What is really going on in our schools? Well, Laura....

[noblegiraffe]

Laura Kuenssberg appears to have just discovered that schools exist. New to the concept she has written an essay discussing what might be going on in them, from the perspective of someone who doesn't know what they are talking about. Basic errors include "standards haven't crashed because GCSE and A-level results in 2022 were up on 2019".

She mentions the lack of funding, but doesn't mention the lack of teachers. She mentions increased pupil absence but doesn't mention the implosion of support services for children like CAMHS, or the huge waiting lists for SEN diagnosis and the cutting of TAs in schools due to lack of money. She suggests covid might have had an impact, but not that the government have done basically nothing to address this and that their covid catch-up adviser resigned in disgust.

She says a minister says that 'teachers have had a bashing since covid'. Since covid! She doesn't mention this is led by the government and has been going on for years.

So, what's really going on in our schools? Anyone want to help Laura out?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-65360168

Nothing is bad about middle schools. I just prefer working with older students.

They could re-instate AS Levels as a quick fix to that.

Yes, I really think they should.

4 AS levels with exams at the end of year 1 contributing to the final A level grade were a much better idea for trying a wider range of subjects and providing objective evidence for UCAS applications. And better for student stress levels too, with less pressure on one set of exams.

In Literature, though, the most recent iteration of AS was dreadful. It meant spending the first part of A2 unteaching things.
I'd take the previous one back in a heartbeat though.

No middle schools for me either! I started out in an upper school and loved it - when they scrapped middle schools in that lea around 2004 it was chaos they also sold off tons of buildings and land so I'm not sure where you'd put middle schools if you wanted them back again in that area. All land is crammed with new houses or sat upon by developers to build housing on in the future. We haven't been funded to do surveys at buildings at risk of collapse so doubt they'd be funding buying land at today's prices and building middle schools.

We need pay and conditions that will actually retain and recruit quality teachers, funding that schools to function and more sen and other AP reinstating.

I’m not a teacher, I’m reading this thread as an interested parent.

The media lack of interest in education seems to me to be only a part of the problem with regards to parents’ perceptions of the issues. All striking professions, not just teachers, have been reduced by the media to just wanting more money. And to a lot of struggling parents, you guys appear to earn well and they can’t see the problem. (We in the NHS are having the same problem).

But, I know that my kids’ school is struggling with staffing, but only because I have a friend with a friend who works there. It’s not that apparent from the outside. Likewise, I couldn’t tell you how many kids have SEN. I can’t help but feel that a lot of parents/general public genuinely have no idea how bad things are and, even if they did, as a nation we tend to moan, and then shrug and do nothing anyway.

I don’t know what the answer is.
I’d love to see a system build from the ground up, by teachers and other relevant professionals and no politicians. Complete overall, start again. And I can’t help but think that the main reason they do nothing but tinker round the edges is because they simply don’t care about the outcome of our children. Their own children will get a great education regardless, and that’s all that matters.

A lot of the issue is the insistence on a “one size fits all” approach. It doesn’t work for most children. Those with additional needs and those who struggle academically don’t get the support they need. Those who are academically able don’t get stretched enough. Those in the middle are just allowed to plod along.

The drive by the Labour Party to get more and more people to university was utterly ridiculous. A lot of young adults would be far better saving the costs of a university education and going straight into a practical job, or an apprenticeship, rather than doing pointless degrees which won’t help them in the long term. The Labour Party just want everyone in a comprehensive system, to result in everyone getting the same, average, results. What is wrong with people being allowed to excel? Surely that would benefit the economy as a whole.

As a country, we need to accept that not everyone is academic. We need to value practical jobs such as plumbing, electricians, builders etc just as much as we do those jobs which are seen as more academic (Accountancy, engineering, law, doctors etc). They are just as important. A better system would be an expansion of the grammar system so that the academic children have more of a chance of getting a place at a school which will stretch them. It would also reduce the demand for private schools. Then technical colleges and other schools could concentrate on more practical skills, which the country needs. A more tailored approach for different types of children is surely better.

The latest drive to push children into learning maths until 18 is pointless. Children who haven’t been able to get a good grasp of maths between the ages of 4 and 16 are unlikely to benefit from an extra 2 years of maths teaching. Perhaps the funding should be given to support younger children so they don’t get to 16 unable to do basic maths.

You know the people in charge for the last 13 years are the Conservatives, not Labour?

I’m fully aware, obviously. My point is that the problems started long before 2010 and are about so much more than funding. Simply throwing more money at the problem isn’t going to solve it without looking at the structure of education and how funding is allocated. No government in recent history has done anything meaningful to improve the education system. They just seem happy to accept the status quo.

