Flick Drummond MP: I don’t believe that GCSEs are the right way to assess our children now they are remaining in education and training until 18

[JuliaMumsnet]

Flick has been the Member of Parliament for Meon Valley since December 2019. She is also a Parliamentary Private Secretary (PPS) in the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). Flick has been a school governor at Milton Park Primary School in Portsmouth and has a keen interest in education.

"I don’t believe that GCSEs are the right way to assess our children now they are remaining in education and training until 18. When young people left school at 16 and went into work then I could see the rationale behind having exams at that age but not now. This is something I am passionate about. I fear too many of our children are being left behind by a narrowly focused inflexible exam conveyor belt that tests memory and does not allow children the flexibility to choose to study what will be useful to them in their careers.

As a former lay Ofsted inspector and school governor, I have seen first-hand how many children are disengaged and set up to fail by high stakes GCSE exams, not to mention the disruption and damage to mental wellbeing that comes from something that is now nothing more than a milepost for young people as they move into adulthood.
Wouldn’t it be better to have a 14-18 curriculum?

I have made these points several times now. In summer 2020, I wrote a report on 4-18 education for the One Nation Conservatives along with Cherilyn Mackrory who concentrated on early years. You can read that report here.

And last week I put the reasoning behind my views further during a debate in parliament. You can see my speech here.

The government is not with me at the moment but I am hopeful this will change. Many in education are starting to take the same view as mine. But most importantly, I would like to take the opportunity to hear the views of Mumsnet users.

I have two recommendations. The first is on the extended school day and the second is a 14-18 curriculum without the interruption of GCSEs at 16.

The extended school day is being looked at by the government and many schools are already doing it within existing budgets. It makes sense because the majority of families have both parents working and childcare is expensive. An extended school day is about bringing in those activities which cannot be normally fitted into a school day. Subjects like music, art, drama and various clubs. It is not to say that music, art and drama are not academic subjects but many young people, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds, cannot fit them into a school day, or their family cannot afford after school clubs.

Enriching the curriculum and school day will have a big impact on the breadth of knowledge and engage those who struggle in other lessons. Where it is already in place, teachers do their marking and preparation time during the day and go home to enjoy family time or other activities rather than school work. It is a better use of school buildings too.

The other area that I would like your views on is assessment. Just over 600,000 young people take GCSEs each year and around 200,000 do not pass at Grade 4 and above - a huge number.

I am not against exams or assessment but would it not be better to have a ‘school leaving certificate’ or portfolio, or whatever we want to call it, which would show whether the young person had achieved the standard in either academic, vocational, apprenticeship or a combination of any of them including a transcript of what else they have achieved like the National Citizen Service or the Duke of Edinburgh’s award?

Any diploma or certificate would include English and Maths until 18 but would make sure that the content is relevant to whatever the young person is interested in to engage them. High stakes exams like GCSEs do not give schools and young people these options.

As I said, these ideas are gaining traction. There are five commissions in the same vein, three have been published - the House of Lords Commission, the Independent Assessment Commission funded by the NEU and the Times Commission - and there are more to come.
Each will come from a different approach and I am sure that we will not all agree with every recommendation but I think one of the areas that we can all agree on is that we need a broad, knowledge-based education system that sets up a life-long love of learning and gives the skills that will help young people tackle whatever is thrown in their way.

It should be a curriculum that engages. I have been impressed by University Technical Colleges (UTCs) which have a 14-18 curriculum that motivates young people who are interested in a more technical education - most go onto read engineering or science at university or go into higher level apprenticeships straight from school. They also have an extended school day until 4.30pm when teachers go home without any work.

