2004/5 annual report on curriculum and assessment

Transcription

1 History 2004/5 annual report on curriculum and assessment This report is based on the activities to investigate curriculum, assessment and qualifications issues in history October 2005 QCA/05/2169

2 Contents Background 3 The state of the 4 19 history curriculum and qualifications in 2004/5 4 Summary of key findings 8 Foundation stage and key stages 1 and 2 11 Key stage Inclusion 20 Evaluation of QCA history support and guidance 22 Key recommendations for QCA 23 Appendix 1: Sources and methodologies 25 Appendix 2: QCA history projects and materials for the current year and work in progress 29 Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

3 Background QCA has a remit to keep the curriculum under review and advise the Secretary of State on curriculum and assessment matters. To do this effectively, QCA has a programme of monitoring and evaluation to ensure that advice is soundly based and development work is informed by practical experience. The monitoring and evaluation programme draws on a broad bank of evidence. Detailed quantitative evidence is provided by the QCA Monitoring Curriculum and Assessment (MCA) project. This yields statistical data through questionnaire responses from representative samples of schools and foundation stage settings. Evidence also comes from specific enquiries undertaken by QCA and other national agencies, including the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) and the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS). QCA phase and subject teams also undertake desk research into published research and reports, including international work. This systematically gathered pool of evidence is complemented by intelligence drawn directly from practitioners and other key players, through conferences, seminars, focus groups and other less formal communications. QCA advisers also visit settings, schools and colleges to speak with individual teachers and learners. QCA phase and subject teams synthesise this rich and varied evidence to build pictures of current practice. All of this monitoring information is linked to common areas of enquiry and focused questions, which are described in Appendix 1. Further details of any websites that are referred to are given in Appendix 2. The following report draws together QCA s findings in history. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

4 The state of the 4 19 history curriculum and qualifications in 2004/5 Background History s unique contribution to the curriculum is its focus on the past in Britain and the wider world. Pupils develop a chronological framework for their knowledge of significant events and people; they consider how the past influences the present, and develop a range of evidential and communication skills that are essential in adult life. It is compulsory in schools from ages 5 to 14. The statutory requirements for the subject are set out in the national curriculum programmes of study for key stages 1 3. Beyond the age of 14 pupils can chose to continue their study of history through GCSE and AS/A level examination courses. The standards and broad structures of these are governed by criteria devised by QCA in consultation with other key players. Reforms outlined in the recent White Paper have focused attention on history and how it is taught. There is growing interest in history s potential to contribute to young people s awareness and appreciation of the notion of common identity and sense of Britishness. A new GCSE in history is currently being developed on behalf of QCA by OCR and will be piloted in around 50 schools and colleges from September It will give pupils the chance to follow a range of general and vocational history pathways. A number of new materials have been developed by QCA to support history teachers. The Innovating with history website aims to help schools design history courses that engage and motivate pupils, improve progression and ensure that history contributes more fully to wider curriculum goals. Guidance on developing pupils chronological understanding was published jointly with the Schools History Project in December QCA s Futures Project, launched in January 2005, has already begun to examine the role and relevance of the current history curriculum in the broader context shaped by government initiatives such as Every Child Matters and rapidly increasing economic, technological and societal changes. The long-term aim is to ensure that any future curriculum frameworks and qualifications continue to meet the needs of all learners. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

5 The present state of the history curriculum 4 19 The quality of history teaching in secondary schools is a real strength. Successive Ofsted reports for secondary history confirm the view that the overall quality and effectiveness of history provision remain high. In the latest report, Ofsted states in 80 per cent of lessons seen the teaching has been judged good or better, meaning that history is one of the best taught subjects. At A level this rises to 91 per cent. GCSE and AS/A level history remain popular option choices with pupils at 14 and 17. A total of 227,240 pupils were entered for history at GCSE in A level history was the sixth most popular subject, with 45,113 entries, a rise of 3 per cent from the 2004 figure. At AS level, there were 54,139 entries in 2005, a rise of over 39.8 per cent since The subject is given support by active, and mutually supportive, subject associations. However, many of these operate on minimal funding and rely heavily on the goodwill of their members. This sometimes limits the extent, reach and sustainability of their activities. In recent years, a number of concerns have been raised about aspects of primary and secondary history. The most significant of these are as follows. The relevance of the history curriculum in schools In many primary and secondary schools, the subject is playing an increasingly marginal role in the wider curriculum and is often given low priority in school development plans. One reason may be a perception that it has only limited relevance to many pupils future working lives. The forthcoming review of the curriculum may provide the opportunity to evaluate the existing structure and content of school history, and to make more explicit its contribution to the wider curriculum aims, values and purposes. The overall quality of primary history According to the Ofsted subject report for primary history published in February 2005, primary history continues to disappoint, with lower achievement and weaker teaching than in most subjects. Formal assessment of pupils progress is frequently lacking. This is exacerbated in many cases by the lack of initial teacher training (ITT) and continuing professional development (CPD) opportunities for primary teachers, most of whom are non-specialists. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

