A closer look at the school league tables reveals the govt. is being insufficiently ambitious about turning round under-performing schools, writes Rick Muir.
Rick Muir is Associate Director for Public Service Reform at the Institute for Public Policy Research (ippr)
Much of the discussion of the publication this week of the school league tables has focused on the introduction of the new English Baccalaureate which has been retrospectively applied to this year’s GCSE results and which ippr has criticised elsewhere.
However, a closer look at the league tables reveals the government is being insufficiently ambitious about turning round under-performing schools. The last Labour government set a target that every school should have more than 30 per cent of its pupils gaining 5 A*-C GCSEs in English and Maths.
Labour was successful at meeting this target with the number of schools below the floor falling from 912 in 2004/05 to just 82 in 2009/10, according to the figures; see Table 1 below:
|
Number of schools reaching the previous (30%) minimum standard 2004/05–2009/10: |
|
Year |
Number of schools where fewer than 30% of pupils achieved 5+ A*–C GCSEs including English and maths |
Reduction in schools where fewer than 30% of pupils achieved 5+ A*–C GCSEs including English and maths |
|
2004/5 |
912 |
|
| 2005/6 | 783 | 129 |
| 2006/7 | 631 | 152 |
| 2007/8 | 440 | 191 |
| 2008/9 | 247 | 193 |
| 2009/10 | 82 | 165 |
Michael Gove was right to retain Labour’s approach of a floor target for schools at the bottom end of the league tables and he was also right to raise the target – although he didn’t go far enough. The government’s new target is that at least 35% of pupils in every school should get five A*-C GCSEs including English and Maths; although no date has been set for when that level should be met.
Today’s league tables show that just 216 schools failed to reach the new target this year. Given that in its last year in office alone Labour managed to get 165 schools over their floor, this target looks under-ambitious.
We should ensure that schools are continuously improving – not least if we are to raise England’s schools up to the standards of the best in the world. Each parliament should set itself a higher standard in terms of school improvement. Given that around 700 schools were lifted above the floor in the last parliament, this government should set itself a similarly ambitious target.
Our aim should be that by the end of this parliament at least 40% of pupils in every school should get 5 good GCSEs, including English and Maths. At present around 500 schools fall below this level. This should sit alongside a new Pupil Premium Entitlement for all low income pupils, wherever they learn, which ensures that extra resources reach the children for whom they are intended.
So far improvement towards the floor target has come about through a mixture of dedicated schools advisors to support school leadership and targeted extra support for teaching and learning. Schools that did not succeed were re-launched as academies.
As school standards rise, a different appraoch may be required:
• One that focuses on ensuring the best teachers are recruited and retained in the most challenging schools;
• In which more schools come under the leadership of federations and chains of high performing schools;
• And where innovation is spread more widely through peer-to-peer networks.
The biggest problem in England’s school system remains the class divide: the fact that pupils from poorer backgrounds continue to lag behind their wealthier peers. If we are to seriously tackle the attainment gap, the government needs to raise its game.
13 Responses to “League tables show Gove’s lack of ambition on underperforming schools”
Susan Steward
The problem we have in this country is that we have never agreed what education is actually for. Michael Gove is secretary for state for education in England only – Scotland has always had a different system where pupils carry on studying a number of subjects to age 18 rather than just age 14. The Nuffield Review of 14-18 education (Richard Pring 2009?) asks “what does an educated 18 year old look like?” It suggests a more holistic curriculum that would mirror those in other countries (even Wales now has its own Bac). The current list of 5 subjects that Gove is using does not include any arts, ‘creative’ or D&T subject and therefore is deeply flawed.
Having said this I cautiously welcome the debate that the new league tables are provoking. I visit a number of schools and many are playing the system. I find it difficult to defend policies where 14 year olds are spending their time in work environments one or two days a week (for no pay) rather than in school studying – sweeping hair from floors and painting nails does not seem like an education to me. Similarly while there appears to be a myriad of ‘choice’ choosing vocational subjects often means not being able to choose a humanities subject or a MFL because the school itself has already decided that that student is incapable of getting a C at GCSE (even if they could get a D or an E). Students are taken out of non-compulsory subjects to do extra English and Maths because the message is that these are the only ones that ‘count’. Having 5 subjects that now count make that targeting much more difficult though I expect schools again will again start to find ways of getting round this new system too. It is the league tables that require schools to play the system rather than look at what is actually best for young people. We need a much better system of ensuring school accountability: surely we want schools to turn out ‘good’ citizens too who can work together and for others rather than just themselves?
Perhaps more worrying than Gove’s new league tables (who cares that much?) is a trend amongst universities to change admissions criteria with little prior publicity. The THES recently reported the demise of MFLs in comprehensive schools (around 44%) and in one article it came to light that UCL (a member of the Russell Group) will require all its undergrads to have ‘another language’ from 2012. Given that students choose options when they are aged 14 and don’t go to uni until they are 18 this does strike me as a real problem for many as the goal posts have been moved with no warning (and still not publicised).
I have worked on education projects looking at the issues ‘schools in challenging circumstances’ face. Yes they really do need to recruit the best teachers but who are these? Gove is rubbishing the current teacher training system and promoting Teach First but a recent OFSTED report said that the best training takes place when universities and schools work in partnership. There is expertise in both sectors as to how to improve such schools but just repeating what is currently done is insufficient and clearly counter-productive. The current model of teacher training allows trainees the time to observe and to discuss what they observe with others when they return to the university classroom: reflection is a really important component in effective teacher training. Teach First apprentices (for that is what they are) do not have this – they are thrown in at the deep end in our most challenging schools with little or no training and more importantly they have little time to think or reflect on what they are doing whilst ‘on the job’. Pupils in challenging circumstances deserve the best trained teachers which means understanding learning and teaching too not just differential equations (not much call for these amongst bottom set Year 9); they also need teachers who are committed to working in such environments not ones who are enticed in with a promise of another job in ‘management’ after a few years. We currently lose at least 40% (some estimates say 50%) of all teachers in their first 5 years – we have to start looking at why and how to stop this.Teachers need to be valued for their teaching expertise – good subject knowledge is only the start.
This whole issue is about so much more than what is being portrayed in the media and it is young people who are being short-changed by all sides. It goes without saying that we have to get rid of selective schools in all authorities and stop pretending that the private schools are ‘charities’ so they don’t have to pay tax. But we desperately need to raise the level of the debate and use what we know from the research evidence that is out there. Sadly this has always either been rubbished or ignored by both political parties.
Gove is the roadblock to Burnham's calls of aspiration | Left Foot Forward
[…] League tables show Gove’s lack of ambition on underperforming schools – Rick Muir, January 13th 2011 Share | Permalink | Leave a comment Comments […]
Gove can't even do a puff piece right | Left Foot Forward
[…] League tables show Gove’s lack of ambition on underperforming schools – Rick Muir, January 13th […]