The other important point, as the House of Lords and Times commission have found, is that ‘skills gaps and shortages are clearly a major drive of youth unemployment and damage labour market productivity’. The Times Commission’s interim report was very focused on asking employers what they are looking for and they would agree that young people are not coming out of education with life skills that help in the workplace. The Department for Education’s Employers’ Skill Survey’s findings from the CBI and other organisations like the World Economic Forum all point to employers looking for skills like problem solving, communication, self-management, team working, creativity, numeracy and digital skills. These are not soft skills that come at the expense of knowledge. Knowledge is only useful where individuals have the skills to interpret and communicate it.

Lastly, but just as important is the mental health of young people. Professor Sarah-Jayne Blakemore, Professor of Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience at Cambridge University, has done a huge amount of research into how teenage brains develop. She says high stakes exams put a huge pressure and stress on teenagers, reducing motivation during a critical time of development. The yearly Children’s Society’s Good Childhood Report raised young people’s mental health as an issue. In 2018, children (aged 15) in the UK had the greatest fear of failure and the lowest life satisfaction in school of children across 24 European countries. The 2021 report found that school, friendships and appearance continue to cause the greatest dissatisfaction in adolescence. And in the Children’s Commissioner’s Big Ask Survey, young people highlighted that high stakes exams or assessment related stress remains a significant concern to them.

It would be great to hear what you think!"

@HowFascinating

Similar with having access to the literary texts in an exam so it's not a pure test of memory. In exam conditions, you can still demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the text without having memorised quotations......

Yes, I agree, when I did my English A level, it was "open books" so we could take in the texts even with lots of notes, highlights and annotations, etc. The questions were set assuming you had the books open in front of you so were a lot more challenging and you didn't get marks for simple regurgitation of quotes etc, you had to actually analyse and understand so it was a much better test of ability than the GCSEs where you just had to remember lots of quotations and character traits.

I think calling schools giving extra & co-curriculars an "extended school day" unhelpful unless it's somehow going to result in further funding and support for those extra curricular activities. I also think saying that they're doing it 'within existing budget' is disingenuous. In my area as in many, teachers and other staff are bringing in their own equipment for these sessions and seeking out additional funding sources for costly activities like Duke of Edinburgh’s award. While I agree these are highly valuable, I think in areas where it's possible, there is also a lot of value in developing community connections and supporting activities kids can learn skills and meet people they don't go to school with. Schools don't have to do everything, we can build stronger community spaces too.

I find it a little confusing you discuss the importance of the breadth of knowledge and how extra curricular activities can help with that, and then praise UTCs. My area's UTC has previously openly stated that they don't do breadth, that are not for students or families looking for that. That UTC also had so many issues that the Department of Education had them not take an entire cohort. The next two closest have done worse. I'm sure there are good ones, but calling them on the whole impressive seems to be smoke and mirrors to fit an argument.

I actually really strongly disagree with the transcript idea. They're great for the same people the GCSEs as great for, but if you're a late bloomer or you go through a bad year? Transcripts are just a record, and not everyone is up to achieving at 14. I have a high school transcript, thankfully haven't needed it in many years, but no matter how well some of it is, what's easiest to spot is the failed class at 15, the dropped classes at 17. It's a risky move if you want to reengage a disengaged child. It can lead to 'I already fucked up, so what's the point?'. That's before getting into the logistics for schools who would then have to maintain those transcripts and have the ability to get them back years later as exam boards do for exam certificates.

Separate certificates have more flexibility in showing your achievements and being able to try again. Also, no transcript will be able to have all of what a kid has done. My oldest has more certificates for work he's done outside of school - mainly through local community organizations - than from his school, including exams.

I agree with noblegiraffe that the last thing schools need is another upheaval. The constant changes have helped no one. I like the previous ideas of possibly a more stairstep approach with Functional Skills at least as an option and more support for BTECs in secondary, but we can support these without tearing everything else apart.

Alongside additional resources, if the government actually wanted to help, it would reduce the amount of objectives for a 'general'/proficient education. Not keep thinking of new things to add or systemic overhalls, but what are our priorities for each area to build a strong foundation for them to go out into the world and what have we brought down from higher levels to look impressive.