6 The role and status of the subject coordinator continues to be crucial in raising standards in history, but the knowledge and expertise of coordinators vary enormously from school to school. Key stage 3 Pupils often fail to acquire a good overview of history as they progress through key stage 3. Too often, the focus is on developing pupils in-depth knowledge of specific topics in history at the expense of making explicit links and connections between the different historical periods studied. The quality of assessment is inconsistent across schools. In a significant number of schools it tends to be over-elaborate and not particularly effective at helping pupils understand how to become better at history or at improving the quality of history teaching The option choices made by schools and colleges in GCSE and AS/A level mean that the content of post-14 history continues to be dominated by topics such as the Tudors and 20th century dictatorships. This is exacerbated by the unitisation of A level courses, which has fragmented the overall learning experience for pupils and reduced the time for wider reading and reflection in history. In addition, the quality of assessment in a number of specifications has come in for criticism for example, the failure to examine historical interpretation and source evaluation properly, and the decline of opportunities, particularly at GCSE, for more able candidates to display the full range of their narrative skills. Inclusion Too little attention is given to the black and multi-ethnic aspects of British history. The teaching of black history is often confined to topics about slavery and post-war immigration or to Black History Month. The effect, if inadvertent, is to undervalue the overall contribution of black and minority ethnic people to Britain s past and to ignore their cultural, scientific and many other achievements. CPD in history Although there is some high-quality CPD in history, evidence suggests that many teachers do not have access to it. CPD provision for history is gradually disappearing in local authorities, and the reach of the subject associations and ITT institutions is Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

7 limited. Their initiatives are not always sustained or followed through, owing to the inadequacy of funding and lack of available personnel. Online CPD has some potential but has not so far proved to be an adequate replacement for actual training. Lack of CPD is a particular problem for primary teachers, who are not normally subject specialists. In recent years, even the history input into primary PGCE courses has been reduced. Links between higher education and school history There are few formal links between university academic history departments and schools, with the result that neither sector has a very clear understanding of developments in the other. There are some initiatives involving the subject associations and institutions that are aimed at exploring ways of addressing this, but it is unlikely that these will have a national impact without additional funding and formal recognition being given to university departments engaged in working with schools. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

8 Summary of key findings Primary There is a need for more specific guidance in relation to the nature of history and progression to key stage 1 and through the 9-point assessment scale. History continues to be one of the most popular subjects among primary teachers, but this is often not translated into good teaching and learning. Achievement is now good or better in just under half our primary schools; it is unsatisfactory in one school in 20. There has been a steady improvement since 1998, but it is still lower than in most other subjects in the primary curriculum. Where standards are improving this is largely due to the enthusiasm and expertise of the subject coordinator and the establishment of rigorous monitoring arrangements, but this is piecemeal and inconsistent. The priority given to history by primary headteachers continues to be low but is improving, according to QCA s MCA survey. About 4 per cent of curriculum time at key stages 1 and 2 is allocated to history. This is the same as last year at key stage 1 but represents a small decline at key stage 2. More than half of all schools surveyed taught history in blocks of time and not on a weekly basis. This may have a bearing on pupils understanding of the subject. The number of schools reporting some difficulties in covering the statutory requirements for the programmes of study for history in the time available has fallen substantially. This may be evidence of schools taking advantage of the flexibility and reduced prescription brought about by the National Curriculum Review. Assessment continues to be identified as a major weakness in history in primary schools. There is some evidence of improving practice in schools with coordinators who adopt a whole-school approach and build up portfolios of work across year groups and across the school. Some teachers find it difficult to use the level descriptions in history, and there is still evidence of too much levelling. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

