The ‘will he, won’t he’ coverage of the call to not abolish GCSEs has understandably interested by the politics of the placement. The sharply different priorities of the principle political parties (within government up to between government and opposition) was outlined sharply, and the Whitehall watchers have found plenty to interest them.
Ultimately, though, a much bigger question for the rustic than what all of it means in Westminster is what it means for the way forward for education reform and for schools. Do the sighs of relief in staff rooms around the country reflect a weariness with change, an apprehension of more demanding qualifications or something else
I think that maybe the excuses run deeper.
There are some areas of public life – pensions reform is a great example – where a factor of political consensus isn’t just desirable but essential. If the problems are sufficiently long run and complicated, the collection of people affected is big enough and if those people must have confidence in a consistent framework, then stability across several elections is important.
Some elements of education policy are like that too. They may be the ‘tectonic plates’ of the system – both the principles on which everything else is built, and the reason for earthquakes if moved too quickly. Among these foundations are the national curriculum, the examinations and testing systems and the faculty funding model. Think back over the past twenty years and each newsworthy education crisis – the periodic strikes and delivery problems related to SATs, the curriculum 2000 A-level problems, the college funding crisis of 2003 – were linked to movements in these ‘tectonic plates’.
But the cause of caution in reform in these areas runs deeper than a political ought to avoid bad headlines. Changes to funding, curriculum, testing and examinations are sufficiently fundamental from a school’s perspective that they absorb much of the energy and a spotlight of teachers, and especially of faculty leaders, for a long time frame.
You can imagine that if as a college you’re having to rethink and re-plan everything you teach, year group by year group, it is possible for you to to highlight little else. As a pace-setter, you should be sure that your school’s schemes of labor comprehensively prepare children to reach new syllabuses and that each teacher properly understands the content and the expectancies. So that you will gear the educational days you’ve at your disposal, the workers meetings and the management of performance to ensuring this occurs. For a time, the job of improving the standard of classroom teaching gets less attention to that end.
Unfortunately, to maneuver a number of of the ‘tectonic plates’ is the very best and most rational reform for a central authority to undertake. It really is far easier to peer the way to make a serious impact through that route than through every other. Consequently, in every period of 3 years for the reason that Education Reform Act of 1988, as a minimum this kind of areas was undergoing fundamental reform.
Of course, a number of this reform was of significant importance. And you can actually see more generally why, seeing real problems in schools, successive governments have calculated that the advantages of reform outweigh the fees. However the cumulative effect have been that very great time and effort have been expended on managing and implementing these changes, a number of which reverse earlier reforms either wholly or partly.
Compare that to lots of the highest performing school systems on the earth. Finland, where following deep reform of curriculum and teaching within the 1960s, there was great stability for some decades; Singapore, where a consistent and only slowly evolving strategy have been followed because the 1950s; Ontario, where a 2007 White Paper commencing the government’s programme for the four years which have been to follow was a straightforward 10-page document detailing how the approach of the former four years will be maintained and deepened. Creating the exceptional school system that the rustic needs will undoubtedly require a level of political consensus and stability of policy that doesn’t yet exist.
The key task of improving an education system is to make it much more likely that more teachers succeed with more children tomorrow than they did today. Creating a reality of that requires a stable context wherein school teachers and leaders can discuss the duty: raising expectations (of teachers and pupils), allowing time for teachers to increase their subject knowledge, improve their pedagogical skill and have interaction with the evidence and with the intention that more of teachers’ energy is targeted on pupils, their work and their progress.
So every body working in education should take the call to stay with GCSEs as a prime opportunity. With less ought to specialize in a completely new qualification, we have now the chance to teach that the drive to lift standards and improve the education system might possibly be led better by the teaching profession than by the federal government. The energy that could had been absorbed by preparing for a brand new qualification can now be dedicated to the largest thing of all – continuing to enhance teaching and learning.
If we are able to make a hit of that, then perhaps will probably be possible to drive a brand new political consensus: that reducing the quantity of presidency-led change and creating greater stability for teachers to steer reform and improve their practice may be a higher strategy to create better schools.
Jon Coles is CEO of United Learning, and formerly Director General for Education Standards on the DfE.
This content is dropped at you by Guardian Professional. To get articles direct on your inbox, and to access thousands of free resources, join up to the Guardian Teacher Network here. Seeking your next role See our Guardian jobs for schools site for thousands of the most recent teaching, leadership and support jobs