And calling something "nothing more than a milepost for young people as they move into adulthood" is to diminish how important milestones are for many. My son wasn't the only child who cried when exams were canceled. Who feels like he missed out. Who struggles to have a clear idea of what 'adulthood' means. In my area, discussing turning 18 with kids is met with where they want to go get drunk. I'd argue we have too few milestones towards adulthood.

Yes I totally agree with this, GCSEs are not the way to assess kids today...

Successive reviews starting with Higginson 1988, continuing with Tomlinson 2003 and again recently by EDSK 2021 have largely recommended the same thing: a single broad diploma qualification for 14-18 education to replace anachronistic testing at 16 followed by premature specialisation from 16-18. The diploma would allow around 6 subjects to be studied to 18, including maths and English language. It's what most other European countries do, and it's what the IB curriculum offers. As one letter to the independent in 1994 put it : "educationalists from other countries cannot believe that we persist with such an outdated system, encouraging scandalously early specialisation. In any other European country, young people will study at least six subjects before going to university". Nothing has changed since - that is scandalous in itself. The system is broken. Radical change is required.

All the way back in 2007 the 2020 Vision report advocated the widespread use of technology to deliver personalised learning. In a similar vein Brighouse and others have proposed an online open school modelled on the open university . A longer school day will achieve nothing without fundamental structural reforms geared towards working smarter, not longer.

extrastrongmints I agree, I studied 8 subjects for my A level equivalent in Holland. That was a choice, the norm was 7 but I wanted a crack at maths (failed it) and 3 MFL (aced them). The other thing to note is that in Holland at least, there are compulsory subjects at A level: English language and Dutch language. So locking down to 3 would be disastrous.

Broadening the post 16 curriculum would be a massive improvement.

On the subject of open book exams I can only say that the open book exams I had at university were the most challenging ones and also the ones I enjoyed because so much depth was expected.

If it was not for Btecs my son would have dropped out completely aged 16. He would not be in education or training and I doubt he’d have lasted 5 minutes in employment.

But he now has degree offers at several good universities plus a music conservatoire & is starting to think seriously about his career.

As for extending the school day, I agree that more opportunities should be available in art, drama, music etc but are you really telling me that all schools can cater for every interest and ability.

My daughter is a dancer. There is no way on earth that a secondary school after school dance provision could have got her to the required level to audition for dance college. I’m fairly sure the same would apply in elite sport.

Also for some the school day is too long anyway and they just need time to decompress.

Don't worry love, by the time your government has starved and frozen us, sold off the NHS and taxed us into submission, there will be plenty of working class kids so desperate to make any kind of money that they'll work less than minimum wage jobs and then you won't have to pretend to care.

Enjoy your pay rise.

Children being left behind begins in reception/year 1 and by year 2/3 the Dane age is done.

I was quite naive as despite other parents saying it I really didn’t think that if a child couldn’t read by the time they entered year 2
then they wouldn’t be able to keep up and would fall further and further behind.
Dd (dyslexia and adhd) didn’t know how to read right up until just before starting year 2 and it just seemed to click.

Ds, otoh was miles behind. Not only does he have dyslexia, dysgraphia and ADHD he had also not been taught for 1/2 the school year in year 1.
So he had no chance keeping up.
He did year 2 in his tiny primary who tbf did try to help him but their hands were tied. (Although they could have referred him for a dyslexia test instead of passing the problem on)
He started in the next school and was given even less help. 10 minutes 2 or 3 times per week reading to a TA who would shout at him if he stumbled over words.
The rest of the time he was put in a classroom and told to copy from the board. (A child who couldn’t even read what he was supposed to be writing)
And was told he had to do the set homework as well.
Imagine not being able to read or write Chinese writing and having to painstakingly copy all the strokes for hours each night to complete the homework and if you missed anything or didn’t do it or it was wrong, having to spend every break time in the classroom staring at a piece of paper because you didn’t know where to start and you were 7 years old

It was horrendous each night. He wasn’t learning anything. No one was teaching him anything in school and out of school he was bogged down for hours trying to do the homework. In the end I removed him from the school environment as he was well on the way to a nervous breakdown at 8 years old and the teaching staff just didn’t understand what it meant that Ds couldn’t read.
They would just keep saying it was the curriculum and he had to do it.
It is the curriculum.

