If you could re-imagine the secondary school system, what would it look like?

[EveSix]

If you could rip up the way secondary schools are structured, and start again, with a view to create truly inclusive learning communities in which all could thrive and fulfil their unique potential, what would it look like?

How large would schools be?
How might catchments work?
Where would resources be allocated and funding spent?
What about the curriculum?

You can plot changes commensurate with the level of taxation you feel comfortable with / the percentage allocated to schools; if you feel education is worth a greater bite of the cherry of taxation, you can suggest more comprehensive reform.

I'm not feeling brilliantly imaginative at the moment, but I'll kick off: as a parent of a DC with SEN who finds school an utter sensory overwhelm, I would like to see secondary schools shrink to the size of medium sized primary schools. I think young people often do well in smaller settings where they are known to all staff.

A 'stages not ages' approach to learning in some areas of the curriculum, such as Maths and English, especially in areas with a high level of language need, ensuring the needs of EAL learners are met.

I think each school should have a sufficiently staffed resource base where learners who require learning support are able to work in an environment which supports their learning needs.

I'd love to see a new take on qualifications to complement traditional GCSEs, with a much easier availability of academically suitable alternatives, preventing pupils from essentially being set up to fail.

Increased options for PE: so many young people properly hate PE, and never really recover any sense of joy or pleasure in exercise after secondary school. It's a massive missed opportunity for public health. I'd like to see competitive sports for those who are that way inclined, as well as gentler options for those who loathe coerced exercise or team sports: yoga, pilates, walking orienteering, gym, aerobics, zumba, archery or darts, pool, fitness theory, Nordic walking or just a regular walk in the neighbourhood.

Anyone else?

Totally agree with no uniform. It's just ridiculously rigid when you can only wear the supplier's skirt and the similar one from Asda lands you in detention. Kids (especially in secondary) know who wears the expensive designer stuff out of school so uniform being a leveller idea is bullshit. If uniform really had an effect on behaviour then we'd see behaviour differences on an international level but we don't see countries with no uniform having issues.
There should be guidelines say no belly buttons showing or slogans on clothes but a more flexible uniform like non-ripped jeans or joggers, a polo or sweatshirt and trainers would be so much more comfortable.

I'm amazed Ofsted has carried on as it is for so long. What good does it do? Why isn't it more a warning light that leads to support and a collaborative drive to improve the school working with specialist support teachers/partnering successful schools etc. utterly bonkers the whole punitive drama horror of inspectors coming to cast arbitrary judgments that devastate the teachers and the kids. Like something from the Victorian era or from a totalitarian regime- they might as well be throwing the SLT in prison or burning them at the stake while they're at it.
The categories are meaningless too- we've just seen a load of fabulous local secondary schools downgraded to good, with a load of average schools now good too - it's rubbish, they're leagues apart!
I'd scrap the overly reductive linear scale too- there's more than one way to be good/bad and different kids do better in different schools. A more descriptive summary would be better and more use to parents trying to choose.

I really dislike a lot of these proposed changes.

There is no point in redesigning a school to your own preferences - surely it needs to be based on evidence of what works.

School uniforms to be mandatory. They are great for disguising levels of income.

I would get rid of setting children by ability I years 7-9. There is absolutely no need to set by ability until gcse years and you have the two tiers of higher/foundation papers. If primary school teachers can teach 30mixed ability children, why can't secondary?
But I would also insist on TAs in every classroom and a 1-1 TA for every student who needs one.

I'm not anti uniform, but suits and ties on 11year olds look ridiculous, like mini businessmen. Polo shirts and black trousers is much more practical. Oh and shorts for boys (and girls)

@PoseasRadicalActuallyMisogynistic ha ha ha....no.
Unless you mean a basic "wear any brand of plain blue polo shirt and any brand of black skirt or trousers" uniform because uniforms actually create a barrier to education because many parents actually avoid certain schools because they know they won't be able to afford the uniform.
Also it's obvious who is wearing the blazer that's been handed down from 6 previous pupils and is clearly the wrong size vs who has a brand new one.
I also don't think children care about branded clothes as much as we think they do.

Just a much more personalized child centered experience. That values all the wonderful things that young people are (not focusses on everything they are not).

A system that engages with them and coaches them. That rewards and raises their self esteem and makes them feel good about themselves.

When they are punished or sanctioned they should be permitted to discuss it-to really understand what they did wrong in order to not do it again. And to be taught to challenge-in the right way. My son was punished last week for an inappropriate comment; but was not permitted to ask why it was inappropriate or how he had offended the teacher. So was genuinely bewildered and learnt nothing from the punishment except to pipe down.

I'm also for changing the a-level system. They have been around since the 50s, and the format hasn't changed. But back then when you left school, you went into a career you were usually in for life, I think careers are much more fluid these days and a broader curriculum would be better, but one that is more about reasoning, problem solving and being analytical. More skills based then subject based

My little corner of Yorkshire has first/middle/high school. Middle school is Y6-Y8, and it is awesome. I'd like to introduce this/reintroduce this system more widely across the UK. The age splits are roughly similar to the US Elrmentary/Junior High/High school system.