9 The DfES/QCA scheme of work, which has been widely used by primary schools, has provided the greatest impetus for change in many of them. Where the scheme is used well it is having a positive impact on standards in history. Awareness and regular use of QCA web-based history guidance among primary teachers continues to be fairly limited. Provision for teachers professional development in primary history varies across local authorities. In too many cases it is negligible, with significant consequences for standards in primary history. Secondary The standard of teaching in history is high. Eighty per cent of lessons seen by Ofsted inspectors were judged good or better, rising to 91 per cent for A level, making history one of the best-taught subjects in secondary education. In 2005, 66.6 per cent of pupils achieved grades A* C at GCSE history, which is marginally better than in the previous year. There was a slight decrease in the proportion of pupils achieving the highest grades at GCE A level, with 50.2 per cent of the entry gaining grade A or B, compared with 50.4 per cent the previous year. GCSE and AS/A level History remain popular option choices with pupils at 14 and 17. A total of 227,240 pupils were entered for history at GCSE in A level history was the sixth most popular subject, with 45,113 entries, a rise of 3 per cent from the 2004 figure. At AS level, there were 54,139 entries in 2005, a rise of just under 40 per cent since There has been little change in the time allocated to history within the secondary curriculum, but the perception of teachers is that history is increasingly under time pressure from the introduction of new subjects. Lack of teaching time is the most commonly cited reason for difficulty in covering the programme of study. The majority of history teachers at secondary level have a history qualification (around 80 per cent), and it is very unusual to find a non-specialist teaching post-16. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

10 The programme of study for history at key stage 3 is regarded as manageable. There is evidence that heads of department are making productive links with other subjects such as citizenship to enhance pupils understanding. Schools are increasingly recognising the requirement to teach local history, and some have found creative ways to do so. Non-compliance is still too high, however, with 35.5 per cent of schools not covering the local dimension. Despite improvements in standards in history, many pupils are failing to gain a good overview of history or an understanding of the significance of some key events and individuals. The teaching and learning of historical interpretations continue to be weaknesses that need to be addressed, and more attention should be given to the teaching of chronological understanding across key stage 3. The history attainment target is generally regarded as giving a useful point of reference for history teachers. However, aspects of it are considered to be too difficult for pupils, and some schools have rewritten some of the level descriptions to allow teacher/pupil dialogue as part of formative assessment. The quality of assessment is still a concern in some schools, and there is still evidence of too much levelling and subdivision of levels. Despite its relative success in recent years, there is growing criticism of aspects of history, including the narrowing and repetition of content at GCSE and A level and the quality of assessment in some specifications. History teachers have become very adept at providing differentiated approaches to teaching and learning, but too little attention continues to be given to the black and multi-ethnic aspects of British history in many schools. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

11 Foundation stage and key stages 1 and 2 Provision Provision for history has generally been maintained at the same levels as last year. History occupied 3.9 per cent of curriculum time at key stage 1 and 4.1 per cent at key stage 2. Some schools are still reporting a slight decline in time for the subject, owing to pressure from numeracy and literacy teaching. Others reported a small increase in their time allocation following an Ofsted inspection or by capturing time for history through links with literacy. A perception among teachers is that they are increasingly having to justify time spent on history. According to the MCA survey, 57.7 per cent of schools teach history as a separate subject at key stage 1, the percentage rising to 70 per cent at key stage 2. History was also cited as the most frequent lead subject when a topic-based approach is taken, particularly at key stage 2 (48 per cent of schools). Curriculum Ofsted reports that primary history continues to disappoint, with less good achievement and teaching than most subjects. This can mostly be attributed to a lack of effective ITT and few opportunities for CPD. The role of the subject coordinator is crucial, and good practice is likely to develop in schools where the coordinator takes a strong and informed lead. A major area of concern continues to be the quality of assessment in primary history, with both Ofsted and teachers themselves identifying this as an area where more guidance would be welcomed. Where assessment practice is good, schools have developed a structured approach to planned progression, with careful use of exemplification to guide teachers. There is increasing evidence of good use of links between literacy and history, but this is not being fully exploited in many schools. The majority of teachers see coverage of the programmes of study at key stages 1 and 2 as manageable. Only 11.8 per cent of schools reported any difficulty at key stage 1 (only mathematics was lower, at 5.8 per cent), and at key stage 2 only 10.6 per cent reported difficulty (again, only mathematics was lower, at 4.5 per cent). The use of ICT in teaching history continues to increase slowly, with all teachers reporting that they use ICT at least on some occasions and 25 per cent saying they Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

