specific topics would appear on the exam. Couldn't the schools just save the £200 and read the curriculum? I assume that the exact questions didn't appear on a powerpoint.
4. One examiner openly admitted that they were surprised that certain papers/questions were passed by board's regulators, but again this isn't huge news. It's no secret that exams are generally getting easier, although in my view it is still difficult to get the top grades. Government targets have made this a necessary evil for the boards who are in the business of making maoney ultimately.
5. What school nowadays can afford to send anyone (other than the headteacher or their deputy, or both) on courses that cost £200 per day?  The first thing to go when a budget is tightened is the staff's access to external training or CPD (Continued Professionaa Development), unless you are the headteacher of course.

The newspaper and media in general are making a big deal of this story, but what the public don't realise is that this has been going on for years, it's just the first time it's been made public. If people really think it will make a huge difference, they are mistaken, but schools will take any opportunity to improve their league table position  - what a pathetic educational world we live in, driven by league table positions rather than offering an education that could actually be useful in the marketplace.