Ds wasn’t the only one this was happening to.

Schools don't teach children. Schools deliver curricula - the same curricula to all kids of a given chronological age despite the fact that by the end of primary, there's a 7 year spread in attainment. Tens of millions have been wasted on failed initiatives like "mathematics mastery" which had hardly a shred of supporting evidence and has not delivered any of the gains it was supposed to. It doesn't work because it insists all kids should do the same things at the same time, enshrines teaching to the middle and discourages differentiation and acceleration, thereby leaving the needs of children at both ends of the ability spectrum unmet.

According to the IFS: "School spending per pupil in England fell by 9% in real terms between 2009–10 and 2019–20. This represents the largest cut in over 40 years, ... This squeeze on school resources is effectively without precedent in post-war UK history. ... Deprived schools have seen larger cuts over the last decade. The most deprived secondary schools saw a 14% real-terms fall in spending per pupil between 2009–10 and 2019–20.... The Pupil Premium has also failed to keep pace with inflation since 2015. These patterns run counter to the government’s goal of levelling up poorer areas"

In the decade from 2011 to 2021, elective home education grew from 15,000 to 115,000 kids. That's an additional 100,000 kids who have been pulled from the school system. That is also without precedent in UK history. There can be no more damning indictment of a government's educational policy than 100,000 parents deciding to remove their chidren from harm's way by avoiding the system entirely.

@Kennykenkencat 02:12
Your poor DS. Did you teach him at home after taking him out? Is he OK now?

@extrastrongmints I always thought specialisation was too early here too.

When a teenager doesn't really know what career they'd like to pursue at age 13/14, and isn't incredibly confident and performing solidly across all subjects, too often, I see them encouraged out of education with the bare minimum of exam grades. If no one hiring actually thinks that highly of a C in English and D in maths at GCSE, then sending kids in their way with just that is not setting them up for success in adulthood.

Test grades should be a single measure of performance, not the be all and end all.

And pupils really shouldn't be pushed into learning a foreign language or humanity if they're barely literate or a science if they're innumerate, it's just setting them up to fail. The illiterate and/or innumerate pupils need different lessons to get them up to speed to an acceptable level and then to be put in the humanities/science/MFL lessons, maybe in different year groups according to ability.

I know there are special lessons for those struggling with the basics, but they seem to be replacements for just the Maths/English lessons and the kids are expected to continue the other lessons with their age group even though they simply don't have the basic skillset.

The whole assumption of the report is that the majority of children are capable of A levels and will go on to a university.

This attitude has resulted in a massive 'dumbing down' of universities, with many lecturers having to use the first year to catch up on the basic skills needed, but which have not been assimilated at school.

In the fifties and sixties, roughly 5% of the population attended a university. Now it seems as if all children are capable of a university education, which clearly cannot be the case.

A better solution would be to offer, at the age of fifteen, a choice of continuing on the academic route, or taking up properly funded courses in other skills such as joinery, bricklaying, cookery, hairdressing, plumbing etc.

This would ensure a balance in society between people going into careers such as law, teaching, banking and medicine, and others being decently trained in needed skills.

I don't believe that an extended school day is needed for this. At any rate, changes to the education system should be put on hold for a good few years, until the damaging effects of lockdown have been mitigated.

