Primary education for the modern world

[ThinkingForward]

Discussion on how to reform the primary school offering to make it suitable for modern britain

> benefits of having more directed hours of experiences and learning
> more diverse educational offering
> societal benefits: broader opportunities for parents, families an the economy

I am a father of a 6 yr old dc, and both my wife and i work full time, she works for the NHS and i run my own business(es). We have elderly parents, who also require our input and limited family support (our son gets picked up by my mum 1 day a week and she has him for 2-3 hrs).

The need to better provisioning of early years childcare is often highlighted, however there is little public discussion about the effects of a Victorian timetable on modern society, especially at primary school level.

This touches nearly every aspect of society,
a) educational regression of pupils after long summer holidays
b) lack of holiday provision for students and family's that receive pupil premium (from school meals to welfare checks)
c) discriminatory effects on women's earning, career progression and pension provision. Furthermore the effect on families/ relationship stability as a consequential outcome.
i. on breakdown of relationships this can lead to loss of homes and employment, in some case lead to problems of homelessness and addiction for the parent without the children
ii compounds disadvantage, for children especially if extended family support isnt available.
d) environmental impact of a 5 day vs 4 day week for example (additional heating, travel etc), if the current level of funding was capped then a shorter week with longer days may provide additional opportunities for parents to gain good quality employment
i. economic impact of the mismatch between typical holiday allowance (4-6 weeks for full time adult) and 13 weeks school holiday.
f) impact from unauthorized absence due to rigid holiday patterns and consequential high prices of travel

Forster introduced the education act in 1870, even at this stage the need for continuous evolution was recognized in the introductory speech. The timetable is probably one of the only recognisable elements of the schools system from 150 years ago. So much of our society has changed and the persistence with this timetable reinforces discrimination and could be seen as a root of many negative outcomes especially for women. Impacting short and long term earnings as well as pensions in retirement, but this also changes the dynamics of the economy, family life and even the environment. The academic literature indicates that long holidays are not to the children's benefit, with the loss of skills over these longer breaks. The travel industry becries the seasonality of holiday, and justifies its crazy pricing as a result of this.. So who actually benefits from a 150 year old timetable?

Almost every section of society would benefit from reviewing the school timetable, it would be ideal if there was more funding for more provision, but there seems to be almost no loosers from having a more fit for purpose timetable. Different funding options for the short, medium and long term could be considered. For example use of the tax free childcare allowance. As schools provides good quality educational options and childcare at a lower cost than the private provision (typical outside funding rates are around £4.20/pupil per hour with most priviate provision being 25-50% more for "just childcare"). Furthermore the marginal cost for increasing this provision would be modest as there would be mainly variable (additional direct staff and minimal additional overhead).

Working patterns have been brought into sharp focus following C19 and the working from home revolution. There are plenty of opportunities to look at different school and working patterns, for example a 4 day school week with longer days. This might allow those that work around school drop off and pick up to improve their employment opportunities, cut there travel costs and the school to only heat the school 4 days a week . Similarly a 45-46 week schedule then most 2 parent families could manage childcare with their normal holiday although this would be a challenge, but would not create such dependence on family friends, private provision etc to be able to manage the holidays.

So what problems do people see with changing the current victorian timetable to one which fits with modern life.?

Schools set their own priorities within the curriculum. There are always choices to be made based on evidence in school. Ofsted want to see reasoned priorities based on evidence. Then the evidence that they have worked. They are far less bothered about quality of music and sport. Other than it being taught! The curriculum is not wholly top down. Many schools are praised for having a well thought through and sequenced curriculum. These are decided upon by schools. The best ones offer a stimulating and exciting learning experience. Monitoring and acting on all of this is down to slt and governors.

What schools won’t do is change ethos and organisation to suit a minority group. Schools also have a duty of care to staff. Any head that allows SEN Dc to run riot is not doing their job. Heads do have powers to exclude Dc but some won’t use them. Staff deserve better leadership.