Our misfile school is Y6-Y8. It's run along a secondary school model ie: subject specialist teachers, moving round classrooms etc, and yet is as nurturing a first school. The age range means that older primary age children get to be a bit more grown up a bit sooner, but big smelly teenagers are separated off into High School (Y9-11).

I know middle schools are not unique, but they are unusual in the UK. It's not even our whole borough, just our cluster of villages. It's all about building accommodation - we had this system to start with, but when most other areas moved to primary/secondary, there was no money for adding a Y6 classroom to every first school (YR-Y5).

Our particular middle school also has more extra curriculars than you can shake a stick at and is very nurturing.

@FloorWipes

Which is why I would base my "Fantasy UK secondary school" on the excellent Finnish school model where only the top 10% of graduates are able to become teachers who are then respected and trusted to do the right thing, because of their expertise, where teaching is tailored to each child's needs, no exams until they are 18. And their results and outcomes speak for themselves.

More info here.

This is well known, but obviously we still face the difficulties of identifying cause and effect between policy features and of transposing policies between countries, cultures, demographics etc. I obviously do not disagree with having highly capable and qualified teachers. I think the exam thing is likely very much more complicated.

Keep uniform. Get rid of gcse exams. Get rid of A levels and allow kids to choose 6-8 subjects to continue and mark them with occasional standardised tests and coursework - they can then apply to university to get firm offers as not waiting on exam results.
Limit class sizes to 25. Spread schools out more - they tend to be clustered.

In a nutshell this is one of my main motivations for unschooling my DC! A lot of learning in a traditional school system is forced learning. This completely denies the child/person the joy of associating learning with pleasure.
My DC have the freedom to learn what they are actually interested in and what brings them deep joy. We have erased this right for children in schools sadly and I agree with @EveSix that we underestimate the importance of this!

Why do you dislike them?

The problem is there is no evidence that the current system ‘works’ per se. Yes teens pass some exams but there is far more research out there that says that the current style of ‘teach to the test’ education does not motivate kids nor does it ensure they actually retain the information they have learned for the test. Research shows it is then mostly forgotten.

I would love to see the Sands School model rolled out as a more mainstream choice, while it's not perfect it's certainly how I'd reinvent the system, great video on their website to explain it if anyone's interested.

I think a lot of the suggestions about uniform, catchments, exams, school sizez, hours are potentially misguided or there are nuanced considerations to be had rather than just scrapping it all. Obviously my initial reaction is probably the same as others in the sense that i cant help but consider what would have been best for me and what is and isn't working for my child. So it's immediately clear that our interests don't all align. Finding out what actually produces the best outcomes for the most people in context is difficult.

There is no point in redesigning a school to your own preferences - surely it needs to be based on evidence of what works.

What eevidence is there that the current system works?

School uniforms to be mandatory. They are great for disguising levels of income.

I don't think they are as great at that as people claim. I was discussing this with a year 10 class the other day (part of the MFL syllabus). They were a bit baffled that anyone believed this was actually an advantage of uniform, because they all know enough about each other to know who has money and who doesn't (phones, shoes, stationery, holidays, part of town they live in, size of house etc, what they wear on home clothes days or school trips etc). Kids are observant.

Not true, there are private schools in Finland.

The International School in Helsinki is 16,000 euros a year.

Here's a list of some of the private schools on offer:

What a lot of the schools do is to have free basic education and then charge for the compulsory extras on top and they are often selective.

It's a bit like state boarding schools in the UK - you don't pay for the teaching but you pay around £15k a year for the boarding part.

I agree. It's a long time ago now, but other kids noticed your shoes, bags, etc as reasons for bullying etc., alongside those poor kids who'd clearly been given cast off uniforms from elder siblings or faded uniforms bought second hand. Nowadays, they'll notice whether you've got your "plain" trousers or shirts from Asda/Matalan compared with the official supplier, or "better" retailers like M&S, Next, etc., with the former being reasons for ridicule/bullying. A uniform is a pretty poor way of "disguising" income as kids are smart enough to find reasons to bully and ridicule if they want.

That's why I like the idea of modules, which gives kids the choice to study what they want to study, in terms of subjects, depth of subjects, and even maybe being able to chose teachers they prefer to study under. Give them a say in their own education rather than being forced to take subjects they don't want to, etc.

I would stream children by their willingness to sit down and learn. And one who starts dicking around is moved to the Dicking Around class, anyone who is willing to make an effort goes in the Actually Learning class. Everyone gets the education they deserve.

I like that. One of my school friends had a genuine learning disability and always ended up in "remedial" classes surrounded by feral kids who didn't want to learn, and so couldn't learn himself. I felt really sorry for him back then, he was a great kid, and "could" have got some kind of decent education with the right teaching, but never got any teacher time as they were always preoccupied with the trouble makers in the same class!

I mean our education system ranks quite decently against other countries. It could be much better but to suggest it doesn't work at all seems extreme.