Simply throwing more money at the problem isn’t going to solve it

I think if you knew the state of school budgets you'd think that throwing a bit of money their way would actually be a positive move. If schools cannot afford to hire the staff they need, or cannot afford to fund government subsidised catch-up tutors for their children, or cannot afford basic classroom equipment, then funding is clearly going to solve at least some of the problems.

I definitely think a lot of these problems are cross party. I have to admit that I don’t think I’d cope now if I woke up tomorrow and we were back in 2006. Obviously, one of the problems is when we all talk about what the problems are, they are up to a point school dependent, subject/stage dependent and even area dependent - there’s still a lot of posts on Facebook and Reddit from teachers who can’t get jobs, even though nationally there’s a huge shortage.

It might help with short term problems of teacher pay and classroom resources, but it certainly isn’t going to address the problem of pupil behaviour, which is why a lot of teachers are leaving in droves. Throwing money at a school isn’t going to suddenly make pupils behave, engage, listen, not assault teachers, not skive off to vape in the loos etc. It’s not going to stop parents complaining when their child is justifiably told off. You can set up all the intervention groups and lessons you like, but they won’t work if children can’t even be bothered to attend. You only have to read the threads on here to see that many of the problems are because children and parents are not, for whatever reason, engaged with education. Education in this country isn’t valued as much as it is in many other, poorer, countries.

We didn’t get much uptake for the tutoring at our school. It’s same with intervention: they just don’t come. I think that’s why a lot of schools use things like the prom as a carrot.

Exactly. Even when something like tutoring and intervention is offered, which could hugely affect a child’s life chances, a lot of children and parents don’t take advantage of it. That’s nothing to do with a lack of funding. As a society we need to look at why so many people don’t care about education. Many poorer countries with fewer educational resources value it far more than we do.

@Another76543 I'm not sure it's just other poorer countries though. Education is valued in most countries in Europe. Far far more than in the UK. Not to mention the very wealthy SE Asian countries.

Behaviour in class and attainment used to be quite good in the 'leafy' schools. The expectations from home were high and parents were usually very supportive of the schools, almost embarrassed if they were contacted. This attitude has shifted massively now and there is so much blame placed onto schools by well off parents. Anything that's going wrong must be potential SEN rather than just teen behaviour that needs to be reigned in. These parents also make you feel like you're an idiot not doing your job, not making the lesson interesting enough or being understanding enough. Never enough scaffolding. Doesn't matter if their kid isn't actually doing anything and refuses to even look at the board.
This is something I used to only see in deprived areas where there was a family history of low attainment and bad experiences with education. And those parents were better as they didn't make you feel like an idiot, they were honest that they thought school was pointless. These parents have all the expectations of attainment, but none from their own kids.

Poverty in this country used to equal very low behaviour and attainment expectations. I feel that's shifted now. Lots of very strict academies that aren't popular on here have actually helped many kids who would've normally been failed.

Lots of very strict academies that aren't popular on here have actually helped many kids who would've normally been failed

I agree

It’s tough for those with SEN though. Not sure what the answer is.

It might help with short term problems of teacher pay and classroom resources, but it certainly isn’t going to address the problem of pupil behaviour, which is why a lot of teachers are leaving in droves. Throwing money at a school isn’t going to suddenly make pupils behave, engage, listen, not assault teachers, not skive off to vape in the loos etc.

No, but I've seen the 'more funding won't help, the problems are structural' arguments thrown at the NHS too, when the shitty wait times are brought up. I suspect it is an easy argument for anyone who is nervous of being taxed more to wheel out.

The difference between education and the NHS is that while the NHS has had a lot of money put into it, schools have been systematically underfunded since 2010 and a lot of the problems are caused by lack of funding.

Funding buys more staff. Schools need more learning support staff for SEN, pastoral support staff for kids with behaviour issues and those failed by the lack of mental health services. Schools cannot afford these at the moment, or struggle to hire suitable candidates because they can only offer around minimum wage.

Throwing more money at teachers would stop the strikes, it may do something to address the terrible morale, it may help with recruitment and with retention. So much teacher workload is created by there not being enough teachers. Large class sizes, covering for absent colleagues, picking up the pieces from endless cover.

Why are we expecting kids to be engaged in falling-down buildings with endless cover lessons and a constant churn of teachers who barely get to know them and don't know their stuff?

If schools are, as it seems to have been decided, now the one-stop-shop for dealing with everything from children's mental health to child poverty to juvenile delinquency, then we need more staff and we need more money.

Ultimately, fix the funding and the staffing and we can start to tackle the rest.

