ASCL's last Council meeting, on 21-22 June, took place well before GCSE results day. However, concerns about the future of exams and accusations of grade inflation were already high on the agenda.

Grade inflation not just hot air

Primary curriculum

Education Committee

Committee members were asked for their views on proposed changes to the primary curriculum. There was strong opposition to a year-by-year (rather than key stage) curriculum, on the basis that children learn at different rates and whole classes might be prevented from moving on if they hadn't completed the curriculum for that year.

The requirement for primary schools to teach a modern foreign language (MFL) for four years was felt to be currently impractical given the shortage of language teachers. However, evidence shows that the primary language awareness courses have had an impact upon numbers studying a language post-14. Rather than focus on French, it would be helpful for primaries to adopt a multilingual approach.

A spelling, grammar and punctuation (SPAG) test is to be introduced at Key Stage 2 in 2013. ASCL's position is to support a SPAG test at Key Stage 2, as it is important that children master this early on. There are to be similar tests at Key Stage 4.

It was agreed to support the NAHT in its request for separate levels for reading and writing rather than having an overall level. The pilot materials seemed to be rigorous and both pupils and secondary schools would benefit later on from this. Committee Chair Andy Yarrow and Curriculum and Assessment Specialist Sue Kirkham agree to incorporate these points into ASCL's response.

---

GCSEs

Education Committee

As Ofqual Chief Executive Glenys Stacey was to attend a forum session on Thursday with Council members, the committee discussed issues to raise with her. The committee strongly disagreed with Michael Gove's leaked comments in favour of an O level-style qualification.

Concerns were also raised about public statements from ministers about grade inflation, 'dumbing down' of the curriculum and the pressure on awarding bodies to ensure that grades do not increase. It is understood that if grades do go up this year, awarding bodies must make a case as to why. It was noted that it is not possible to achieve the government's aim of more pupils achieving a C in English and maths if results are not allowed to improve.

There were concerns that Ofqual, as an independent regulator, appears to be too close to the DfE. Ofqual's role should be to make sure that assessment is fair for learners.

---

Publication of financial information

Funding Committee

The committee, under Chair David Grigg, discussed DfE requests concerning publication of information. There was support for attempting to capture some measure of teacher contact by analysis of the single period data currently collected. There was also some support for an extra box on the data collection to facilitate this. The difficulties of what this actually tells you was raised, given that some teachers are more effective than others.

Clear contextualisation is important, as is a fair method for publishing information on all schools including free schools and academies. The point was made that the more information league tables contain, the less traction they have.

---

Academy funding

Funding Committee

The committee stressed that the 2 per cent carry forward rule for academies is making forward planning difficult. It was sugggested that the developing system, with a free market structure, contains the inherent inevitability of financial failure for some. In some areas there is also a culture emerging that inhibits senior leaders from seeking support in advance of any difficulties, as they may be perceived as 'weak'.

The following position statements were agreed: The 2 per cent allowance for carry forward is unjustified and unfair to academies. In addition, the regulatory framework for academies is robust enough and further regulation is unnecessary and contrary to the aim to give autonomy to academies.

---

SEND changes

Inclusion Committee

Stephen Kingdom, Deputy Director of SEND in the DfE, presented to the committee on the intended changes to special needs and disability provision. (See SENsory perception for more information).

Pathfinder projects are ongoing and there is much yet to be decided about how the new system will work in practice. The draft bill is due in September, with a formal bill in spring 2013 and phased implementation from mid to late 2014.

The presentation was followed by a lengthy question and answer session. The committee asked for clarification about who chooses how the personal budget is spent and how the amount is set. There was great concern expressed about pupils just below statement level, including those with dyslexia and similar conditions, as well as pupils with behaviour and emotional difficulties (BESD).

Regarding the committee's concerns, Chair Jonathan Fawcett agreed to keep in contact with Stephen Kingdom, who offered to attend a future meeting to update on progress.

Plenary debate: Jonathan updated Council on the meeting with Stephen Kingdom and opened the floor for discussion. Concerns raised reflected those discussed in the committee. Many of the proposed reforms appear useful but there is not enough detail to be clear on the implications for schools/ colleges. There was scepticism that funding will be sufficient.

---

Evidence to the STRB

Pay and Conditions Committee

ASCL officers were due to give oral evidence to the School Teachers' Review Body (STRB) on the afternoon of the second day of Council. The STRB had asked for ASCL's response to a number of questions on local pay, recruitment/retention, pay scale architecture models, progression including performance and reward, leadership pay, appraisal, and governance; therefore, committee members were able to give their views.

The general view was that the current pay structure is largely fit for purpose, although the link between pay and performance could be strengthened and teaching and learning responsibilities (TLRs) made more flexible, for example with shared line management responsibility.

The new Teachers' Standards are not as effective as the previous ones in that they are not as fair or consistent in measuring performance. ASCL would wish to keep the upper pay scale (UPS) standards. There needs to be further investment in the training of middle and senior managers in managing performance.

Plenary debate: The committee's feedback formed the basis for the Council plenary debate, led by Chair David Trace. Views were mixed on whether to keep the designation of advanced skills teacher and whether three years’ safeguarding for teachers was appropriate.

---

Middle tier

Public and Parliamentary Committee

The committee followed up on its previous discussion about what, if anything, is needed to fill the gap in the functions and responsibilities that once sat with local authorities, including admissions, special needs, transport and safeguarding. There were concerns as well about the commissioning of school places, accountability, at risk schools, school improvement, parents and complaints.

The committee did not want: loss of autonomy, more bureaucracy, extra tiers of organisation, fragmentation, outright competition, or expensive systems.

It was agreed that there is no one-size-fits-all solution; it depends on where schools are geographically. Local schools working together in a structured way may be the way forward. There were examples of where this is working well. However, with a voluntary system there is a risk that not all schools will cooperate.

Checks and balances would be needed to ensure that all is being carried out correctly.

A discussion was held about the definition of local and whether it should include all sectors and ages.

A proposal was made that ASCL gather case studies of existing models. A further proposal was a region-by-region audit of how local provision is working and a check that there is sufficient provision.

Plenary debate: Chair Peter Campling reported back to Council on the committee's discussion and led a plenary debate on the topic. The need for flxibility and local accountability was emphasised, as well as the importance of sufficiently robust monitoring systems to ensure individual schools in need of support are identified and get help.

---

Ofsted framework

Professional Committee

The committee, led by Chair Ian Bauckham, cautiously welcomed the September 2012 evaluation schedule, in particular the greater clarity of descriptors.

However, concern was raised about the use of subjective words – like 'favourably', 'quickly' and 'widely' within the section on achievement. Under behaviour, the 'outstanding' descriptor contains a lot of superlatives, which inspectors will need to interpret realistically and sensibly.

It was pleasing to see that ASCL's influence had resulted in key changes such as: short notice rather than no notice, an emphasis on progress alongside attainment, no expectations about particular preferred teaching methodology and a 'clean slate' for satisfactory schools as of 1 September.

The committee noted its continuing concern about inconsistency among inspectors. Inspections Specialist Jan Webber will continue to raise this with Ofsted.

---

Additional school places

Professional Committee

ASCL continues to oppose the creation of additional pupil places areas where there is no demographic requirement, particularly when capital expense is involved. The National Audit Office will be carrying out a survey to see if capital money is being spent wisely and ASCL has been asked to give evidence.

• The next council meeting will be held on 11-12 October

Designed with IMPACT

© 2024 Association of School and College Leaders | Valid XHTML | Contact us