The second camp was the most significant. They had no axe to grind, they were not rewarded by the achievement of pass targets, and they saw the output of our educational system beginning to fail. Technology, society, geographical boundaries and communications had leaped forward; our educational standards had not. Yet this paradigm shift had been masked by results which implied all was well. Our teaching standards had progressively risen, the results revealed improved teaching and learning in a well maintained schooling system. The teaching unions said so.

Yet the feedback from teachers indicated rising stress, falling moral and a huge turnover in teacher employment. The claims of falling standards were understandably refuted by many who were at their wits end. Pedagogy  was in turmoil but no one was prepared or able to draw a line in the sand and develop a modern educational system that met the future needs of the UK. Educational secretaries came, dabbled and went. Teaching unions rebutted, manipulated and refused. No one was responsible for the lack of progress; the attrition rate was a hidden disaster. Since Tony Blair’s initial battle cry of “education, education, education” little has been achieved; we have slipped disastrously down the international educational world league table at a time when we needed to re-launch the UK in a new role.

The world is evolving at a rate perhaps not seen since the industrial revolution. But whereas the UK led the industrial revolution we are now on the touchline watching the new game plan emerging in the BRIC countries. We are watching the commercial magnetic poles reversing polarity and can do nothing to stop it happening. Our enthusiasm in the 1990’s to move manufacturing from the UK to the Far East to improve short term profit margins has fuelled the imbalance. The UK shop window needs redressing with a new range of skills that will attract customers from overseas. The days of the British car; designed, manufactured and the company owned in the UK are over. Our most significant brands and utilities are foreign owned; London property is predominately now owned overseas.

So what are the educational needs of future generations? Michael Gove can see the problem but can we be sure he has the solution. Simply tightening the exam standards and reverting to a previous regime of a more rigid teaching curriculum is a start but it appears the much bigger plan is missing. We certainly do not have a classical structure that would respond to mere renovation. You can only repair a structure that is time expired for so long before it needs demolishing and rebuilding from scratch. It is the bigger plan that is missing, something the UK can be proud of, something that will meet the future needs of our children in this fast changing world, something our teaching resources can commit to, grasp with both hands and make it work. But our real problem is a stream of Educational secretaries who basically are looking to the next election, Whitehall staff who are career dabblers worried if their job is safe, and teachers, mesmerised by a constant flow of initiatives, are drained of strategic creativity.

The new standards for teaching and tightened exam structure may stop the haemorrhaging but we won’t know for sure for five years if it has any had any beneficial effect. Try telling the thousands of children involved that the best we can offer is to revert to a previous concept outmoded when it was superseded 15 years ago and certainly displaced by the rapidly changing world of today. Hopefully some might make it through and revolutionise education for the future because I don’t believe we’ve cracked it at the moment.

In addition to fragmenting the state school system; offering academy and free school status as a means of opting out of the strict controls of the curriculum, Micheal Gove plans to break up the UK examination structure. Already criticised for introducing harder exams at GCSE and “A ” level he now plans to let England, Northern Ireland and Wales instigate their own interpretations of his examination policy. (Scotland already operates independently). This will alleviate some of the critical mass that is reluctant to move to the new curriculum and exam standards. It also introduces confusion as universities and employers will have to differentiate between the educational pass standards of candidates depending on where they were schooled.

The educational games being played between Michael Gove, the Department for Education, and the teaching resources is not pleasant reading. Clearly something a bold strategy is required to redress a failing system that is acceptable by the people that are required to implement it. It therefore seems ludicrous the teaching profession is openly condemning all initiatives being fed down through the educational hierarchy. Instead of taking the time to complete the fundamental review that clearly is required, we are witnessing a series of shots from hip that are missing the target completely and serving only trying to antagonise the system. This beggar’s belief; in this day and age of global markets, instant communications and the availability of a staggering array of technological advances we can get schooling so wrong.

We hear repeatedly of comparisons with overseas educational systems, noticeably in Scandinavia and the Far East, which are heralded as the aspirational benchmark. Rather than completing an overhaul of our entire system, which clearly needs fixing we seem to be adopting elements of overseas policy in isolation that has induced confusion rather than forthright policy. Clearly the bigger picture is not being seen and although Michael Gove, an intelligent man, has given considerable thought to this future policy it is appearing at the grassroots level as the thoughts of a desperate man.

Many academics see the change in schools structure through the introduction of academies and free schools as a means disrupting the strength of the teaching unions rather than the forthright policy to improve our educational standards.

Playing games with GCSE versus “O” level and instigating a more rigid curriculum for state schools which are not an operational necessity in academies appear as an educational game where the rules change by the day. It is no wonder teachers are reacting badly to this level of change and conflict. It smacks of the policy from the Thatcher days when the prime intention was to break the trade unions. The history books will show this created catastrophic changes that changed the face of manufacturing in the UK entirely, and not all to the good.

