Transcript The direction of policy: refining the National Curriculum in England Tim Oates Chair of the Expert Panel advising on National Curriculum Review 2011 Group Director.

The direction of policy: refining
the National Curriculum in
England
Tim Oates
Chair of the Expert Panel advising on National Curriculum Review 2011
Group Director Assessment Research and Development Cambridge Assessment
The National Curriculum Review 2011
Background: the need for reform
‘Fine-tuning’ or ‘fundamental re-orientation’
1989, 1995, 1999 continuous refinement – 2009 KS3/4 dislocation
A break with principles
But…a failure of ideas?
Schizophrenia of ‘…the State overprescribes…but if it’s not in the National
Curriculum we won’t teach it…’
Models of ability – progression
Diversity in the system – dampening of innovation
Views of the aims of schooling and the status of ‘knowledge’
Why the concept of ‘future’ curriculum is vital
-
The undue pace of change, ripping capacity from the system
The role of stability in monitoring and fine-tuning systems
The need for principled change
Attending to the precise form of knowledge in a National Curriculum
-
The skills versus knowledge dichotomy; observation, mathematising
Attending to true signals regarding important capitals; Bynner, Vignoles
Importance of capitals for social cohesion and reduction of inequalities
The ‘powerful knowledge’ thesis, a radical shift in thinking
QCA futures as future 2, proposed curriculum as future 3
-
A curriculum for 30 years?
The pattern of the change cycle
Policy potential: understanding the relative
performance of different national systems
through ‘control factors’
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
curriculum content (nc specifications, support materials, etc)
assessment and qualifications
national framework for qualifications
inspection
pedagogy
professional development
institutional development
institutional forms and structures (eg size of schools, education phases)
allied social measures (linking social care, health care and education)
funding
governance (autonomy versus direct control)
accountability arrangements
labour market/professional licensing
allied market regulation (eg health and safety legislation; insurance
regulation)
Evidence paper November 2010
The tendency towards introspection
Benefits and ills
The importance of subjects
Clarity in statutory elements
Concepts, principles, fundamental operations and key knowledge
The importance of transnational comparisons
‘Coherence’ and ‘curriculum control’
benefits
1
The concept of ‘entitlement’ has been highly effective in raising attainment (Chitty C 2004; Colwill I & Peacey
N 2003)
2
Structure progression in the National Curriculum has reduced inappropriate repetition of content as children
progress through education (Chitty C op cit; Evangelou et al 2008)
3
The rate and pattern of pupil progression has been enhanced (Chitty C op cit; Tymms P 2004; Whetton et al
2007)
4
Balanced coverage has emerged in the primary phase, particularly in respect of science (Harlen W 2008)
5
The common structure has supported more effective pupil transfer, which previously affected vulnerable
groups of children in particular (Dobson J & Pooley CE 2004: Strand S 2002)
6
The curriculum entitlement has enhanced performance of girls in maths and science (Machin S & McNally S
2006)
7
The structured approach to content and assessment has led to identification of issues such as the Key Stage
3 dip (Powell R, Smith R, Jones G, Reakes A 2006; Doddington C, Flutter J & Rudduck J 1999)
8
The National Curriculum has led to higher expectations of young people (Barber M 2002; Hopkins D 2001;
Tabberer R 1997)
ills
However, problems have accumulated in respect of:
1
Acute overload, with resulting pressure on teachers to move with undue pace
through material and encouraging a ‘tick list’ approach to teaching
(Black P & Wiliam D 1999; Alexander R (ed) 2010; Dearing R 1994; House of Commons Children, Schools and
Families Committee 2008)
2
All groups clamouring to ensure that subject content which reflects their
interest is included in the ‘core’ content of the National Curriculum – leading
to a lack of clarity as to what should legitimately be included, or not included
(Rawling E 2001)
3
Overbearing assessment with adverse impact on teaching and learning
(Black & Wiliam op cit; Pollard A, Broadfoot P, Croll P, Osborn M & Abbott D 1994; ARG & TLRP 2009; Mansell W
2007), with specific problems emerging in relation to narrow drilling for tests (Pollard A, Broadfoot P, Croll P, Osborn
M & Abbott D op cit; ARG & TLRP op cit; TES 2005) and a failure of the assessment to provide policymakers with
robust information on national standards (Oates T 2005; Statistics Commission 2005; Tymms P 2007; Massey A,
Green S, Dexter T & Hamnett L 2003).