Not everyone will find a university subject degree useful, that's true. But that doesn't mean the trades are welcoming kids who can't do do algebra or write a persuasive essay either.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachmentdata/file/936489/ESSS2019SkillssNeedsReportt_Nov20.pdf

One of the greatest skills lacking among applicants to the construction sector and manufacturing sectors, where there is a shortage of skilled workers, is "solving complex problems" and analytical skills.

There's more than one reason there's a skills gap in those sectors. It doesn't all have to do with suburban snobbery about degrees.

@iCouldSleepFoeAYear

I agree with your statement that 'One of the greatest skills lacking among applicants to the construction sector and manufacturing sectors, where there is a shortage of skilled workers, is "solving complex problems" and analytical skills'
but I think these skills could be effectively taught on a vocational course, where the complex problems and analytical skills are directly related to the particular job.

There is no snobbery involved here, it's a matter of suiting the training to the applicant.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-53253718.amp

@iCouldSleepForAYear

Not everyone will find a university subject degree useful, that's true. But that doesn't mean the trades are welcoming kids who can't do do algebra or write a persuasive essay either.

[[https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment]]data/file/936489/ESSS2019SkillssNeedsReportt_Nov20.pdf

One of the greatest skills lacking among applicants to the construction sector and manufacturing sectors, where there is a shortage of skilled workers, is "solving complex problems" and analytical skills.

There's more than one reason there's a skills gap in those sectors. It doesn't all have to do with suburban snobbery about degrees.

Maybe there wouldn’t be a skills shortage if colleges for trade courses did welcome students who can’t write a story or do algebra.

ScrollingLeaves No Ds isn’t ok.
All he wanted was a test for dyslexia but in the rush to save money for their school they pushed him further and further behind.
He then got back up and went to college where he was top of his class with near perfect average scores only to be told he can never qualify because he can’t analyse a poem.

Can’t anyone see how ridiculous it sounds.

Add to that the general shock that I feel the government had when they realised we don’t have enough people qualifying in a trade is just astounding. It just shows a lack of critical thinking.

Also please get the wording correct.

Children do not have to remain in education until they are 18. They don’t even have to train for anything.
You can go to work. You can sit around playing video games. You can do anything (except sign on)
Dd left at 16 and set up her own business.
Ds was forced out of training at 17

Qualifications and assessments lose value if anyone can pass them. If we try and make school and college assessments accessible to everyone including those young people who simply aren't academically inclined, we end up where they are worthless.

Meanwhile we lack people with practical skills. We dont have enough plumbers, bricklayers etc.

I would rather see an acknowledgement of variety of ability and skill, and a focus on expecting at least 30% of a cohort not to focus on academic qualifications but to have rigorous pathways leading to practical work focused skills.

@OfstedOffred

Qualifications and assessments lose value if anyone can pass them. If we try and make school and college assessments accessible to everyone including those young people who simply aren't academically inclined, we end up where they are worthless.

Meanwhile we lack people with practical skills. We dont have enough plumbers, bricklayers etc.

I would rather see an acknowledgement of variety of ability and skill, and a focus on expecting at least 30% of a cohort not to focus on academic qualifications but to have rigorous pathways leading to practical work focused skills.

It doesn't help when schools don't take their "tech" subjects seriously. When I was at school, we were "taught" woodwork by a Maths teacher and we basically spent an entire school year making a wooden fish - it was basically a dossing lesson, pupils didn't care, teacher didn't care (he spent the lessons marking Maths homework). The pupils who did well were those who had fathers/uncles who were "manual" minded with little workshops in their sheds etc.

Same with my DS decades later. At the open days, schools were proudly showing off their modern tech (i.e. laser cutter, 3d printer, router, CAD/CAM computers/printers, etc). In reality, in the 5 years he spent doing "tech", including to GCSE level, none of that was ever seen - all locked up in a storeroom. Guess what he spent the first year making - a wooden fish! For his GCSE, he chose to make a radio, they didn't even start the actual construction until about a month before the deadline to hand it in - which meant they had to work through lunchtimes etc to try to do it in time - of course, the pupils with fathers/uncles who had a garden shed workshop did it at home and got the top marks - barely anyone else managed to finish it because they were all competing for the same pieces of equipment in the workshop (i.e. the 1 saw, the 1 drill, etc).