All the evidence points to quality teaching being the best provider of good outcomes. Small classes are not the answer and what schools have the space? Never going to have the money in a million years. Therefore a list of wants is pointless. What most parents do is accept that few schools deliver 100% of what they want. Some things could always be better but until we, as a country, earn more money, we don’t have it. We also obsess on the NHS and now water. Tomorrow it will be the armed forces or social care. It’s a never ending treadmill. We don’t have enough people working and paying tax to fund all we want. So until we, as a nation, change, we will experience shortcomings.

Yes, I remember a few years ago, there was a real push for a skills based curriculum. My Head was constantly asking 'what skill are they learning', but then it became apparent that, actually, knowledge is pretty vital too...

These things go in ebbs and flows in education based on who is in charge.

I'm not even going to mention that man in 2014 who turned it all upside down. When the news came through that he was shuffled out of post, one of the TAs whispered it in assembly and all the teachers cheered.

We need fewer thought experiments and hunches about what children need from non-experts. That includes the OP of this thread...

@lifeissweet absolutely, less thought experiments and politicised shifts and changes constantly. Change should be led by educational experts not politicians. Major change should be piloted properly, feedback taken and properly evaluated. The impact on children should be evidenced robustly and then nationwide change can be made based off successful pilots. Any resources that are needed should be prepare before teachers are expected to implement it, and training courses etc should be available before hand too.

The last initiative I remember that worked like this was when Letters and Sounds was introduced.

It was the last big, widespread and useful educational innovation (which wasn't actually anything new, just a change in emphasis, really) that was well resourced, well researched, well rolled out and training provided in good time.

I honestly can't think of another.

@RoseslnTheHospital

so what does a "proper pilot" look like?

No I don't. But I do think the current way the system is calculated is deeply flawed.

They changed it a few years ago, because it was arguably even worse.

Ultimately the lack of proper funding of SEN provision is the biggest issue.

And COVID has really hit this.

You have to remember how long it takes to get a referral. And how the system is different council by council.

In our area the school does an observation for two terms and then refers their observations to the local NHS. But DSs year missed the best part of two terms in reception and nearly the same in Yr1. So when they went back properly they had a bunch of unreferred kids whose behaviour was off the scale and no funding at all to support it. That doesn't count how long it is to get a diagnosis from referral. I know one child in my son's class had very obvious learning difficulties from nursery so he was started on the pathway immediately. The only got funding for him in Autumn term in YR3.

On top of this the school only have money to refer so many children per year. Regardless of who might actually NEED referring. They can choose to fund referral out of the school budget - but that comes at the expense of other things which when they are scraping the barrel that much for cash, they can't do.

DS is going through the process. God knows how long it will take. We can't go private because it won't necessarily be recognised by the school / council / NHS. So we can't/ couldn't fund it ourselves with any guarantees it's was worth the paper any private assessment was written on.

The waiting lists since COVID have shot up. I think we are hoping we will get somewhere with things by the time we get to High School. DS is currently yr 3 - and that's where our expectations are at with it.

In the meantime think of the impact of all this on schools and how it means they are underfunded by default due to these delays and how this impacts on whole classes. They can't just get on with maths whilst Mrs Jones is dealing with Johnny's latest episode of throwing chairs, dancing on tables or hurling abuse at her.

The extra stuff would be nice, but if I'm honest I'm not convinced my son's year would benefit. They are significantly behind where the school has historically been - their Yr2 SATs were utterly dire. And largely connected with the number of kids in the class with undiagnosed and unfunded SEN needs. Just getting the basics would make more of a difference to educational levels than all the extras.

It is pointless moving DS because the situation is similar throughout the country for his yr and unsettling him by moving would bring its own challenges and not resolve the issues with needing extra support that he needs.

I know the system for referrals is completely different in the next council over too. So you have massive widespread disparity and inconsistency about how your child might be treated in one place compared to just two miles down the road.

It really is a postcode lottery that I don't think serves anyway.

Unfortunately people vote for political parties, not educational experts. The current politely system does allow parties to change education policy and the curriculum. Change is what voters vote for quite often. Experts are always polarised in their views anyway. There are points of agreement but how to get there is always debated. Parents always think small classes. Experts cite quality first teaching. A small class taught by a useless teacher won’t progress.

