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

Hmmm, hmmm. In theory that would work and there's nothing to stop schools from offering that. Dropping after Christmas might not be seen as efficient by school management; you'd be left with smaller class sizes than normal for the remaining two terms, which would be great in one way but has some staffing implications.

And not only that, but the decoupling means that in my subject, the things they are awarded marks for at AS are not the same as A2 - so you spend a year saying "do x or you get no marks", then the second year saying " don't do x; you'll get no marks."

That is a Tory MSP and in The Scotsman , though . It's rather equivalent to taking a story form the Torygraph which quotes Halfon!

I am not saying there aren't problems but I don't think it is quite as bad as the perception created of it by certain quarters.

I would be in favour of life/functional skills in maths, English & science taken when ready. It is so depressing trying to resit English GCSE in college. My DD would be far better off practing job application letters or similar than trying to argue on a random topic she's never thought of before.
Also agree with PP re English in primary. What was the point of teaching random grammar terms never again used in Secondary when my DD hadn't mastered basics such as full stops and commas?

Labour have always been weak in education policy. Their answer under Blair was chuck money at it, degrade exam standards and bring in useless degrees that students took loans out for when in fact many were far more suited to vocational careers, ie plumbers and electricians.

"Multi modal assessment" ...yep teachers assessing and deciding grades...too much already and we saw the reality if that in covid. Grades soared. Some schools with historically crap results suddenly sprouted Oxford standard students.

The only way forward is wholesale reform that is not subject to party politics, but good luck with that!! It is too tempting for our generally useless politicians to actually to the better thing and get some expert consensus and use learning from other countries. And no, that doesn't mean the teaching unions tell us what is best as that will amount to long teaching holidays to allow teachers get over the stress (yes I get there is stress but so do many many occupations that don't have 6 week breaks).

Have you read Dennis Sherwood's stuff gohoggie.?Noble will be lolling at me because she knows I'm a fangirl! But you would find it interesting.

I agree exams are not as equitable as people say , in all subjects . Maths , science and secondary are dominating thoughts on this thread (as someone posted upthread little discussion of primary) and I am also often surprised at what English teachers think on here, who also seem quite traditionalist. We can't begin a discussion on coursework vs exams with an assumption that exams = the correct grade.

FWIW, there are huge problems with exams in written subjects :

Examiners have been found to be inaccurate markers (they are teachers after all!) . Different examiners could give different outcomes by two grades (remember the governments much lauded 'exams are accurate by one grade in either direction' comment when there was howling about the algorithm? Well, that's a huge difference when applying to uni, or getting a 3 instead of a 4 in English GCSE!

Secondly, people will say at least this doesn't build in unconscious bias but examiners still judge by presentation which tends to favour NT students and girls with neat handwriting and florid vocabulary.

Thirdly - exam results can be appealed . This massively favours the affluent advantaged. Coaching and tutoring for SAT, GCSEs and A Levels is also the domain of the privileged.

Lastly, exams are not 'real life' and definitely favour students with curricular skills and abilities (this used to be seen to be boys but the tables have turned). Surely there should be some balance of skillsets under examination in education?

I don't think there is a one size fits all approach but to claim the current system isn't broken is not listening to the voices who say the exam treadmill is damaging to true learning and is not good for many many students' mental health either (the stats on our 15 year olds happiness and stress levels compared to counterparts in other countries are pretty damning). The high stakes high pressure system is fairly unique to the UK. If we genuinely want to iron out in built disadvantage we would look at the whole system - but it needs time, cross party co operation and de politicising. Unfortunately, these days teachers themselves are quite polarised in debates. And 5 Education secs in abut a few years tells us everything we need to about ow valued that job is in government.

That link jangly pointed above consists of mainly the 'trad EduTwitter' bunch who have lots of ideas, but hey do tend to think all their ideas are correct , and that every teacher agrees with them. I don't and nor do many others - in my opinion, huge damage has been done to English teaching (can only speak for about year 6 upwards) and I know it isn't just me that thinks this. The recent leaked OFSTED stuff on English is genuinely pretty alarming and the EMC and others are quite an active dissenting voice and they really should be listened to.

