ASSOCIATION OF TEACHERS AND LECTURERS
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
ASSOCIATION OF TEACHERS AND LECTURERS
7 NORTHUMBERLAND STREET, LONDON WC2N 5RD TEL: 020-7930-6441 FAX: 020-7930-1359
e-mail: info@atl.org.uk web site: http://www.atl.org.uk VAT REG NO 539 0866 17
GENERAL SECRETARY Dr MARY BOUSTED B.A.(Hons) PhD
Reformed GCSE subject content consultation
Response from the Association of Teachers and Lecturers
20th August 2013
About ATL
ATL, the education union, is an independent, registered trade union and
professional association, representing approximately 160,000 teachers,
head teachers, lecturers and support staff in maintained and independent
nurseries, schools, sixth form, tertiary and further education colleges in
the United Kingdom. AMiE is the trade union and professional association
for leaders and managers in colleges and schools, and is a distinct section
of ATL.
ATL exists to help members, as their careers develop, through first rate
research, advice, information and legal advice. Our evidence-based policy
making enables us to campaign and negotiate locally and nationally.
ATL is not affiliated to any political party and seeks to work constructively
with all the main political parties.
ATL Policy
Education is about meeting the needs of every child and ensuring all can
realise their potential, and develop as fully rounded citizens. ATL’s
education policy is underpinned by the professionalism of teachers.
Teachers should be recognised for their knowledge, expertise and
judgement, at the level of the individual pupil and in articulating the role
of education in promoting social justice. Within light national parameters,
development of the education system should take place at a local level;
the curriculum should be developed in partnership with local stakeholders;
assessment should be carried out through local professional networks.
Headlines:
• ATL supports the need to change Key Stage 4 qualifications, but
feels the starting point to this debate should have been about the
role of examinations at 16 and whether they are still required.
• ATL is concerned about the narrowing focus in the latest proposals
for GCSE reform on traditional subjects, potentially reinforcing the
hierarchy between core and foundation subjects.
• The emphasis on end of course exams risks disadvantaging many
pupils at Key Stage 4 and fails to recognise the diversity of abilities
in year groups.• The GCSE changes are being introduced alongside many other
educational reforms – the pace and scale of reform is reckless, and
is placing undue pressure on teachers.
The case for reform
ATL believes that change is needed to Key Stage 4 qualifications, because
the current system does not best serve young people. However, the
government’s approach to GCSE reform has been misguided, and ATL has
argued that there needs to be a proper debate around the need for, and
purpose of a qualification at 16. Given the raising of the participation age,
is there a need for a qualification prior to 18? Although previous proposals
around the English Baccalaureate Certificate qualification have thankfully
been dropped, the fundamental question about the role of examinations at
16 has not been addressed. The speed and determination of reform
means the opportunity to reflect on what is valued in learning at Key
Stage 4 has been lost.
ATL’s position is that:
• 14-19 education should develop the knowledge, skills, attitudes and
dispositions to enable young people to be responsible citizens and
independent thinkers.
• 14-19 education should be sufficiently engaging to retain young
people at risk of leaving education, employment and training.
• The 14-19 curriculum must be underpinned by coherent aims and
build on Key Stage 3.
• Schools, colleges and policymakers should work towards an
integrated and flexible framework of entitlement that is not solely
qualifications led.
ATL members support the need for rigorous qualifications but feel strongly
that the principle of equality should be at the heart. ‘Rigour’ does not
mean making subjects harder, narrower, and more challenging for pupils
to progress. Our members have told us that the most important principles
for GCSE reform are having an equitable offer for teenagers and a broad
curriculum. The idea of a ‘one size fits all’ qualification is inappropriate.
There is concern about the narrowing focus in these latest GCSE reform
proposals on traditional subjects, with end of course exams. Decisions
about how to assess should be based on the purposes of assessment, and
the skills and knowledge to be assessed, not on political whim. Our
response to Ofqual’s consultation will cover assessment in more detail, but
there needs to be a balance between coursework and exams to recognise
the different successes of students – it does not have to be a choice
between one or the other. As one teacher pointed out:
“Surely we have moved past the time of good grades for the few and the
rest feeling like they have failed”.