I’m not a teacher, just a parent. We are extremely lucky in that our son goes to a private school where has thrived. (I went to an underfunded 80s comprehensive with portacabin classrooms, so I know how lucky he is).
However I volunteer two days a week at a local primary with a mixed catchment. I help Yr 6 with reading and literacy and I manage the school library and get kids borrowing and reading books.
The school culture is fantastic and encourages respect, cooperation and learning. It’s a genuinely pleasant environment. But I see what the teachers struggle with. There are many kids with additional needs (quite a few deaf kids) and class sizes are large. Ability is very mixed.
There is one child I help, who basically cannot read at the age of 10. He’s dyslexic but seems to have slipped through the net (Covid?). I think like a lot of dyslexic people he’s bright but he is way behind just because he’s now in Y6 and struggles to keep up. When he reads with me he frequently guesses the words he can’t do and his guesses are intelligent but nothing to do with the word on the page. We do flash cards and then he is exposed with no picture or context to guess from and I can see just how many words he doesn’t recognise. We work through them using phonics and sheer repetition and it is working slowly. I also read to him - I am not sure anyone else reads to him (he is one of five children and there doesn’t appear to be parental back up).
For this child to catch up, he will need that kind of one to one support consistently every day. The school can’t manage that. (I would like to do more but have other commitments and can only do 2 days a week). Not only do they not have enough staff, they can’t take him out of all the other lessons for enough time to concentrate purely on reading.
This child will go to secondary school in September- how on earth will he manage? It’s frightening.
It also occurs to me, along the lines of the vocational stuff, that 100 years ago he could have got a trade or manual job, and it wouldn’t have mattered that much. But now - how can you have a phone, download apps, apply for benefits, pass a driving test, book an appointment, if you can’t read? Everything is online. It’s unavoidable, and yet he has a reading bank of less than 100 words.
How, just how??

@MotherOfCatBoy Try Toe by Toe with him. 20mins daily. Will make a huge difference and can easily be done by older siblings at home. He just needs to read the words and they mark a dot if it's wrong.

No, no and no.

Nothing about grammar school, no research at all suggests they improve social mobility. And your post doesn't convince me that really you want anything more than a segregated system. And do you think we would recruit the teachers to technical schools? The current UTCs are folding everywhere, having terrible outcomes and are unable to recruit , far less retain, staff.

And you realise this is contradictory , right?

The drive by the Labour Party to get more and more people to university was utterly ridiculous. A lot of young adults would be far better saving the costs of a university education and going straight into a practical job, or an apprenticeship, rather than doing pointless degrees which won’t help them in the long term. The Labour Party just want everyone in a comprehensive system, to result in everyone getting the same, average, results. What is wrong with people being allowed to excel?

I'd also argue we do value plumbers, electricians and builders. Talented and dedicated tradespeople can earn a great deal and are in high demand. Not everyone wo is not academically brilliant has the skills or desire to do more manual work. And what of girls in your analogy? Or are we assuming they are plumbers, too?

Lastly , 'throwing' money at schools would improve behaviour. I'm sure it would. It would certainly help.

Middle schools in my area. I don't rate them. That is partly because they don't fit into the key stages. If we got rid of obsessive testing and key stages they might have a future. They do tend to freeze children in childhood for longer, which is a double edged sword.

Thank you, I will look at that.

Yes, any big changes are just going to push people on the edge already to leave- even if they are changes for the better, many people won't be able to face it.

Plus so many new teachers (I say this as a relatively new teacher) can't/don't want to plan SoW from scratch, so they wouldn't be able to cope with major changes.

Consistent staffing helps improve behaviour. Having subject specialist teachers who students respect improves behaviour.

Assaults on teachers are extremely rare, still.

Vaping I agree is an issue, but money buys pastoral staff who are skilled in dealing with addiction in teens and pre-teens.

And whenever I run intervention etc, I have a huge number of students, including those who might appear to be "can't be bothered" in class turn up. The problem is that many staff don't have the capacity to do this.

If we could get smaller class sizes- some of the "can't be bothereds" would be easier to engage.

Throwing more money at teachers would stop the strikes
Would it? I thought teachers have been saying that the strikes are about conditions as much as pay. So if the government agreed to a funded pay rise today, the strikes would be called off? That’s certainly not what has come across from everything I’ve read and heard. There’s been a big deal made about the strikes being about a lot more than pay. Teachers on picket lines have been quoted as saying the strikes aren’t just about pay.

The difference between education and the NHS is that while the NHS has had a lot of money put into it
I’d say that’s a fairly good indication of how increased funding doesn’t always mean improved standards. I’m not sure anyone would argue that the NHS has improved despite increased funding.

Why are we expecting kids to be engaged in falling-down buildings
In a local area, some of the worst performing schools in terms of exam outcomes and pupil behaviour are the ones with the newest and best facilities. The kids still aren’t engaged, despite state of the art drama and recording studios, amazing sports facilities, great science labs etc.