New Accountability Frameworks for Schools and Colleges

Transcription

1 July 2012 Post-14 Research and Innovation Institute of Education University of London, 20 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AL Tina Isaacs (Academic Director, Centre for Post-14 Research and Innovation) opened the Research Seminar, by identifying radical, swift and sweeping changes to national policy, post-14 curricula, qualifications and provision, as well as the ways in which performance is reviewed and measured. Amanda Spielman (Chair of Ofqual) has noted that this period of development is more wide reaching than ever before, as everything is changing simultaneously even Curriculum 2000 did not spark a national curriculum review. This issue is not getting the best of press currently, amidst speculation that it may result in the abolition of GCSEs. Seminar participants were invited to consider key issues, questions and concerns arising from these changes and suggest ways forward, to frame a conference debate and engage a wider range of practitioners, policy makers, researchers and social partners in the discussion. Courses taught from September 2012 and reported in the performance tables for 2014 will include, full course GCSEs and established igcses, AS levels, Level 3 free-standing maths and Asset Language Ladder qualifications and graded music examinations at Grade 6 and above. The approved qualifications which meet the requirements outlined in the technical guidance (published 27 October 2011) and which will also count, are represented in the table below: 1

2 Awarding Body Level Award Subject Area 2 Further Mathematics AQA Use of Mathematics 1/2 English Language English Literature BCS 2 IT User Skills CACHE 2 Award Child Care and Education Engineering /Diploma IT Users City and Guilds 2 Diploma Software Developers ICT Systems and Principles for IT Professionals EAL 2 /Diploma Engineering and Technology Applied Science Art and Design Business Construction Creative Media Production Engineering Diploma/ Health and Social Care Extended 2 IT Music (QCF) 500/7774/0 Edexcel BTEC Performing Arts Sport (QCF) 500/7658/9 Travel and Tourism Digital Applications for IT Users Diploma Hospitality First Children s Care, Learning and Development 1/2 First Award Performing Arts Principles of Applied Science Application of Science IAM 2 IT User Skills Award Graphic Design NCFE 2 Art and Design Interactive Media Performance Skills Extended Music Technology / 2 Diploma Creative Media OCR IT User Skills 1/2 Cambridge National Health and Social Care /Diploma ICT 2

3 Awarding Body Level Award Subject Area RSL 2 /Extended TLM 2 WJEC 2 1/2 Various 1/2 Principal Learning Music Practitioners IT User Skills in Open Systems and Enterprise Latin Language Latin Language and Roman Civilisation Latin Literature English Language English Literature Business Administration and Finance Construction and the Built Environment Creative and Media Engineering Environmental and Land-based Studies Hair and Beauty Studies Hospitality IT Manufacturing and Product Design Public Services Retail Business Society, Health and Development Sport and Active Leisure Travel and Tourism The number of explicitly vocational courses has been drastically reduced (even the NCFE programmes are both subtly and subtly not, vocational) and the list includes a number of courses in Latin language and culture. Significantly, none of these courses will count for more than 1 GCSE equivalent including the Principal Learning of the Foundation and Higher Diploma. 3

4 Performance tables have also changed dramatically. Schools must now report out on the percentage of: EAL learners learners below, at and above their expected Key Stage (KS) 2 level (i.e. just English and maths) learners achieving 5 A*-C at GCSE including English and maths learners achieving 5 A*-C the cohort entered for English Baccalaureate (EBacc) the cohort achieving EBacc Progress measures include the percentage of learners: making expected progress in English included in the English progress measure making expected progress in mathematics included in the mathematics progress measure The Value Added (VA) measure will be based on: KS 2-4 VA score upper and lower confidence intervals the percentage of learners in the calculation Data indicating achievement of 5 A*-C including English and mathematics will also be mediated by the percentage of: disadvantaged learners learners on Free School Meals (FSM) achieving 5 A*C including English and maths other learners achieving as above 4

5 The Average Point Score will be drawn from the: best eight GCSEs only number of qualifications per learner entered average number of GCSEs entered per learner The Department is requesting this in the interest of transparency, however, there is a danger the data will be used to measure accountability (and is the EBacc an accountability measure rather than good curriculum provision?). In addition, some of the information may be especially difficult to interpret as it isn t widely understood the 95 per cent confidence interval for example. Ofsted has promised to level the playing field by introducing a new Common Inspection Framework for Further Education and Skills and Framework for School Inspection. Changes which cut across both include: the satisfactory judgement being changed to requires improvement the requirement for providers to demonstrate outstanding teaching and learning in order to be judged outstanding overall limits to the number of requires improvement judgements before special measures kick in a reduced notice period for inspections inspectors right to request anonymised performance management information. School inspections will focus on the aspects of the school s work which have the greatest impact in raising achievement. They must cover learner achievement, behaviour and safety and the quality of teaching, learning, leadership and management at the school. Not much of this is new. The main changes lie in the reduced scope of inspections and number of judgements (there are only four grades), whilst there is an increase in the proportion of inspectors time which is spent observing teaching and gathering evidence of learning, progress and behaviour. Inspectors must also consider: the spiritual, moral, social and cultural development of learners at the school the extent to which the education provided by the school meets the needs of the range of its learners and in particular the needs of disabled learners and those with special education needs where relevant, the overall effectiveness of the sixth form. 5

