Concerned schools will just reteach material from March 2020

[notevenat20]

I have become worried that schools will decide they need to reteach all the material from March 2020 onwards when they go back in September. For the many families like ours who worked their socks off trying to provide decent home schooling in the lockdown, this would be a kick in the teeth.

Do you think this is going to happen?

@notevenat20

Logically, I'm afraid this cannot be true. The expectations of the primary curriculum are more than they have ever been before. If the majority of schools didn't challenge nor progress the children then you wouldn't see them transform from kids who know nothing to preteens capable of in-depth reading analysis, detailed complex writing and solving a variety of mathematical problems.

At our school the parents take up the missing parts of the education. This makes me even more sad as it further accentuates the social divide. Those children with parents who either don't care about education or who have difficult lives themselves get nothing from the school to make up their disadvantage. This is all done under guise of anti-elitism of course... :(

So you're saying that the only reason any child at your school reaches a decent age-related or a greater depth score in their End of KS2 exams is because the parents educate the children. And, based on your conversations with othet parents, you believe that this is also true for the majority of schools. How can that be correct?

My dc are in secondary. It surely can't be at all surprising to anyone that, however good or bad the lockdown learning provided by individual schools, the majority of students will have been unwilling and/or unable to work at a level which would replicate learning in school with their teachers. Therefore re-doing those topics was always going be necessary.

It's great that some parents were able (academically and in terms of time available) to home teach their dc to a really high standard, but frankly they must have been well aware that this was only going to be the case for a small minority, so expecting everyone to be able to come back in September able to just move on to the new stuff would be very unrealistic and very unreasonable.

My dc have 2 secondary teachers as parents, one of whom was in charge of the virtual learning for their school. My dc completed the work set to the required standard and no more. We let them get on with it and didn't try to push them on, home school them etc, though I had plenty of free time. They, like their peers, will benefit from re-doing those topics with their teachers.

@notevenat20

On the more general point, what we are re-teaching or re-covering depends on the subject.

What about the many families who made a Herculean effort to teach what should have been taught from March? I guess that the good schools which can differentiate will find a way to keep things interesting for those children and those in not so good schools (most schools?) will just get bored and learn nothing new for a term.

No, I don't think there will be any schools in which children learn nothing new for a term.

The point is, there is a national curriculum, and it mandates what must be covered each year (very specifically in some cases e.g. Maths and science, much less so in say Art).

Every school will have to cover this year's NC objectives, by whatever means, while also 'filling the gaps' that will exist .

If a school does as you suggest - ignores this year's NC and teaches only material from last year for a term - then they will have to cover this year's NC in two terms. I do know of some schools where there is an explicit 'finish of last year' plan, but for half a term at absolute maximum.

Most schools will be teaching a mixture of the two NC years, through an explicit extension of what is always implicit - that some children will not be secure in knowledge and skills from previous years and will need them further practised and secured. Equally, the children who are very secure with the previous year's curriculum and rapidly grasp the new material will, as always, get appropriate extension work, though best current practice is to do this via deepening within a rich interpretation of the current year group curriculum rather than extending to that for future years.

Hello,
I am a teacher and know we won’t be doing that. Sadly we don’t have time to

So you're saying that the only reason any child at your school reaches a decent age-related or a greater depth score in their End of KS2 exams is because the parents educate the children. And, based on your conversations with othet parents, you believe that this is also true for the majority of schools. How can that be correct?"

Not quite. As I say, they focus on the median and below. The children above the median who get the education they need according to their ability get it from their parents.

@notevenat20

So you're saying that the only reason any child at your school reaches a decent age-related or a greater depth score in their End of KS2 exams is because the parents educate the children. And, based on your conversations with othet parents, you believe that this is also true for the majority of schools. How can that be correct?"

Not quite. As I say, they focus on the median and below. The children above the median who get the education they need according to their ability get it from their parents.

And you think this is true for the majority of primary schools?

And you think this is true for the majority of primary schools?

Hard to know for sure without a yougov survey but certainly lots of primary schools. I have definitely heard this complaint from a lot of other people and it is partly what makes the local private schools financially viable.

@StaffAssociationRepresentative

I have a curriculum to deliver in case we have exams next summer. I do not have time to go over everything again that I delivered through on-line teaching via Teams.

This.

I have year 10 and 12 starting GCSE and A level courses respectively, and y11 and 13 with exam syllabi to complete. I haven't got time to reteach things I taught via Teams.

@notevenat20

And you think this is true for the majority of primary schools?

Hard to know for sure without a yougov survey but certainly lots of primary schools. I have definitely heard this complaint from a lot of other people and it is partly what makes the local private schools financially viable.

I genuinely believe that this must be a case of perception vs reality then. I've not known any teacher or school who would take that attitude or approach. If they did, they'd soon find themselves in capability procedures or would be absolutely annihilated by Ofsted during their next inspection.

Unfortunately, if it is perception-based, nothing I could say would sway you.

