Education Reform A Starter for Ten

Schools

16 Feb

Conversations that dare to examine the purpose of education will generally draw two brushstroke distinctions between historically rival categories: the acquisition of knowledge and the pursuit of new skills.

The former will centre on exam results and outcomes linked to economic value for workforces whilst the latter will see education as social, equitable and experiential, a means within itself rather than necessarily a means to an end.

On the one hand, the purpose piece rests on a pragmatic approach to helping young people access the jobs market. The expansion of T levels, the deregulation of government-funded state schools and the focus on maths to 18 are all routed in mobilising society for economic return; the modern reaction to change continues to be influenced by the adult world that waits for it.

On the other hand, purpose centres on ideal notions of process and preparation for adulthood. The purpose of education is to prepare every child to flourish in their context. Purpose rests on responsibility, ensuring children grow up with the tools to allow them to actively participate in the world. A recent Pearson survey of 7000 teachers suggested ‘life skills’ should be given as much time as core subjects, with two-thirds of teachers believing that this would better support pupils. Furthermore, the recent Times Education Commission highlighted that 70% of HR companies think the system focuses too much on grades.

Purpose through this lens centres on three key areas: the empowerment of children as producers; the view that learning must be social; and, optionality: the learning experience of every child is different and tailored towards their needs and aims.

If the purpose of education is about economic outcomes - explicit conduits to the skills required by employers - as well as the construction of a more equal society, then the question centres on how best that duality can be handled. What are the barriers to a more empathetic society and how can those in education find ways to bridge that gap?

Within the ever-changing landscape of employment, both the knowledge the child acquires and the skills they leave school with may increasingly be seen in the collective; those early brushstrokes that define the why behind what we learn may end up much more blurred than we think.

I believe there are four, non-exhaustive, challenges to be considered in discussing reform within education.

The Academic Challenge:

Away from core subject matter, to what extent should schools be enabled to make context-specific curriculum design decisions for their students? I am in favour of a more hands-on, dialogic learning experience. I am in favour, too, of an interdisciplinary approach to solving problems; the broad context it allows young people to apply remits from anthropology, economics, and history, for example, make learning a more rewarding experience. Learning is social. I don’t believe learning should happen in silos. Education reform therefore must ask how the spaces and communities we occupy serve as learning environments. Conversely, we have seen teaching departments become less experiential in their delivery: in science there is less coursework; in geography fewer field trips; in English GCSE, oracy has become a casualty in assessment criteria.

Greater budgetary flexibility to make context-specific decisions around how money is spent on extracurricular experiences is vital too; Capital City Academy in North London makes cooking mandatory for every Y12 student; West London Free School invests in music lessons; XP School in Doncaster tread their own path. Independence with curriculum creates a happier workforce, also, and that in itself poses a separate challenge.

The Pastoral Challenge

The emotional wellbeing of students is much discussed and its addition here unoriginal. The challenge for pastoral reform, though, is not so much in the delivery of novel concepts (though interesting) but rather the delivery of clear impact around those concepts. The abstract “jingle jangle” (EEF) understanding of educational concepts like resilience, leadership and character has meant that impact data has historically been lightweight. In recent years, studies have attempted to add weight to the conversation – led by organisations like the Oxford Character Project - but on the ground, in a resource-light, time-poor world of classroom teaching, sceptics remain abound to a lack of demonstrable value-add to a child’s experience at school.

If reformists are to value Social and Emotional learning (SEL) programmes, it’s vital that impact is acquired, not simply to appease those cynics, but to persuade students of its worth; value is attached, after all, to what is measurable.

The Innovation Challenge

The speed and degree to which schools can innovate is surely one of the most pressing issues for schools and colleges. Within the enormous innovation space available to dissect, my view centres on a change in how we perceive the role of a student. Historically, students have been consumers rather than a proponents or builders of what they are learning. Our view suggests that the catalyst for education change centres on young people playing an active role in shaping their learning through the role of producer.

This idea is broadly what schools refer to as ‘student voice’. Schools who see students as researchers or participants in the delivery of what they are learning are proven to be more dynamic and happier environments to learn.

Key academics who ignite discussion on pupil voice are Jean Rudduc and Michael Fielding, who argue for the inclusion of students’ perspectives in conversations about school improvement The academic Alison Cook-Sather notes student voice is about rights and respect. All children have the right to express their opinion and be included in decisions that involve and affect them; similarly, if children feel respected they will be more engaged in school. I believe that students who increasingly are seen as co-participants in research will engender must faster innovation in the settings in which they serve.

The Regulatory Challenge

How often does an Ofsted inspection fail a school on a lack of skills acquisition? A shift in the inspection criteria we ascribe to schools must surely be a priority; accreditation or recognition by Ofsted to reward schools who explore academic subjects in collaborative ways might help shape change on the ground.

Similarly, there should be conversation on the link between secondary and higher education, and the regulatory benchmarks on how offers are made. If, for example, UCAS’s shift from personal statements towards a broader application process proves successful, will that ignite change in schools in terms of how and what they learn? With more and more outstanding alternatives to university shaping how young people make decisions post 16, the link between these two facets is fundamental in determining education progress and reform.