Why are Labour so shit at education policy?

[noblegiraffe]

It should be pretty clear that I am as keen as anyone to see an end to this Tory government and their destruction of education through consistent and persistent underfunding and deprioritising.

So it is incredibly depressing to turn to the education policy of a Labour manifesto and every time experience a feeling of wtf.

Anyway, Labour have just realised a report that will be used to inform education policy in the next manifesto, and it's that sinking feeling once again.

They acknowledge that teacher recruitment and retention are a massive issue.

And then:

"This will include, beginning from initial teacher education, being trained in a wider range of methods than the traditional ‘chalk and talk’, including high quality team-based learning which will lead students to understand how to approach the delivery of projects in the workplace."

"Labour should introduce multimodal assessment so that young people’s progress is no longer just measured through written exams"

"A syllabus should be designed to ensure all students have accessible and practical, hands-on applicability of digital skills, so that they are able to engage with the transformative approach to problem solving that is rapidly changing the economy."

"For primary and secondary school, Labour should design an inclusive, inspiring, creative and future broadening curriculum which will liberate talent, promote the enquiring mind of every young person, and prepare young adults for the ever-changing world, designed to ensure that no child is left behind. Not only are we preparing students for their contributions as employees, but unlocking their potential as entrepreneurs, and therefore the innovators and job-creators of the future."

And how will ripping up the curriculum and assessment system again improve teacher recruitment and retention, eh, Labour? Teachers were massively pissed off with Gove when he did it, it created massive workload and we're still dealing with the problems of its rushed implementation.

Teachers will see the prospect of all their current practice and knowledge being ripped up and put in the bin and say 'fuck this, I'm off'.

I understand that Labour want to be seen as the party of bold and ambitious plans. But education cannot support bold and ambitious plans. It needs careful investment, tweaks to the current systems that will lead to immediate improvements (like reintroducing AS levels), and major focus on fixing immediate problems that urgently need fixing, like the state of school buildings, mental health and SEN support. Not the curriculum and assessment system.

And Labour need to talk to and listen to actual teachers who will have to implement their ideas before publishing their policy.

So if anyone on here has anyone in Labour's ear (or an MP you can beg), please tell them to stop this crap before it gets to the manifesto.

schoolsweek.co.uk/major-labour-review-calls-for-creative-curriculum-and-less-exams-focus/

Actual report:
labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/WR-16813_22-Labour-Skills-Council-report-Edit-19-10-22.pdf

I’m happy with the Key Stage 4 and 5 curriculum as it is. I don’t see any need for Labour to come in with ambitious plans to change the curriculum. I think BTECs need to stay but I don’t have any burning desire to bring back AS levels.

The problem with Tory education policy for me is not the curriculum they’ve brought in, it’s them making sweeping changes at a time when they were cutting education spending to the bone and not giving people the time needed to implement changes properly.

If I were Labour, I’d put my money into properly funding schools and increasing PPA allowance and leave the curriculum the fuck alone.

Now they study full, challenging texts in depth and the students rise to the challenge.

Am not sure either of those things are the case in all schools, @verastan.

Well put @MadameMinimes

Well they’ll have to invest a lot of money into schools if they’re going to introduce a 20% rise in fees for private schools. Whatever your opinion on private schools, presumably this will lead to a relatively significant number of children needing state school places.
It also has the effect of making private schools even more exclusive and only for the rich. I know ideologically that they are against them, but surely it would be better to improve the system, encourage greater chances of bursaries, scholarships, tie ins with local schools etc.

@JanglyBeads perhaps not, I should have said this is the case in my school.

The structure of the Lit GCSE does require full knowledge of challenging texts in closed book exams however, so it does mean that to do well, you have to study the text in full.

In a previous GCSE it was possible to do coursework on a few extracts, a few poems and short stories and an oral discussion of a Shakespeare play!

@TeenDivided I would vote for this. Can you be education minister please?

I don't know how I'd fund it though.

There is LOADS of research, it's an entire academic discipline! It's just our ridiculous political system, instead of having a headteacher or teacher with 5+ years' experience as education minister, puts some random arselicker in the post. Same for health minister, environmment etc, and they pull these silly radical policies out of their arses to get their name in the papers so people have heard of them by the time they try to stand for PM.

Yeah that's the big problem.

I sort of am.

I hate hate hate the relentless obsession with terminal exams( at least in subjects that don't suit exams) and woukd also argue that exams prepare students neither for employment, nor for the vast number of university courses.

I'd also like more creativity and inspiration back, and not just in creative subjects. The idea that only arts subjects are for creative thinkers, and that creativity is light, fluffy and feminine has led to the derisive commentary on the Arts from lots of circles, and the pushing of music, especially, further towards public school elites.

I think at the very least it should be looked at. So many children have struggled mental health wise under the treadmill approach.

I have two young adults, one is very academic the other is not, both love the arts.

The current system did not serve them well.

I'd like to see a recognition that for some children it is subjects like the arts and sport that keep them in school, engaged and out of trouble so they need to be properly funded.

Some children love the rigour of academic learning for the sake of it and they should have access to classic literature etc but for others (such as my ds with SEN but highly talented in music, it is absolute purgatory and they should be given the option of an alternative to the current GCSE English and Maths requirements something more along the lines of Functional Skills.

But this all requires a lot of funding.

Piggy, I agree with every word you have just said.