I do think stability in school policy is what we need but now we have so many SEN issues, we now want government intervention. Sounds like posters do. Unfortunately he who pays the piper calls the tune. You cannot pick and choose what interventions you want from government. With no money, it won’t be much right now.

@RedToothBrush Yup and this will be blamed on schools when it's actually the fault of the local CCGs and how their ICB allocation is managed. Nothing to do with schools but they will be blamed. The only reason EHCNA applications and EHCP number have shot up, is because it's so easy to meet the £6k threshold now. Yes there's more awareness of them and more are applying but thats because schools really can't give appropriate support. Even EHCPs aren't fully funded.
For a lot of parents the only way they can see an EP or get a diagnosis is through an EHCNA as the referral process is so impossible to access in their CCG. It's an absolute postcode lottery.

@RedToothBrush

So would SEN be better if it was broken out into a semi separate function for the LA or regionally? Do you think there is a lack of sharing of best practice between different areas? To allow different schools/or groups of schools to learn from each other?

The waiting until 7 for testing for SEN is an issue, certainly the idea of waiting until high school looks like its just going to embed problems long term, and delay development and education.

The medical related SEN gets picked up sooner, but there are arguments between health and education about roles and responsibilities. There is a shortage of special school places, and with specialisms for different needs. This seems to lead to poor outcomes for both that those that would be in the special school and those that share the inappropriate environment in mainstream.

@ThinkingForward don't you have any experience of pilots? I mean a pilot where a variety of different types of schools are involved across the range of demographics. Where the reason for the pilot is well defined and the possible outcomes well defined, and how those will be measured are well defined. Where data on those outcomes are collected effectively and analysed promptly. Leading to evidenced conclusions being drawn.

@TizerorFizz Yes and the issue is the political party in charge has 0 dialogue with actual leaders in education. Most of the time schools have had no knowledge of change in policy till last minute and little to no guidance in implementation. There's no dialogue with schools or education experts. It's all grand visions by a person that hasn't spent a day in the classroom since they left one. There's lots of politicians like OP in charge at the moment and it's partly why it's a mess.
A lot of parents moan about LAs making illegal decisions when it comes to EHCPs, but they've also been left in an impossible position. The government continues to throw legal responsibilities on them without giving money to actually implement them. It's almost like they're doing it to vilify local authorities and schools. It's no good making a law without support on the ground to implement it.

@RoseslnTheHospital
Im trying to listen more following the earlier comments.
I was specifically interested in what you thought might be the scale of the pilot and how long it might run for.

You're telling me you tried to force a school to do this without doing any research on pilots?

Any head that allows SEN Dc to run riot is not doing their job. Heads do have powers to exclude Dc but some won’t use them

In fairness to our head she was between a rock and a hard place due to resistance from the parents. The school can not exclude a child with unmet SEN needs. The school were pushing to the parents that there was a problem but the parents were resisting.

When things kicked off, it meant us pushing back gave the Head the ammunition to force through things with outside agencies much to the horror of said parents. The head couldn't do anything until things reached crisis point and because the other parents were pushy they would have pushed back legally on any exclusion too.

Things HAVE since improved but the kid in question, the school, the head and the other kids were put into a position which should never have happened but for a loophole where you have middle class pushy parents in denial coupled with referral delays and understaffing due to underfunding.

Still a lot more to be done but the Head and DSs teacher really have gone above and beyond and there simply aren't really alternatives for a bright kid like this one for SEN due to a shortage of places.

What I'm hearing this is being replicated across the country especially in yr3 too. There is something very particular about yr3 and also I believe the current yr1 who missed out on nursery.

Experts are always polarised in their views anyway. There are points of agreement but how to get there is always debated. Parents always think small classes. Experts cite quality first teaching. A small class taught by a useless teacher won’t progress.

This along with your previous post about curriculum progression shows you are steeped in current educational thinking and the current Ofsted framework.

But give it a couple of years and the message and the expectations will change again.