6 Within this new Framework, judgements are rationalised as follows: schools cannot be judged as outstanding unless they demonstrate outstanding teaching an acceptable standard of education is defined as a good standard of education (what this means precisely remains unclear) a school which is not yet good but that is not judged inadequate is a school that requires improvement a school that is inadequate overall and that requires significant improvement, but where leadership and management are not inadequate is a school with serious weaknesses a school that is inadequate overall and where leadership and management are also inadequate is a school requiring special measures. The following inspection procedures may apply: a school that is judged as requires improvement will normally be monitored and re-inspected within a period of two years if a school is judged as requires improvement and is still not good at a third inspection, it is likely to be deemed inadequate and to require special measures inspectors will evaluate the robustness of performance management arrangements and consider whether there is an appropriate correlation between the quality of teaching in a school and the salary progression of its teachers. The main changes to the inspection of Further Education (FE) institutions under the Common Inspection Framework for Further Education and Skills include: the requirement for providers to demonstrate outstanding teaching and learning in order to be judged outstanding for overall effectiveness the introduction of earlier re-inspection of learning and skills providers judged as requires improvement the reduction of the notice period for inspections 6

7 the right for inspectors to request an anonymised summary of performance management information (informal discussions with Ofsted reveal they will not ask about teachers qualifications unless the provider is judged to be poorly performing) the grading system as in schools satisfactory becomes requires improvement different emphases on the quality of teaching, learning and assessment. Teaching, learning and assessment will be considered to be of high quality if: learners benefit from high expectations, engagement, care, support and motivation from staff staff use their skills and expertise to plan and deliver teaching, learning and support to meet each learner s needs staff initially assess learners starting points and monitor their progress, set challenging tasks and build on and extend learning for all learners learners understand how to improve as a result of frequent, detailed and accurate feedback from staff following assessment of their learning teaching and learning develop English, mathematics and functional skills and support the achievement of learning goals and career aims appropriate and timely information, advice and guidance supports learning effectively equality and diversity are promoted through teaching and learning. Providers should ensure that: all learners achieve and make progress relative to their starting points and learning goals achievement gaps are narrowing between different groups of learners learners develop personal, social and employability skills learners progress to courses leading to higher-level qualifications and into jobs that meet local and national needs. 7

8 Leaders and managers must: demonstrate an ambitious vision, have high expectations for what all learners can achieve and attain high standards of quality and performance improve teaching and learning through rigorous performance management and appropriate professional development evaluate the quality of the provision through robust self-assessment, taking account of users views and use the findings to promote and develop capacity for sustainable improvement successfully plan, establish and manage the curriculum and learning programmes to meet the interests and needs of learners, employers and the local and national community actively promote diversity and equality, tackle bullying and discrimination and narrow the achievement gap safeguard all learners. What does accountability mean in this context? How do we square the circle? And with the abolition of primary levels and changes to exams, how do we measure progress and floor standards? In addition what are the implications of revised A levels, the possible re-introduction of O levels (although this may not happen until the next election) and the Select Committee proposing one syllabus per subject (however with different examinations) and sampling, rather than reporting out GCSE results? Sampling has not really been covered in the press but could have significant implications for accountability. Participants raised the following issues and questions in discussion: Local authorities have been written out of the script and the FE articles of governance have been ripped up. Education conglomerates are impacting on our sense of identity. Does the EBacc bring the notion of a national secondary curriculum in by the back door? What will happen to KS3? Will the KS4 curriculum begin in year 9 or will it be just one more year of preparation for exams? What diet are we offering our year olds and what is the purpose of exams at 16? 8