The new National Curriculum framework has a strong emphasis on
essential knowledge, and the new GCSE proposals reflect this too. Breadthand balance should be at the heart of the curriculum for Key Stage 4, with a blend of theoretical and applied learning. This is not achieved by including as many academic subjects as possible, and apparently reinforcing the hierarchy between core and foundation subjects. ATL fears that the current specifications will not answer employers’ demands for skills development and their need for employees who can communicate, collaborate, innovate, research and design. A narrow focus within the academic subjects provides a particular kind of education with little consideration of whether it will be useful to every individual or to society as a whole. Teachers are driven to unlock the potential of every child who enters the classroom and determined to help them fulfil their promise and expand their horizons. That does not mean that they each have to be good at the same things. A better starting place would have been to think about how to cultivate entrepreneurship, and develop skills for growth sectors such as social media, green technology, communications or creativity. The fact that there are no specifications for Design and Technology, Music, Art and Design and dance in the first tranche of reforms shows that the emphasis is yet again on the subjects that the government feel are important, rather than a whole range of subjects that can develop skills in different ways. ATL believes that the current proposals risk disadvantaging many pupils at Key Stage 4, and fail to recognise the diversity of abilities in year groups. The consideration of the equalities impact in the consultation does not adequately engage with the potential difficulties for particular groups in accessing the new GCSE qualifications. There are real concerns about the practicalities of bringing in new GCSEs at a time when teachers are also implementing a new National Curriculum and A-levels. It is too rushed to make all these changes at the same time, and this will have an adverse impact on learners and the teaching profession. In addition, teachers are already in the midst of adopting changes to GCSEs that are coming in from this September – for example, new GCSE specifications for History and English Literature. If the current proposals are adopted, these new specifications will only have been in place for 2 years, and will be replaced with the new GCSEs being taught from September 2015. As one of ATL’s members said: “Every time I plan a coherent programme of study for years 7 through to GCSE, the requirements have changed before the pupils get to the critical time.” No time has been allowed for pilots, and allocating time for training in the new syllabuses will be difficult. The phasing of the new National Curriculum framework and the new GCSEs has not been aligned, so there are also concerns about the continuity between Key Stage 3 and 4 as a result of this piecemeal approach to reform. There has been little attempt to build consensus in the profession, and the timing of this GCSE consultation over the summer holidays yet again shows that consulting and engaging with teachers has been an afterthought.
Subject comments
ATL members have provided feedback on the content and assessment
objectives in the new GCSE proposals and these are summarised below.
English Literature
• ATL members cautioned that there is potentially too much content
set out. There should be some flexibility in the content so schools
are required to teach 80% as prescribed, but with the remainder
being free for schools to choose as appropriate to their own intake
and context.
• The range of texts should be broad, with a balance between classic
literature and contemporary literature. For many pupils, the latter
will be more relevant and engaging.
• The writing assessment weighting should be reduced as the current
proposal for 30% risks distracting from developing literary skills.
• The lack of coursework is an issue as this provides a good way to
recognise the different successes of students – ‘rewarding diligent
work by students over timescales greater than an hour’.
• ATL members felt that the GCSE content was a good preparation for
A-level literature, but may not be for different qualification routes.
• Another issue that has been highlighted is that the compulsory
English GCSE course under the Ebacc is more focussed on language
skills rather than literature. Given the emphasis in the new English
literature GCSE on more challenging texts, and no coursework,
there is a risk that pupils will not choose to take the English
Literature GCSE. Robert Eaglestone has warned this could "send
English – the most popular school and university humanities subject
– into a rapid decline of the sort that has devastated modern
languages and classics [university departments] over recent
years.’ 1
English Language
• There are concerns that spoken language is a compulsory part of
the course, but is not recognised in the weightings. Our members
have said that this is an important element that should be valued.
Teachers often report seeing students display skills in English which
are accomplished, original and engaging through this strand and
allow them to excel.
• Spoken language also helps develop the ability to communicate
effectively for the workplace and further education.
• The different weighting between reading and writing is problematic
– these are equally important.
1
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/jul/15/michael‐gove‐gcse‐changes‐english‐literature• Digital texts should be included as the reality is that many pupils
are familiar with these and the use of them will continue to
increase.
• Further thought needs to be given to SEN pupils – for example,
whether an alternative English language paper could include more
life skills, and speaking and listening. Our members have warned
that the current proposals do not allow for a wide range of abilities.
Maths
• ATL members are broadly in support of the Maths content, but feel
that there has been a missed opportunity to properly consult with
the teaching profession and improve the specifications.
• There is some concern that the pitch of some of the content is not
appropriate – for example, trigonometry on the foundation paper
risks being inaccessible as a topic for some students.
• Project work should be included in order to develop mathematical
ability and enable young people to demonstrate what they can do.
• The charity National Numeracy have recently highlighted the
discrepancy between the existing Maths GCSE and the numeracy
skills needed for life and work. 2 In order to tackle the fact that
performance in numeracy is lower than in literacy, the new GCSEs
should be based around appropriate numerical skills that provide
different routes through education.
History
• There is concern that the proposed assessment objectives have
relegated the evaluation of evidence to a less important skill than
the recall of knowledge. In a work environment and at university,
the ability to evaluate information is vital.
• With regards to the possibility of a historical investigation, ATL
members were in support of this in principle as it develops
important skills in independent research. However, it can be hard to
achieve in a classroom situation, with schools that have accesses to
resources being at an advantage. Teachers would need to have the
flexibility to chose topics that they know they can support in their
schools with appropriate resources and information.