12 use it a lot. Lack of time for teaching history was the most common reason given for not using ICT more. The range and quality of software available were thought to have improved. The impact of developments in assessment Assessment practices vary, and in the worst cases there is little or no evidence of any formal assessment actually taking place in history. A significant number of schools are still dividing the level descriptions and assessing on a termly basis or even more frequently. Many schools do use the levels of attainment laid down in the programme of study, usually at the end of the key stage. There is increased evidence of moderation of pupils work between teachers in the same school and very occasionally between schools. The impact of national initiatives and other developments Teachers are increasingly positive about the impact of the National Literacy Strategy on the teaching of history. Although some still felt that the time devoted to literacy reduced the time that could be spent on history, many had identified areas where history content could be used as a context for the development of literacy. The national primary strategy is encouraging teachers to take a more creative approach to planning in history. Although most primary schools stay fairly close to the DfES/QCA scheme of work, some of the best teaching and learning is to be found in schools that are able to adapt this to local needs and pupils interests. Transfer and transition Planning across the key stages is variable. Lack of planning for transition from the foundation stage to key stage 1 was one of the key findings of the focused study on history in the foundation stage curriculum. Transition between key stages 1 and 2 is often not planned effectively, and pupils end up with partial and fragmented knowledge as a result. This is not helped by the different structures of the two programmes of study. There is evidence from the MCA survey, however, that transition has been recognised as a problem within some schools and that coordinators are beginning to address it. Some saw progression as skills based and were planning for progressively more sophisticated skills through the key stages. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

13 Key stage 3 Provision Respondents to the MCA subject survey for 2004/5 reported that time given to history at key stage 3 was unchanged from last year in 89 per cent of schools. It had declined in 8.5 per cent and increased in only 2.5 per cent. Only 3 per cent reported significant difficulties in meeting the requirements of the programme of study, although 62 per cent experienced some difficulties, primarily because of lack of curriculum time. Some teachers felt under pressure to justify maintaining curriculum time for history, with more subjects competing for space on the timetable and pressures within some specialist schools at GCSE resulting in the squeezing of humanities subjects. The number of schools teaching key stage 3 in two years appears to be increasing, although the exact number is difficult to determine at the present time. Curriculum The majority of teachers at key stage 3 make some use of the DfES/QCA scheme of work (82 per cent), most adapting it to local circumstances and the needs of their pupils. A significant number (35.5 per cent) are still failing to teach local history as part of their key stage 3 provision, citing lack of time and teacher expertise as reasons for not doing so. Heads of history responding to the MCA questionnaire identified a number of areas that staff find difficult to teach. The most commonly listed is historical interpretation, mentioned in 46.5 per cent of responses. This is followed by references to specific period topic areas of the programme of study (20 34 per cent of respondents) and chronological understanding (20 per cent of respondents). Reasons given for the difficulties encountered in teaching these subjects were lack of expertise and curriculum time. Ofsted s concerns include a failure of pupils at key stage 3 to gain a good overview of history as they progress through the school, and Ofsted concludes that there is a need to rethink the history curriculum to ensure that it adequately meets the needs of current pupils and that its relevance and importance to young people is recognised and understood. Further observations centred on the failure of some history teachers Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

14 to exploit the freedoms within the national curriculum or to make sufficient links with other subjects. The introduction of citizenship has had a significant impact on some history departments, with many taking a leading role in planning for citizenship delivery across the curriculum or undertaking a subject audit to identify areas where links with citizenship could be developed. In other departments the impact of citizenship was minimal. The use of ICT in history teaching is becoming much more widespread and is regarded in an increasingly positive way. Twenty-nine per cent of heads of history in the MCA survey felt that the ability to deliver ICT through history has improved teaching and learning in the subject. The use of interactive whiteboards is now more common, along with the internet, databases and simple word-processing packages. Where use of ICT is limited, teachers cite lack of access to hardware and lack of adequate training as key obstacles. Impact of developments in assessment Evidence from teacher seminars and the MCA suggests that many departments are reasonably content with the level descriptions for history, although some concerns remain about the expectations within individual levels. Assessment continues to be inconsistent across schools: elaborate and ineffective assessment structures are still too prevalent. A majority of departments in the survey indicated that they give levels at the end of years 7 and 8 as well as at the end of the key stage. In most cases this was a school requirement. As a result of the strategy, increasing numbers of departments are developing approaches to assessment for learning, although it is too early to assess the impact of this on pupils learning. Greater attention is being paid to the moderation of teacher assessment within departments, mainly through the use of departmental portfolios and standardisation meetings. Impact of national initiatives and other developments The impact of the national secondary strategy has been very variable so far. Many of the benefits are promised rather than proven, according to Ofsted. The MCA respondents take a less pessimistic view of the impact of the strategy, with 83 per cent believing it had a positive influence on the teaching of history. Seventy per cent agreed that the national curriculum programme of study and the strategy approaches worked well together. Seventy per cent also believed that staff development delivered by the strategy had been beneficial. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