Quality first teaching, of course, is the cornerstone and it absolutely should be, but that phrase in itself has become a massive buzz-word that is hiding a huge number of issues. It is a phrase used to justify SEN children sitting in mainstream classes with no TA in a lesson they can't access. 'Quality First Teaching' also needs to be individualised. It is not enough to deliver a brilliant lesson - even a highly differentiated brilliant lesson - if the class is made up of groups of children with entirely different needs and they are. And SEN teachers like me are told it's ok because they are getting 'quality first teaching' with no actual agreement about what that means and what it looks like in practise.

The idea that small class sizes doesn't make any difference is a fairly new argument. I still think it's fair to suggest that a good teacher with a class of 15 is going to be better than the same teacher with a group of 30. Why? Because that's half as many individual needs to take account of, half as many books to mark, half as many to give dynamic feedback too, half as many to push and extend as and when individually necessary.

A bad teacher or a bad lesson will be bad however many children are involved, but a good one could be better with fewer children to consider. Plus, it makes for a less burnt out teacher with more to give, ultimately.

But it's expensive, so we keep being told that class sizes make no difference - because what is being compared to draw that conclusion is a good teacher with 30 pupils vs a bad teacher with 15.

@RoseslnTheHospital

No im aware of pilots, im trying to establish how many schools/year groups etc you would consider adequate. Thus if what i proposed, etc would fall within your definition of that.

Doesn’t a school have to be a pilot? This could have been one. If the proposal came from a uni professor, might it have been considered?

NFI

I just see what I see from where I stand. I am yet to go through process so I don't fully understand it in my own area never mind the neighbouring council.

I simply lack the knowledge on which system(s) works well and which are total arse.

I just am aware of how inconsistent it is and that alone gives me cause for real concern.

I THINK our local system makes more sense than others I've heard of but that doesn't mean to say i think it's good.

I've no idea how long we will have to wait for next stage or what really happens next. I feel completely blind as to how any of it works really and I'm usually proactive in finding out and it's like a black hole of nothing.

@TizerorFizz

Yeah and this 6 academics from 2 university, one university team was to focus on the educational component the other to focus on all the sociological and economic etc issues. The departments are well published in there relevant areas etc.

@RedToothBrush

I've no idea how long we will have to wait for next stage or what really happens next. I feel completely blind as to how any of it works really and I'm usually proactive in finding out and it's like a black hole of nothing.

all you can do is keep asking questions to find out.

But it's expensive, so we keep being told that class sizes make no difference - because what is being compared to draw that conclusion is a good teacher with 30 pupils vs a bad teacher with 15.

Absolutely. I would love to see some quality research into class sizes, rather than always being told it makes no difference to anything. I don’t believe that for a second bit the government are never going to commission any research into this!

I once had a class of 19 and it was the best year I’ve ever had. I could run numerous in class interventions, feedback could be given instantly and in detail and the children had a fantastic year. The progress they made both academically (easily measurable) and socially (less easily, but still quantifiable) was amazing. The next year, I was back to a class of 34…

To be honest, a school is allowed to just say no. You don't need to go back to them proposing a pilot. Just accept they said no. They don't have time for this. Just move schools if you hate this one so much.
@TizerorFizz I don't know any school that would say yes to a proposal like this, whether it's from a parent or a uni student.

I think you are confusing child care with education. Don’t worry, you are not the first.

What exactly makes you think we haven't?

There isn't anyone to ask. Or they don't know the answer to how long a piece of string is.

You find out more from other parents but since every child has different needs and is a different priority level that's not all that helpful either.

I was not thinking uni student. I was thinking uni professor. Op seems to suggest research had uni backing. It’s probably just too radical.

The problem with comparing outcomes and progress based purely on class size is the variables of teacher quality and Dc. However quality first teaching is easier to evaluate. Poor teaching is easy to evaluate. What if all the 15 parents pay for additional tutoring?

I have certainly seen schools use 3 classes for maths in y5 with a group of 60 Dc. The 3rd group was small and needed a lot of help and were below expectations. Did they get to the magic sats 100? No. So intelligence makes a difference too!!