I genuinely believe that this must be a case of perception vs reality then.

I am happy to disagree (that's what MN talk is for after all). You may also have missed the role that school governors play. If the chair of governors is the best friend of the head, the head can get away with pretty much anything.

Not quite. As I say, they focus on the median and below. The children above the median who get the education they need according to their ability get it from their parents.

If your school was genuinely doing this, their results would be awful.

If your school was genuinely doing this, their results would be awful.

I don't know if that is quite right. They probably do worse in their year 6 SATs than they would do otherwise but how much worse? SATs aren't designed to test the most able children and those below average are being taught.

I am assuming your DC school is in special measures OP?Not at all. I think it's probably an average school. From talking to other parents I think that only exceptional schools do all the great things discussed on MN by teachers.

Having a whole section of the classes (MAs) not progress would trigger SM OPs in any school.
It is not an exceptional school just because chn progress all chn should progress and by stating that the MAs are just sat around learning things they already know and the work/learning is not differentiated to their needs would indicate no progress for the whole MA group in every class. That is unacceptable and not following the basic standards of education and would result in special measure.
So I really thing you are not correct in your evaluation of the school or those in your area.

HAs not MAs sorry.
As in the higher ability.

That is unacceptable and not following the basic standards of education and would result in special measure.

Has that ever happened where a school does well in the SATs but is put in special measures because the higher ability children don't do as well as they would have done had differentiated teaching taken place?

My school set some twinkl worksheets and that was it.
We are literally missing 6 months worth of teaching, so if they did revisit topics, I would be quite happy.

Luckily, my experience is that schools/teachers don't do much in the Summer term anyway, certainly the last couple of weeks the teachers are de-mob happy and it's mostly video watching, etc. Add in earlier weeks when there was the school play rehearsal, sports day practices, educational day trips, inter school sports competitions, etc. When you strip out all the disrupted time, they've missed 2/3 weeks before Easter and say, maybe 4 weeks of the Summer term prior to half term. After half term, most teachers wouldn't have been doing much new teaching due to the usual disruption (also including teachers being absent on day trips, sports competitions etc) meaning it's not just the kids absent on those events, but kids still in school without their usual teacher. Probably the best time of the school year to lose a few weeks of teaching really, if there has to be any at all. It's the Autumn and Winter terms where the real solid teaching takes place. Hence why it's so important to get them back in September.

@notevenat20

If your school was genuinely doing this, their results would be awful.

I don't know if that is quite right. They probably do worse in their year 6 SATs than they would do otherwise but how much worse? SATs aren't designed to test the most able children and those below average are being taught.

Sorry but, as a Year Six teacher and a data and assessment lead, I have to say that that is fundamentally untrue. The entire greater depth range is there to test those higher-achieving children and to reach a score like 119 or 120, you're looking at getting every single mark available on each tightly-timed paper.

The process for writing is also quite stringent. What is expected from a strong greater depth writer is beyond what many adults can produce and all the evidence must be there in order to be verified by the local authority moderators.

If your school was doing what you claim, their results for both attainment and progress would show it, as Herc said. That would be particularly true of the progress scores. I'm happy to have a look at the data analysis that will exist for your specific school if you want to message me with the name.

I really hope they do repeat it. So parents like me who were working their socks off in their actual job don't feel even more guilty and shit about themselves because they could not devote lots of time to homeschooling.

@TheABC

My school set some twinkl worksheets and that was it. We are literally missing 6 months worth of teaching, so if they did revisit topics, I would be quite happy.

Maybe 6 calendar months, but take out the holidays (easter, half term and summer) and take out the non quality teaching time (plays, sports, competitions, day trips, supply teachers, video watching, inset days, etc), and you come down to just a few missed "quality" teaching weeks.

If a whole section of children in any school were not showing progression yes it would trigger SM. It is totally unacceptable.
It is not just about SATS , every term there are progression reports for each child that the teachers are accountable for. If not SM the teacher would at least be put under review. However, if as you say it is the whole school this would be serious and it certainly would not be acceptable.

If a whole section of children in any school were not showing progression yes it would trigger SM.

But I don't think it works like that. First, the more able children make progress simple because they are clever. Second, the parents largely make up for the missing teaching. Third, the SATs aren't designed to test the most able children.

My school set some twinkl worksheets and that was it.

Same here or one week there was "Make an invention" with no further instructions or opportunity to show the work you had done.

In my experience, if over time I get a balance of complaints that:

• The most able are not stretched
• The middle children are overlooked
• The needs of lower ability children are ignored

then I reckon I am doing a decent job - not because I do all of those things, but because fundamentally it means that the balance is pretty much right if each group, over time, complains (and praises) equally.

At any given moment, in a specific lesson, I may be focusing on the needs of a particular individual or group - so i might be giving more input for those who are finding something hard, or explaining an extension task - and thus I am not at that moment focusing on others. The main thing is that I should be systematically ensuring that all groups, over time, get the input they need to make progress.