15 Transfer and transition Teachers attending the secondary seminars said that they had become much more aware of the need to liaise with primary colleagues to ensure better progression from key stage 2 to key stage 3. In the best cases this involved meetings between secondary teachers and their feeder primary schools and, more rarely, planning across the key stage to ensure that the prior learning of children was acknowledged and built upon. A minority of schools still fail to take account of the prior learning of pupils, and some still begin their year 7 work with a What is history? unit. Pupils perceptions of history at key stage 3 Over the past two years, Terry Haydn, of the School of Education and Lifelong Learning at the University of East Anglia, has undertaken research on behalf of QCA into pupils perception of history at key stage 3. In the light of previous attempts to explore pupils attitudes to history in school, it was decided to do a longitudinal study of pupils perceptions of history at key stage 3, starting with a pilot study of pupils at the end of year 7, and including their views on history at primary school. In addition to exploring their views on which facets of their experience of school history they had found interesting and enjoyable, and which less so, pupils were also asked about their views on why they studied history in school, whether they were interested in history outside school, and (in the focus group interviews) their ideas about what it meant to get better at history. The approach taken to this study meant that some pupils could be tracked during the key stage to see whether their views about history changed in any way and, if so, to explore the reasons why. The main part of the study comprised field-based research in different parts of the country and used pupil questionnaires, along with follow-up interviews with a smaller sample of pupils. What follows is a summary of the key findings of the final report. Pupils experience of history at primary school is extremely variable, not just in terms of substantive content but also in terms of how much time they have spent at history and whether they have studied it in project or integrated subject form. Many pupils (perhaps more than 40 per cent, according to this survey) arrive at secondary school with negative perceptions of the subject. Even by the end of year 7, many pupils appear to have forgotten much of what they learned in history and can bring to mind little more than the names of some of the topics or periods they encountered. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

16 Pupils perceptions of the importance of history as a school subject suggest that many of them do regard it as an important subject, perhaps more than in previous surveys. When given a choice of describing it as useful or not very useful, 68.7 per cent of respondents described it as useful. When the pupils were asked to rank history against other subjects for usefulness/importance, it emerged in sixth position, below English, mathematics, science, ICT and physical education, but above art, design and technology, geography, modern foreign languages, music, religious education and personal, social and health education. However, many pupils were unable to give reasons for studying history that reflected the aims and purposes of the subject as indicated in the national curriculum. Their reasons were often very vague and general or based on fairly inchoate or limited ideas about employment possibilities. Many pupils either did not feel that history was relevant or were unable to articulate why it might be useful. A majority of pupils reported that they enjoyed history at key stage 3, with 69.2 per cent claiming that they found it quite enjoyable as against 30.8 per cent who chose not that enjoyable from the two options. This again suggests that more pupils enjoy the subject than at the time of earlier surveys. Pupils reported that they enjoyed active lessons, where there was a variety of activities and where there was some opportunity for pupils to talk, in the form of discussion, presentations, group work, drama or role play. The use of video was commonly cited as an enjoyable component of lessons, and the use of ICT, although less prevalent and varying widely between departments, generally elicited positive comment. The general climate in the lesson the personality and nature of the teacher and his or her relations with the class was also felt to be an important determinant of how enjoyable the lessons were likely to be. There was wide variation in the number of pupils who regarded history as interesting and important, with substantial differences within as well as between departments. Pupils dislikes were focused on overuse of written work (particularly in the form of worksheets, working from the text book and essay work), overlong or unpunctuated teacher exposition, overuse of source work exercises, not being able to work in friendship groups and working in silence. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

17 Roughly half of the pupils surveyed acknowledged an interest in history outside the classroom, in the form of reading, looking at websites, site visits and watching history programmes on television. The proportion of pupils interested in history outside the classroom varied substantially between schools. Pupils ideas about what it meant to get better at history commonly involved the notion of progression being based on the aggregation of substantive historical knowledge. Pupils did not express their ideas about progression in terms of the national curriculum knowledge, skills and understanding. Very few made any reference to terms such as enquiry or interpretation. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