The National Curriculum 1995 and 2007
Background to the reforms: a
fundamental shift in underpinning
principles
The National Curriculum 1995
Science - key stage 3
Materials and properties
Chemical Reactions
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.
o.
p.
that when chemical reactions take place, mass is conserved;
that virtually all materials, including those in living systems, are
made through chemical reactions;
to represent chemical reactions by word equations;
that there are different types of reaction, including oxidation and
thermal decomposition;
that useful products can be made from chemical reactions, including
the production of metals from metal oxides;
about chemical reactions, e.g. corrosion of iron, spoiling of food, that
are generally not useful;
that energy transfers that accompany chemical reactions, including
the burning of fuels, can be controlled and used;
about possible effects of burning fossil fuels on the environment.
National Curriculum 2007
Chemical and Material Behaviour
In their study of science, the following should be covered:
a.
chemical change takes place by the rearrangement of atoms in
substances;
b.
there are patterns in the chemical reactions between substances;
c.
new materials are made from natural resources by chemical
reactions;
d.
the properties of a material determine its uses.
Where are we now and why?
Science in the National Curriculum
ATs statements of attainment
1991 Original specification
4
KS3 96
KS4 139
1995 Dearing Revision
5
KS3 166
KS4 221
1999 QCA-led revision
4
KS3 121
KS4 189
2007 QCA-led revision
4
KS3 37
KS4 30
-
Dramatic contraction in 2007
Mysterious reappearance, in June 2009, of the 1999 National Curriculum
Significant reduction in conceptual demand
‘Upward drift’ in, and removal of, demanding material
-
Decay of understanding of original purpose of National Curriculum
Confusion between ‘curriculum’ and ‘National Curriculum’
Generic (imprecise) statements driven by a commitment to consensus
Confusion regarding an ‘up-to-date and motivating’ curriculum
Confusion between context and concepts
Policy potential: understanding the relative
performance of different national systems
through ‘control factors’
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
curriculum content (nc specifications, support materials, etc)
assessment and qualifications
national framework for qualifications
inspection
pedagogy
professional development
institutional development
institutional forms and structures (eg size of schools, education phases)
allied social measures (linking social care, health care and education)
funding
governance (autonomy versus direct control)
accountability arrangements
labour market/professional licensing
allied market regulation (eg health and safety legislation; insurance
regulation)
My conclusions regarding direction – 2010 policy paper
Curriculum coherence is crucial – a National Curriculum is one means
of establishing this – note the conundrum regarding textbooks
Focus on concepts, principles and fundamental operations arranged in
an age-related framework
Stable, sparse listing
Contextualisation should be controlled by teachers
No slavish commitment to a common structure across subjects, bar
attending to necessary links
Rapid action allied to appropriate long-term direction
The current review
Revised specifications in the
Primary phase: English, Science and
Mathematics
Initial reactions – NAHT survey summer 2012
NAHT n500
54% teach 12x12, long division
80% add subtract multiply and divide fractions
66% algebra
44% taught subjunctive
88% learned names of planets in solar system
90% taught foreign language, 83% in yr3
If implemented in current form
13% help
38% hinder
30% make no difference
19% don’t know
Detail
26% About right
47% too much
5% not enough
22% don’t know
A responsible approach to transnational comparisons
(note not identical to control factors)
Character and structure of the National Curriculum (size, focus, underpinning
theory, and design principles)
Curriculum coherence – content, pedagogy, assessment, support materials,
drivers and incentives
Teacher quality and teaching quality
Demarcations between national requirement and school autonomy – locus of
control
School ethos and balance between National Curriculum elements, taught
elements and untaught elements
Family culture and national social culture