9 The speed of reform is a continual surprise. We have to understand the nature of this political project, which aims to create a deeply centralised and privatised conservative education state and uses all the ideological instruments of the left, but takes away the capacity for individuals to achieve the most desirable outcomes (not everyone can go to a Russell Group university). The discourse has moved from social inclusion to social mobility and locality has been taken out of this. We are working within a decontextualised education system where no allowance is made for the local level apart from the corporate middle layer. This notion of social mobility is flawed, as in order for someone to go up, someone else needs to come down. Its rhetoric suggests that if you fail to achieve, it is primarily your own fault. The undermining of teachers and lecturers as professionals is part of this marketisation. There is a prevailing narrative presenting a rather rosy view of pre-1965 education and re-presenting grammar schools as socially inclusive institutions. Are they being brought back to make profits at the expense of mainstream schools? Are GCSEs the most successful qualification ever? Now more than 90 per cent of year olds are taking English, maths and science. There is increasing cynicism about the independence of Ofsted and Ofqual. Constantly changing benchmarks removes any (potentially beneficial) historical context. We privilege comparability over everything else, which is a barrier to innovation. Will standards actually go down and if they do, how will we know? Perceived falling standards may actually be a result of having raised the bar. Are we having a year zero? The term recalibration effectively means that. Who has a clue what to do about the increase in young people who are NEET? Post-16 participation has gone down for the first time in a decade but in FE and at Levels 1 and 2. These young people have progressed into part time provision rather than jobs. In London, we need to keep a close eye on drop out at 17 in particular (the percentage has risen to 12% again having previously fallen to 8%) we have hit a peak too soon. More young people are going into academies at the same time as they are going out onto the streets, which is a polarising trend. With youth unemployment at an all time high, we might question the purpose as well as the impact of the retention measure. Many employers are confused, don t perceive that young people have the 9

10 requisite employability skills and need to come into the debate more. The CBI is more proactive but discourse about the system remains negative. Only one third of employers recruit young people although there is general satisfaction with school and college outputs (more so with colleges). Employers need to accept the importance of their role in facilitating and supporting progression from education, to the labour market. Following recommendations in the Wolf Report, schools no longer have a duty to provide work related learning and careers education. We should have a system which recognises the necessity for English, maths and employability skills. At Level 2, maths should be Applied should we talk about numeracy skills rather than GCSE maths (the new Ofsted criteria demands this)? What about longer term measures are we comparing cohort by cohort? Are the people that employers want taking another route altogether? We need to consider how we make policy in a different way. We should make a distinction between national policy instruments and real accountability frameworks and work to create a new stability, where social partners come together (this is gradually occurring in Wales and Scotland) and assess performance on the ground. Accountability should be democratic and lateral, rather than politicised. An alternative government would need a real sense of the local and this rich form of lateral accountability to make tangible and sustainable improvements. Two days notice for inspection will simply not work for employers! Should there be more trade union involvement in curriculum development and assessment EU countries already do this? Inspection frameworks are obsessed with the performance of individual institutions. Shouldn t we be looking at area-wide performance or, for example, evidence of the effectiveness of teaching in very small groups? Who is going to use these league tables? There is so much data how do we know what s relevant? What will parents do with this information? The distinction between the performance indicator and performance measure has been muddied in the public domain especially (the EBacc is a notable example). Are schools likely to be academised if, for example according to the Guardian website, they don t come up to scratch? 10

11 The EBacc is a misleading measure we need to tell our own story. The London agenda is driven by choice of school places, where children from middle class families have more choice than those receiving FSM. Use of terminology is particularly important in the context of organising a conference. We have been speaking about accountability as a measure, but what about responsibility? Where do Apprenticeships and Baccalaureates fit in? Work-based learning providers are responsible for employer experiences and placements this is messy and key for the learner. Who determines the value and currency of qualifications? Some qualifications fall outside of this but young people are still taking them. Could a black market grow and are policy makers aware of this? Accountability to the learner, parent, locality and national system is key, but when it comes to progression it is local people who are the decision makers. Accountability has to be horizontal and downwards as well as upwards. Are we used to things being rather vague? Schools and colleges have the power to decide which qualifications they offer, not employers, although employers will play an increasingly important role. If an employer is responsible for delivering an Apprenticeship, for example, they will also be accountable for its delivery. Why accountability in the first place? Does this create perverse incentives not to be fair? Data is richer and more reliable than ever but are we in danger of misusing it? Schools and colleges are failing more Ofsted inspections however they, rather than Ofsted are blamed for this. At base, there are some very good intentions but the politicisation of Ofsted makes this inevitable. We should focus on the welfare of people in the system. Prioritising institutional performance impacts on the possible outcomes of and opportunities for, learners who may not be ready for or suited to, certain qualifications. Participants agreed to explore some of these issues further at a conference event. The conference should begin by introducing the current framework and questioning its appropriateness. Delegates will be asked to consider, given that accountability is broadly understood and accepted, how a better system can be delivered now, as well as in future. In so doing, they may address the following questions: What do we want in place, at local and national levels? When should this happen? 11

12 What s worth being accountable for/measuring? What international models can we draw on? The conference should explore: Sampling Different dimensions of accountability Accountability in a local area and how this is/could be organised Levels of accountability Key points of selection (e.g. at 16+) The divisive curriculum The marginalisation of professionals (and why this appears to be a peculiarly English phenomenon) Discussion strands may include: Social mobility vs. Social inclusion Democratic vs. Political accountability and the decentred state Standards Progression Employer Engagement 12