Out of interest, why are a few of you against the reintroduction of coursework?

Oh right. Yes, agree. But I'd go further than that!

I would love to see almost entirely vocational areas make a comeback for those that are not academic.
And by that I don't mean Btec
Or T Levels (mostly due to set up costs).

Something like where the product that they made was assessed fully for the mark or catering where the final assessment was based on an organised 3 course meal for a number of people.

Because people cheat

I hate hate hate the relentless obsession with terminal exams

And yet what has two years of teacher assessment and no terminal exams taught us? That teacher assessment benefits the rich, increases the gap between the most advantaged and least advantaged, leads to massive inequality in assessments between schools, and, although I've not looked at the stats, I would suspect from previous research, also disadvantages certain ethnic groups.

Exams aren't a great solution, but they're better than the alternatives. Progressive teachers need to stop arguing 'but alternatives just haven't been implemented properly'.

I would bring back AS levels too.

The ability to do 4 AS and drop the weakest, was so much better. With a child just trying to decide A levels now, having to choose which A levels when you have no idea about which career you want to go into, or how much harder some subjects get at A level. And yes, I teach so many students who are stuck with their A level choices after 1 term and no other options. It is soul destroying for them.

I would also welcome a thoughtful return of coursework too. Although I think it would need careful managing to avoid plagiarism. However, in some subjects like sociology - I really do think the best way for students to learn the strengths and weaknesses of research methods is to do an actual research project. Maybe coursework might need some kind of viva to ensure it is the students' own work, and that would take money to finance (and consideration about teacher workload too) but again, I teach too many students who know their stuff, but don't perform well in exams and having courses as exam based only disadvantages them and gives a wrong view of who the best students are.

I also started teaching in the late 90s when Labour first came to power. And I also remember the radical ideas they brought in then. Labour even paid for most of my masters, which I do think radically changed my teaching. So I would welcome the sabbaticals. They have always existed in my subject, (through a charity scheme) I know teachers who have done them and it's been great for them and their schools. I would like to see that widened to other subjects.

But yeah, this all needs money, and more teachers, but I don't think we should limit the vision because of current teacher morale. Maybe we first need to revisit teacher workload, as Labour did in the 90s when we had the list of jobs we weren't expected to do any more... but we need to had a vision for a better teacher career to stop the death spiral it currently is in.

I did 100% coursework GCSE English.

I developed a love of reading and experienced lots of different genres. A very tough, but intelligent boy in my class for whom reading was not cool discovered he actually really enjoyed Wuthering Heights because it wasn't done/crammed to death.

My son loves plays and drama and used to love reading but GCSE ENglish sucked the pleasure out of it. Dd did English Lit A level and even she said GCSE English was dull and formulaic.

@kegofcoffee because in some schools, because of the pressure to get strong results, pressure is put on teachers to inflate the grades and cross boundaries when it comes to supporting the students in what should be independent work. It's not fair to put teachers in that position.

It also confers unfair advantages on students whose parents "support" them with coursework.

In a very high stakes results system, it is a nightmare. Exams aren't perfect but are much more fair imo.

As a parent whose eldest did GCSEs prior to reform I got the impression coursework was just too subject to outside help.
My DD did 2 MFLs which had written and verbal coursework which she wrote, learned by heart, and regurgitated. There appeared to be nothing to stop a tutor helping students. There was also nothing to stop teachers 'leading' their pupils more than they should for English essays etc.

they should be given the option of an alternative to the current GCSE English and Maths requirements

Yes, absolutely, the current Gove curriculum really does not benefit the weakest pupils at all.

Intelligence is made of two parts.

The first is knowledge. The second is applying that knowledge correctly.

Asian education focuses hard on the former, at the expense of the latter. Their students tend to have fantastic memory recall and a large amount of knowledge stored. But they often have difficulty in applying that knowledge correctly to real-world situations.

Western education focuses hard on the latter. Their students have difficulty in memory recall and have less knowledge stored. But they are much better at applying the knowledge they do have correctly to real-world situations.

The brightest students understand all of this and work on both aspects, easily standing out as a result.

The UK needs to drastically improve discipline and start teaching rote learning to younger students (primary school). They will then be able to use these skills throughout their education. With the building-blocks of gathering knowledge in place, the UK can continue the current style of teaching through secondary school - which is great at teaching students how to apply knowledge to situations.

*And yet what has two years of teacher assessment and no terminal exams taught us? That teacher assessment benefits the rich, increases the gap between the most advantaged and least advantaged, leads to massive inequality in assessments between schools, and, although I've not looked at the stats, I would suspect from previous research, also disadvantages certain ethnic groups.

Exams aren't a great solution, but they're better than the alternatives. Progressive teachers need to stop arguing 'but alternatives just haven't been implemented properly'.*

I agree, you'd think Labour would realise this.

I'm torn because exams are the fairest way of assessing children, at least on my reading about biases in teacher based marking, but I also think there should be a greater range of options for those students who don't cope well with exams and there shouldn't be exams for the sake of it in subjects that don't lend themselves to exams.

I'd be devestated to go back to coursework or controlled assessment at GCSE for my subjects.

The best thing anyone can do for schools in my opinion is properly fund the related services around children and young people (CAMHS, social services, family workers, social prescribing, SALT, EdPsyc assessment routes) so that schools can get on with educating children and not trying to do everything.