General attitude to innovation
Investment in education
Elements of comparisons….size
Note on populations
Singapore
Finland
Hong Kong
Mass
Alberta
England
4,839,400
5,313,399
6,977,770
6,593,587
2,974,807
51,460,000
(world bank)
(worldbank)
(worldbank)
(uscensus)
(finance and enterprise Alberta)
(office for national statistics)
Korea
48,747,000
(worldbank)
Elements of comparison: expenditure
Public expenditure on education as % of GDP
Australia
Canada
Finland
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China
Japan
New Zealand
Singapore
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
United States of America
1999
5.1
5.7
6.1
2000
5
5.6
5.9
3.6
6.9
3.7
4.6
5.1
4.6
2001
5.1
5.1
6
3.9
3.6
6.8
3.1
4.7
5.7
2002
5
5.2
6.2
4
3.6
6.6
2003
4.9
2004
4.9
6.4
4.3
3.7
6.7
6.4
4.6
3.7
6.8
2005
4.8
4.9
6.3
4.2
3.5
6.5
5.3
5.7
5.5
5.9
5.4
5.6
5.5
5.3
From UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS)
Education at a Glance 2009: OECD Indicators - OECD © 2009 - ISBN 9789264024755
Indicator B1: How much is spent per student?
Table B1.4. Annual expenditure on educational institutions per student for all services relative to GDP per capita (2006)
Primary to
tertiary
education
OECD countries
United States
31
United Kingdom
27
Finland
25
New Zealand
23
OECD average
26
EU19 average
24
Source: OECD.
2006
5.2
6.1
3.9
3.5
6.2
5.7
2007
3.5
6.3
Policy potential: understanding the relative
performance of different national systems
through ‘control factors’
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
curriculum content (nc specifications, support materials, etc)
assessment and qualifications
national framework for qualifications
inspection
pedagogy
professional development
institutional development
institutional forms and structures (eg size of schools, education phases)
allied social measures (linking social care, health care and education)
funding
governance (autonomy versus direct control)
accountability arrangements
labour market/professional licensing
allied market regulation (eg health and safety legislation; insurance
regulation)
Some overall comparisons
Mathematics – primary
Basic structure similar to other nations
Number curriculum narrower and less demanding
Data handling broader and more demanding
Visualization and transformational geometry unique to England
Science – primary
Different structural division - greater disaggregation in some other nations
Scientific enquiry shared - but this not a structural element in some other nations
Physical processes narrower and less demanding than majority of other nations
Life processes narrower but not less demanding overall
Scientific enquiry and Materials level of demand similar to other nations
Nfer study of Taipei, Hong Kong, Latvia, Netherlands, Ontario, Singapore, British Colombia, Sweden
Rudduck G & Sainsbury M Comparison of the Core Primary Curriculum in England to those in other high performing Countries DfES 2008
‘Stand out element’
In Primary, fewer things in greater depth
‘…Concentration on a small number of attainable goals, mostly of an
academic variety or concerned with the individual’s relationship to society,
rather than a spread of effort across many academic, social, affective and
moral goals…’
Reynolds and Farrell 1996
The revised specifications
available on DfE website
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/curriculum/nationalcurriculum/b0075667/national-curriculumreview-update
English
Early acquisition, highly fluent reading by end KS2 and reading for enjoyment
Structure and range in writing
Development of spoken language
‘Language of grammar’, rules and exceptions
Cognitive development through memorising – writing and poetry
Mathematics
Developing proportional reasoning
Working with decimals and fractions
Secure understanding of key concepts
Fluency and confidence in four operations
Science
Separate sciences, for conceptual clarity
Classification
Life processes, inheritance, evolution
Forces, physical structure, properties, states of matter, sound and light
Science through the lives of scientific figures
Observation, safe tests, recording
Ability models and pedagogy
Concentration on a small number of attainable goals, mostly of an
academic variety or concerned with the individual’s relationship to society,
rather than a spread of effort across many academic, social, affective and
moral goals.