• The prescription of 40% of the syllabus for British history is another
concern – as the subject should help to equip students to be global
citizens in the modern world. This will restrict the space for other
topics that can help to engender enthusiasm and passion for
history.
2
http://www.nationalnumeracy.org.uk/what‐is‐the‐issue/index.htmlGeography
• Feedback from ATL members suggests that there is a lot to
welcome in the content of the Geography GCSE, in particular the
strengthening of locational knowledge, and the balance between
physical and human geography.
• One member did comment that the requirement to teach 3 different
eco systems was potentially problematic. The suggestion was that
two might be more appropriate to avoid repetition.
• Another comment on the content was the emphasis on ‘extreme’
weather, when it might be more appropriate and relevant for pupils
to learn about British weather systems such as depressions, anti
cyclones and the effect of the jet stream.
• Our members felt strongly that the current proposed weighting
needs reviewing as the 10% proposal for fieldwork is too low.
• The proposal to submit a letter to the awarding body confirming
that fieldwork had taken place beyond the classroom was also
lacking in support from our members. The main fear was that this
could be open to abuse, and that it is the quality of fieldwork that
matters, rather than its presence or absence. The proposal risks
devaluing the subject overall.
• Suggestions that our members put forward were to have a
fieldwork report for a specific topic that had been investigated, or
an exam question that requires pupils to apply their fieldwork
experience. Our members also cautioned that there needs to be a
choice available for schools for fieldwork as it could be a costly
option if inner city schools were required to undertake fieldwork in
rural areas and vice versa.
• The Geography Association have argued strongly in favour of
fieldwork in GCSES courses – as this is a vital aspect of assessment
in Geography: “Fieldwork provides the opportunity for students to
investigate the complexity of the real world through personal
experience, bringing to life examples which would otherwise be
considered only theoretically, at second hand.”
• Their recommendation is to assess enquiry skills through an exam,
but that there should be an individual fieldwork report accounting
for 15% of the GCSE. We support the call to look again at this
element of the proposed Geography GCSE and to consider further
how internal and external marking of fieldwork might be improved.
Sciences
• It is not clear from the proposals what the distinction is between
single awards and combined science and there needs to be more
clarity over what this looks like in practice for a pupil sitting the
course and the exams.• There is concern that the proposals appear to be taking the
retrograde step to the double award GCSE Science, rather than
core and additional Science GCSES.
• The amount of content for the three science GCSEs could risk
putting pupils off taking triple science.
• Our members have commented that there is not enough emphasis
on practical skills and the application of science in the real world.
The 10% weighting to coursework is too low as this fails to
recognise the importance of how to do real science, and ensuring
that it is relevant to life and work in the 21st century. Science is
about investigation and experimentation rather than just theory,
and these skills and processes need to be part of the GCSE course.
• ATL members also felt that the content of the Science GCSE has
become more challenging in places, and there is now an overlap
with A-level content – for example, on inverse square law, and the
equations that are set out for Physics.
• Science teachers felt that the current content proposals would
disadvantage lower ability students. The language needs to be
changed to address this, and ensure that it is accessible.
Modern languages
• ATL members welcomed some aspects of the proposed content,
including the equal emphasis on listening, speaking, reading and
writing; and the focus on culture and identity.
• However, some concerns were raised about the literature category
in particular. Our members emphasised the need to ensure that a
wide choice of literary texts is included, with shorter pieces too, in
order to not put students off entirely. At GCSE level, they felt the
primary focus of a modern language should be on skills for work,
travel and tourism, and this should remain a priority.
• Our members suggested that a wide range of sources of language
should be used including film, lyrics, adverts, short magazine
articles and adverts to reflect the sources that pupils might
encounter in reality.
• There was also a concern that translation into a foreign language
would be quite challenging at GCSE.
• Many pupils do not take languages at A-level as there is a
perception that it is a hard option. There are concerns that the new
specification for GCSE will not address this problem – there needs
to be a fine balance between improving language skills and the
structure of a foreign language, but ensuring that this does not
alienate pupils at the same time. ATL members felt that social
background does have an impact on pupils’ experiences of learning
languages – as those who are able to take holidays abroad, or have
parents who speak other languages have an advantage that is not
related to their ability or aptitude.• We feel it is important to keep imaginative ways of assessing as
part of the course so teachers can use their experience and
expertise to cover the content in the best way for their students.
Ancient languages
• ATL members have commented that the current proposed
specification risks being overloaded. The range of knowledge is
wide with language, literature and history so might be appropriate
for 2 distinct GCSEs rather than one.
• The risk of trying to cover too much is that linguistic skills in
ancient languages might not be developed as too much time is
spent focussing on set texts. These language skills are the hardest
element of the subject, and require more time and emphasis.You can also read