18 14 19 In 2005, 66.6 per cent of pupils achieved grades A* C at GCSE history, which is marginally better than in the previous year. However, there is a difference of 5.9 per cent (4.9 per cent in 2004) between boys and girls grades, with girls achieving the higher grades. Pupils achievement at GCSE was good or better in 74 per cent of schools, according to Ofsted s annual report for secondary history in 2004/5. A total of 227,240 pupils were entered for history at GCSE, according to the examinations data for This number is a decrease on last year but is still 6.7 per cent higher than the number in 1998, when the long-term decline in history entries was reversed. GCSE modern world courses continue to increase in popularity, gaining candidates mainly at the expense of the British social and economic specifications, which have been in steep decline over the past few years. Schools History Project courses are more or less holding their own, with large candidate entries maintaining their viability. History was the sixth most popular subject at A level, with 45,113 entries, a rise of 3 per cent on At AS level, there were 54,139 entries in 2005, a rise of more than 39 per cent since There was a slight decrease in the proportion of pupils achieving the highest grades at GCE A level: 50.2 per cent of the entry gained grade A or B, compared with 50.4 per cent the previous year. Pupils achievement was good or better in 81 per cent of schools post-16, according to Ofsted s annual report for secondary history in 2004/5. This reflects the high quality of teaching at A level, which is good or better in 91 per cent of history lessons seen by Ofsted. Evidence from teacher seminars and previous MCA surveys suggest that there is a fair degree of satisfaction among teachers with the current GCSE specifications, despite their feeling that some were rather content heavy. Their longevity means that these courses are relatively easy to resource, and teachers are familiar with their demands. Many teachers surveyed also welcomed the flexibility and variety inherent in the AS/A level modular structure, including the choice of content and the range of assessment methods employed. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

19 However, despite the relative success of history in recent years, a number of aspects are giving increasing cause for concern and will need to be addressed through the forthcoming review. There has been a gradual narrowing and Hitlerisation of post-14 history. The option choices made by schools and colleges in GCSE and AS/A level mean that the content of post-14 history continues to be dominated by topics such as the Tudors and the 20th century dictatorships. This trend is exacerbated by the unitisation of A level courses, which has fragmented the overall learning experience for students and reduced the time for wider reading and reflection in history. The quality of assessment in a number of specifications has come in for criticism for example, the failure to examine historical interpretation and source evaluation properly and the decline of opportunities, particularly at GCSE, for more able candidates to display the full range of their narrative skills. Earlier this year, the Historical Association Curriculum Project (HACP), set up with joint funding from the DfES, published a report setting out key recommendations that should underpin any future shaping of the history curriculum. These included an entitlement to a specifically historical education for all pupils, greater breadth and diversity of historical content at GCSE and A level, and reform of assessment to bring about substantial improvements to examinations and coursework tasks in history. The report also called for any reform of the history curriculum to be planned as a coherent whole, setting clear lines of progression and continuity in content coverage, in types of work, and in assessment, from key stage 3 to key stage 4, and from key stage 4 to key stage 5. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

20 Inclusion The overwhelming response of primary and secondary history teachers in surveys and seminars on inclusion is to refer to differentiation. This inevitably means a focus on approaches to teaching and learning rather than on whether the content in schemes of work sufficiently reflects the diversity of the societies studied. History in primary and secondary schools is commonly taught in all-ability groups, and teachers employ a range of strategies designed to meet the full range of needs of the pupils. These include providing different learning activities, presenting activities in different ways, using teaching assistants, and having different expected outcomes for the same activities. Sixty-two per cent of respondents to the MCA secondary survey said that they had adapted the history curriculum to suit particular groups of pupils, the most commonly cited examples being gifted and talented and pupils with learning difficulties. The majority of departments participating in the secondary teacher seminars reported no problems in accommodating students with sensory and physical disabilities. This included adapting classroom layout and equipment, using scanners to enlarge text, providing special resource packs and using scribes for examinations and other occasions. However, as reported last year, few history teachers appeared to be aware of the existence of any detailed strategies in their schools for dealing with new arrivals from overseas. There is also no discernible change to the position stated in last year s QCA monitoring report that, in many schools, too little attention is given to the black and multi-ethnic aspects of British history. Too often, the teaching of black history is confined to topics about slavery and post-war immigration or to Black History Month. The effect, if inadvertent, is to undervalue the overall contribution of black and minority ethnic people to Britain s past and to ignore their cultural, scientific and many other achievements. A recent report commissioned by the Northamptonshire Black History Project along with University College Northampton appears to reflect the national picture in its conclusion that primary and secondary teachers in the Northamptonshire study do Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