Mechanisms to ensure that things are taught properly the first time
around, and that there is no ‘trailing edge’ of children who have to be returned
to later (an example from Taiwan is that children have to repeat in the
homework books any exercises that they got wrong in their previous
homework).
The use of the same textbooks by all children, which permits teachers to
channel their energy into classroom instruction and the marking of homework,
rather than into the production of worksheets that is so much a feature of
English teaching.
Reynolds and Farrell 1996 p56
Chasing the right demarcation between control and autonomy
Transnational analyses do NOT supply a ‘judgement-free solution’
Using the control factors
Understanding patterns of incentives
The partial role of the National Curriculum
Embedding the distinction between National Curriculum and School Curriculum
Key elements
Revision of inspection
Review of EYFS
Review of teacher supply
Review of national assessment
Examination of role of textboooks and materials
Review of capacity in Primary phase
Development of a broader range of performance metrics - including EB
Prudent policy involves relaxing some factors and tightening others
Recognising that control is a system characteristic, not a top down mechanism
How much detail, in which areas of the National Curriculum?
Expert Panel recommendations
- importance of curriculum aims Yes
- standards emerging from transnational comparisons Yes
- considerable detail in key subjects Yes
- ‘two-year block’ structure to content No
- reduced scope (crucial elements) but increased specificity (greater precision) Yes
- using the existing legal categories for the level of prescription in different subjects No change
- retain statutory breadth to 16 but with less prescription in specification No change
- importance of curriculum coherence Yes
- change to structure of key stages - KS2 in particular No change
- challenge of models of progression in primary phase Yes
- assessment which links to the specifics of the curriculum – remove ‘levels’ Yes
- importance of ‘spoken language’ including rich pedagogy Yes
- emphasis on teaching quality, leadership and ‘intelligent accountability’ Yes
- language learning in Primary Phase yr3-6 Yes
- additional requirements (2012) to publish year on year school curriculum
The reality of the proposed changes
Has statutory breath decreased? No - and fl has been added at primary
Have overall aims of the curriculum been neglected, including 'broader aims' of
education regartding development of the child? No - they've been re-inforced
Is it all about facts? No - the importance of powerful knowledge has been emphasised; deep
conceptual learning is emphasised as well as 'joy of reading' 'understanding the wonder of the
natural world' 'rich oral exchange'
It is over prescriptive – is increase in autonomy illusory? No - fewer things have been
described with clarity and precisionm, making room for choice over high quality teaching and
learning
But what if all subjects are stated in the same level of detail as Eng Maths Sci in
primary? They won't be - that's one way in which things are being freed up
Does it prescribe what happens each week, each year? No - the legal requirement remains
reaching a high standard at the end of each key stage - that's the existing law and it will stay
that way - schools can depart from the precise year on year scheduling - the year on year
specification is to bring greater clarity to expectations, not over-determine the shape of the
school curriculum
Scheduling
Originally:
Phase 1 subjects – English, mathematics, sciences, and PE
Specifications in schools by Sept 2012 for first teaching in Sept 2013
Phase 2 subjects – to be determined
Specifications in schools by Sept 2013 for first teaching in Sept 2014
Now:
Phase 1 and Phase 2 - now on same timetable
Specifications in schools by Sept 2013 for first teaching in Sept 2014
Issues
The National Curriculum is important, but it is not the sole control factor – the locus of control
issues are not to be underestimated – autonomy can deliver curriculum coherence but there is
a lot to play for and a lot which can go wrong
Quality of teaching is critical
Focus on key concepts and secure learning
The model of progression in primary seems to be vital
Maintaining statutory breadth is challenging, and requires a subtle policy approach
Continuing problems regarding MFL and classical languages
Strong stereotypical participation in public examinations