None of the above means I think Labour's plans are great. I just son't think that means what we have now is working. FWIW the young English colleagues I know who have dropped out think teaching is not as creative, inspiring or independent as they thought it would be and they have noticed the kids don't have any fun at all in lessons, constantly writing mini assessments and prepping for ,and doing , tests. And I think student enthusiasm and engagement has dropped off a cliff . Sadly, I keep overhearing students in the corridors groaning about going to English.

Sorry - long post!

Some schools with historically crap results suddenly sprouted Oxford standard students.

Ermmm.. that's not true. The biggest grade inflation was in the private schools.

Also, I think the unions are the only people who would make governments look at workload implication of changes. No union has actually ever called for longer holidays, so that's a made up version of what they say!

If you want to know what Labour would do to education, look at Wales. New fancy curriculum and they still haven't decided how they're going to do GCSEs (or whatever equivalent they settle on). It's shambolic. It's also based on the Scottish reforms even though there's no evidence at all that these have improved outcomes in Scotland - what evidence there is points in the other direction.

Everyone seems to be crap at education. There’s not very much good research on what works and what doesn’t so a lot of people have strong opinions.

I am long in tooth.
I remember being a teenager in the 70s and thinking, havent they worked out what works best by now?

And in 2022, her we are. Same old.

If only labour would say "we are handing education policy to the education system" we might get somewhere instead of the perpetual merry-go-round of huge policy changes every decade which cause lots of work and stress for absolutely naff all real progress!

A poll of teachers on Twitter still said 87% of them trusted Labour in charge of Education over the Conservatives.

Just checking that posters here have seen there is going to be a MN chat with Keir Starmer & Bridget someone who is shadow education secretary. A high number of questions are on basic biology so far, so some other education questions might be good too.

Oh God, yes please teen! So many opportunities to ask education questions being missed. Or questions about many things tbh....

Q. Why are Labour so shit at education policy?

A. Because most of them are thickos who don't know what 'education' is !

Thickos?

labour.org.uk/people/shadow-cabinet/

Right...

Constructive.

I think the basic biology questions are important, but we know MN will only put 1 or 2 of them, so some good quality questions on their proposals for education wouldn't go amiss.

@Piggywaspushed OK,

So Angela Raynor is qualified to wipe old folks' bums in nursing homes?

Proves my point.

Perhaps stop assuming every child wants or needs to go to university? Encourage more apprenticeships in well paid and useful trades that are in demand - plumbers, electricians, etc?

TBH, in primary we are in desperate need of a curriculum overhaul. There is WAY too much in it. We need to slim down SATs (no SPaG paper, one short reasoning paper instead of two long ones) so we can actually nail what they need to do instead of sweating to finish the curriculum. Then a smaller foundation curriculum that we actually have a hope of doing more than skimming through.

Currently, teachers and children are breaking under the relentless pace that primary school days have to go. Nobody is enjoying it.

It's Rayner. And she is one person.

I agree with @careerchange456.

Primary curriculum desperately needs attention.
It's way too much and I think all kids - even the brightest, would benefit from cramming less in, but spending more time on what we do teach and doing it better.

SEN is also desperate. It seems to be getting worse year on year. I get COVID and backlog etc but it's way more than that.
Last year I had to beg for an assessment for a Y3 pupil which cost the school in the region of £800.
This year, when we are predicting a £30 k deficit that would be totally impossible.

What about those who don't want to be in trades? What exists for them? It's not a binary be a plumber or go to uni....

TBF there are some very good apprenticeships available in law, accountancy, IT, cyber security, marketing and a host of other areas. People can gain meaningful qualifications and earn relatively well while studying. The problem is that provision is patchy and funding Byzantine. Years of underinvestment in FE while simultaneously ramping up requirements has greatly damaged the sector.

One day it might be you who needs someone to look after you.

But thankyou for calling carers thick as two short planks - no wonder so many people detest the Tories.

Quite frankly, i'd rather have a Rayner than a Gavin Williamson

That coursework, which is wide open to cheating, is a less reliable form of assessment than an exam?

I thought that would be more of an obvious statement than anything.