21 not appear to teach Black British history in any systematic way or consistent way, whether in history or citizenship. This finding contrasts with the recommendations of the Macpherson report on the death of Stephen Lawrence and the statutory requirement contained in the programmes of study for history that states that pupils be taught about the social, cultural, religious and ethnic diversity of the societies studied, both in Britain and the wider world. The barriers to developing a truly inclusive history curriculum in many schools appear to be lack of knowledge among teachers of black British history, a lack of accessible resources and a lack of confidence on the part of many teachers. The Northamptonshire Black History Project offers an effective way of countering this lack at a local level and is one that could be replicated in other local authorities. The project has collected, recorded and archived the history of the local black and Asian population over the last 800 years, and through its community networks and training expertise it now offers practical support to schools trying to develop a more inclusive curriculum. Nationally, QCA will launch its bibliography of black history resources later this year, which is an attempt to identify and draw together details of suitable resources for the teaching of black British history across the primary and secondary programmes of study for history. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

22 Evaluation of QCA history support and guidance Teachers level of awareness of QCA s support and guidance materials in history continues to be quite low. Although the DfES/QCA schemes of work form the basis of the programme of study for history in the majority of primary schools in England, other resources fare less well. According to the MCA, 40.6 per cent of participating secondary history departments and 58.3 per cent of primary schools had not heard of the National curriculum in action website. Figures for some of the other QCA websites were similar: Innovating with history 50.5 per cent; Gifted and talented 51.1 per cent; learning 50 per cent; Learning difficulties 68.7 per cent. Feedback from teachers and other history practitioners who were actually using these resources was generally positive, especially in relation to the history materials on the National curriculum in action and Innovating with history websites, which are averaging over 250,000 hits a month. According to successive primary and secondary teacher seminars, levels of teacher awareness and usage often appear to depend on local intervention through either a local authority adviser or an ITT history specialist, who are able to publicise and mediate the materials available on the QCA websites. The MCA primary survey confirms that many teachers still prefer to read curriculum guidance on paper, which suggests that web-based resources have their limitations. In response, much has been done to publicise QCA s history materials. A detailed update on what is available and how to access it is sent to all local authorities and many ITT institutions twice a year. Publicity materials such as bookmarks and leaflets have been sent to every primary and secondary school in England, and additional copies have been distributed at many of the national and local authority history conferences. Articles about QCA s history websites have been published in the Times educational supplement and the Historical Association s journals Primary history and Teaching history. Batch mail alerts have also been used to signal the publication of new QCA history guidance, after last year s MCA survey suggested that 72 per cent of teachers expressed a preference for this method of communication. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

23 Key recommendations for QCA Curriculum reform Work with schools and other key players to explore the feasibility of reviewing and reforming key stage 2 history. Reform the key stage 3 programme of study for history so that pupils develop a more coherent overview of the past and to ensure that its content is relevant to the 21st century. Reform history, in particular the breadth of study offered by current specifications and the quality of assessment within these. Develop and pilot a GCSE qualification linking history to related vocational areas. Continue to develop the history curriculum so that it is relevant to the early 21st century. Curriculum guidance Develop guidance for primary teachers on developing pupils chronological understanding and their enduring knowledge of past. Publish additional British history units for the DfES/QCA secondary history scheme of work to complement the guidance already commissioned to help teachers develop pupils chronological understanding and their enduring knowledge of aspects of the past. Develop guidance on teacher assessment, along with additional optional tasks for primary and secondary history. Publish a national bibliography of resources to support the teaching of black and multi-ethnic aspects of British history. Continue to develop strategies for the effective dissemination of curriculum guidance materials and examples of good practice in history. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

24 Work with other stakeholders Work with DfES, Ofsted, BECTA, the Teacher Development Agency, the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust and the national strategies to ensure that schools receive consistent messages on all aspects of the history curriculum. Continue to work with the DfES, other government agencies, the wider subject community and schools to raise the profile of history in schools and highlight its potential to contribute effectively to the developing curriculum. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

25 Appendix 1: Sources and methodologies Areas of enquiry For the period April 2004 to March 2005 the QCA history team investigated the following areas of enquiry: the strengths and weaknesses of current provision for history in the foundation stage curriculum the strengths and weaknesses of current provision for history in primary and secondary schools the manageability of the national curriculum programmes of study for history at key stages 1 3 how attainment in history is being assessed in schools in key stages 1 3, the impact this is having on teaching and learning, and the extent to which the revised level descriptions are promoting accurate and manageable assessment how schools are managing the key stage 2 to 3 transition in history the impact of the DfES/Standards Effectiveness Unit strategies on history at key stages 1 3 pupils perceptions of (key stage 3) history the strengths and weaknesses of current provision in history and recent trends in the uptake of pupils at GCSE and GCE how the requirements on inclusion have contributed to a more inclusive approach to teaching and learning in history the awareness, use and impact within schools of QCA curriculum guidance for history. Sources The history team drew on a range of sources and methodologies to investigate the different areas of enquiry covered in this report. The Monitoring Curriculum and Assessment Project The following reports produced as a result of the Monitoring Curriculum and Assessment Project 2003/4 were used as a key source of evidence for this report: foundation stage report 2004/5 key stage 1 and 2 report (overview of primary schools) 2004/5 key stage 3 and 4 report (overview of secondary schools) 2004/5 key stage 3 report (detail of KS3) 2004/5 key stage 4 report (detail of KS4) 2004/5 subject report: history 2004/5. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