Its s but like the recent announcement that 90% of primary children should be meeting the "expected standard". My DC class has 3 children in it with learning needs that make it near impossible for them. This means every single other child has to be able to meet the expected standard. There's no room for there to be a proportion of kids who simply arent academically able. To me, the only way you can have 90% of kids meet that standard is a) massively lower the threshold at which you remove kids from mainstream or b) have an expected standard that is quite low.

@OfstedOffred

Its s but like the recent announcement that 90% of primary children should be meeting the "expected standard". My DC class has 3 children in it with learning needs that make it near impossible for them. This means every single other child has to be able to meet the expected standard. There's no room for there to be a proportion of kids who simply arent academically able. To me, the only way you can have 90% of kids meet that standard is a) massively lower the threshold at which you remove kids from mainstream or b) have an expected standard that is quite low.

A good example of how statistics are badly used.

Same with A&E waiting times where you're basically forgotten about if they didn't meet the 4 hour target, as there's no difference in the statistics whether you were stuck there for 5 hours or 10 hours - it's a binary "met or not met" target.

In your example, the pupils for whom that target is impossible to meet should be excluded from the statistics, and it should be "90% of those able to meet the target" rather than 90% of all pupils.

Our modern day obsession with simple statistics can often do more harm than good. Trouble is that too many people don't understand "numbers" so the statistics themselves are dumbed down so much to be understandable that they become meaningless and ambiguous and not fit for purpose as a method of evaluation of success/failure.

Would really appreciate some help! 18month old is refusing daily nap. We have quiet time and story beforehand, room is dark etc.

She just cries/screams and I end up having to get her up. I’ve tried leaving her to cry for 20mins and going in to cuddle for a bit, but then she just cries harder when I leave the room.

I don’t want her to drop the nap altogether, but really don’t know what to do.

She’s crying before going to sleep at night too. It’s only been the last week and she is teething, so have tried calpol but doesn’t seem to have any impact.

@MonkeySwing wrong thread?

Education will only be effective when we remove it from politics. MPs and government officials have little idea what children should learn and at what age and the most effective way of teaching.

Until we end the constant cycle of significant changes every time we get a new government then education will continue to be the largely flawed system that it is!

It needs to be based on robust, proven systems with a clear ideology created by experts in child development and with a curriculum relevant to the current times.

I work in a Primary School and some of the current curriculum is ridiculous. The expectations of children under 7 is completely at odds with their developmental state and needs. Asking them to sit all day at a desk and learn from a powerpoint is unreasonable and damaging to their wellbeing and social relationships.

I think educational expectations need rewriting, along the lines that one-third of students are academically inclined (whether to STEM or humanities), another third are practical and talented with imaginative skills, and should be steered into hands-on fields, from toolmaking to art to bricklaying and digger driving, and the other third will find a niche in work that's related to interpersonal skills, possibly nursing or hospitality or sales. And a percentage will fall through the gaps no matter how what is done.

@EdenFlower

Education will only be effective when we remove it from politics. MPs and government officials have little idea what children should learn and at what age and the most effective way of teaching.

Until we end the constant cycle of significant changes every time we get a new government then education will continue to be the largely flawed system that it is!

It needs to be based on robust, proven systems with a clear ideology created by experts in child development and with a curriculum relevant to the current times.

I work in a Primary School and some of the current curriculum is ridiculous. The expectations of children under 7 is completely at odds with their developmental state and needs. Asking them to sit all day at a desk and learn from a powerpoint is unreasonable and damaging to their wellbeing and social relationships.

You could say the same about the NHS, health/care in general, tax, green issues, etc. If you took politics out of all the areas it screws up, there’d be no politics!