26 A focused study on pupils perception of history at key stage 3 The focused study explored pupils perception of history at key stage 3. Phase 1 was completed in August 2004 and phase 2 was completed in August Terry Haydn, of the School of Education and Lifelong Learning at the University of East Anglia, undertook this research on behalf of QCA. Phase 1 comprised: a desk-based longitudinal study of any ongoing and previous research into pupils perceptions of history the piloting and evaluation of the field-based research with a small sample of schools to find out pupils perceptions of the history curriculum in year 7 an interim report to QCA on the findings from the longitudinal study and the evaluation of the pilot, along with a final proposal for the research to be carried out in phase 2 of the focused study. Phase 2 comprised: field-based research in different parts of the country, using pupil questionnaires, along with follow-up interviews with a smaller sample of pupils a final report to QCA on pupils own perceptions of the history curriculum across key stage 3, along with an evaluation of the methodologies used and recommendations for further research in other key stages. A focused study on history in the foundation stage curriculum This focused study was commissioned to review the extent and state of history teaching within the foundation stage curriculum. This was designed as a follow-up to QCA s 2002 report History in the foundation stage, a consultation report to QCA, by Jayne Woodhouse. Research included interviews with a small sample of foundation stage practitioners along with a structured questionnaire. A report was submitted to QCA in February Meetings A programme of meetings with representatives of relevant subject associations, primary and secondary teachers, and teacher trainers was organised. The Wirral and Suffolk local authorities each nominated primary and secondary teachers to attend history monitoring seminars with QCA. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

27 Opportunities were taken to canvass the views of teachers and other practitioners at the following local authorities, ITT and national conferences: East Riding, Lancashire, Liverpool Hope University, Oxford, Midlands History Forum (Birmingham), Schools History Project (Leeds), SFE History Conferences (London and Sheffield), Philip Allen History Conference (London), Humanities Association (Wirral), QCA Futures Summit (London), Institute of Historical Research / The Historical Association History Conference (London), The Prince of Wales Summer School (Dartington), Specialist Schools and Academies Trust Humanities Specialist Schools Conference, Ofsted Invitation Conference (London), Historic Environment Information Resources Network Conference (London). Two meetings were held with the representatives of subject associations and other organisations at which issues relating to monitoring were considered. The subject associations and other organisations comprised: Qualifications, Curriculum and Assessment Authority for Wales, Council for the Curriculum, Examinations and Assessment, DfES, Ofsted, the Historical Association, the Humanities Association, the National Association of Advisers in History (NAAH), the National Association of Humanities Advisers (NAHA), English Heritage, the National Trust, the Royal Historical Society, the Schools History Project, the Group Education in Museums, the History Teacher Education Network, the Midlands History Forum, the Society of Archivists, the Council for British Archaeology, and the History at Universities Defence Group. Reports and other information A number of published sources, data and correspondence were used to inform the monitoring findings: QCA history monitoring reports 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004 QCA examinations database 2001/2, 2002/3, 2003/4 and 2004/5 History in the foundation stage, a consultation report to QCA by Jayne Woodhouse (2002) Ofsted annual subject reports for primary history and secondary history 2001/2, 2002/3, 2003/4 and 2004/5 Ofsted reports Good assessment practice in history (2003), ICT in schools: the impact of government initiatives (secondary history) (2004) and Citizenship in secondary schools (2002/3) English awarding body statistics for GCSE and AS/A level history candidate entries 2005 Qualifications and Curriculum Authority

28 educational journals, including Primary history and Teaching history, published by the Historical Association Black is also British: an investigation into the needs and opportunities for developing black British history within the schools curriculum in Northamptonshire by the Northamptonshire Black History Project and University College Northampton correspondence to QCA on a variety of issues relating to the history curriculum and qualifications press coverage on a variety of issues relating to the history curriculum and qualifications. Qualifications and Curriculum Authority