If the educational policy is now to break the teaching unions they have almost succeeded through subterfuge. The countless failed initiatives have driven the life out of the teaching profession. Changes to the GCSE and a tightening of the curriculum have met with scorn and a series of negative votes in the confidence of the system. Schools can opt to become academies or free schools and avoid the full ramifications of the curriculum. Targets are changed and an element of teaching freedom is induced. But is this just an element of capitulation by the department for education. The choice to opt out is not being taken lightly by schools. The initial take-up, fell well short of the predictions but could be an indication many schools are waiting to see what happens to the vanguard. If the situation of the ailing confidence in the Department for Education continues, and it sees no signs of abating, it may be a means to an end. If schools shift to academy status to reclaim a sense educational reason and control then the work of the department will have been achieved. The criticism will decay and it will become a third party’s fault.

It is not beyond the wit of man to develop and maintain an educational programme that is fit for purpose. We live in ever changing world as did our forefathers. Whatever they did in to educate their children over the previous millennium still waits to be ameliorated. In comparison to medical science and technology education appears to have stalled, completely, and this is travesty that will haunt us all in the future.

The question areas are

• Yellow; remembering,
• Orange; understanding,
• Red; applying,
• Green; analysing,
• Blue; educating,
• Purple; creating.

Designed to get the student to think about the answer(s) in a highly way constructive way. Ideal to get things started as a lesson ice breaker or the start of a structured answer. The question can be in any subject; science, history English literacy even maths. Their application is phenomenal and seen as a great asset by teachers and  students from primary school to university.

Colour coded Thinking Dice

Available in single packs of 6 dice for £12.49 (+VAT) or a super saver class pack of 30 packs of 6 dice for £263.75 (+VAT)

Each of the coloured dice asks a question in ascending order of thinking using Blooms revised taxonomy of thinking levels.

What is the Theory behind Thinking Dice?

Higher order Thinking:

Lower order thinking:

Benjamin Bloom was an educational theorist and teacher who studied the nature of thinking. His taxonomy has been widely used in the field of education since the 1950s. Bloom’s Taxonomy was revised in the 1990’s by a group led by Lorin Anderson, one of Bloom’s former students. The revised version is a more useful tool for teaching thinking skills. “Taxonomy” simply means                 “classification”. Bloom’s revised Taxonomy is a multi-tiered model of classifying thinking according to six cognitive levels of complexity.

The lowest three levels of Blooms revised taxonomy are: remembering, understanding, and applying. The highest three levels are: analysing, evaluating and creating. “The taxonomy is hierarchical in  the lower levels, in other words, a pupil functioning at the ‘applying’ level has also mastered the material at the ‘remembering’ and ‘understanding’ levels. It is suggested that one cannot effectively  address higher levels until those below them have been covered. It is thus effectively serial in structure, until the higher levels are achieved.

Thinking Dice use the following elements of Blooms taxonomy.

• Remembering Dice  (Yellow) This is Bloom’s lowest  level of thinking.   Enables recall of  information.
• Understanding Dice  (Orange) Bloom’s second level of lower order thinking. Promotes explanation of ideas or concepts.
• Applying Dice  (Red)  Transition level from lower order thinking to higher order thinking Engages students in using information in another situation.
• Analysing Dice (Green)  Higher order thinking. Encourages the student to break information into parts to explore understanding and relationships.
• Evaluating Dice (Blue)  Higher order thinking. Guides the student to justify a decision or course of action.
• Creating Dice (Purple)  Higher order thinking. Challenges the student to generate new ideas,  products or ways of doing things.

At this time of year with exams looming the focus on academic achievement becomes more intense. Our teaching resources, responsible for the educational process are being equally examined. Targets have to be achieved to prevent retribution by OFSTED. And common with a relegated football team the recovery for a school classed as “improvement required” becomes an all-consuming vortex. Key players (teachers) seek to pursue careers elsewhere and supporters (parents) become less compassionate.

A school that is in trouble can recover but it is not an easy task. The quest to employ the best teachers to induce the requisite educational standards can become insurmountable. Why join a struggling school and suffer undue stress that any recovery will entail. The temptation for any school in this situation is to bend the rules. Children do not then become educated but merely taught how to pass tests and exams. Targets are met, schools become reclassified and students are cast into the wide world with a very narrow band in their knowledge.

The growth in the number of tutors is a further indication of what is going wrong. Children only require tutors if their educational progress is sub standard. Is this the fault of the school, the teacher or the system? And then the question of social equality. Affluent parents can afford to potentially correct any failure in their child’s ability, poorer parents cannot. But the bottom line is why the fault occurred in the first place. Schools have a job to do and need the best teaching resources and a relevant curriculum to achieve it. Targets are a cover up that masks the true achievement. Manipulation of the facts through skilled drilling in exam techniques masks the lack of depth in a child’s education. The school may appear progressive the reality is they have disguised the truth. The performance pressure may be reduced but the school is producing children ill equipped for the future.

Lord Winston announced he is reluctant to recruit individuals with a first-class honours degree. He feels they have spent so much time concentrating on the narrow band of a subject to achieve a first such graduates lack the broad brush education and failed to develop other interests at university. This epitomises the “teach to test” and tutored exam techniques emerging at primary and secondary schools. Education is all about preparing children for adulthood. Careers and parenthood skills need to develop with the changing world in which we now live. It is pointless giving children a false impression of education merely to pass exams. If they lack the broad brush of learning their ability to adapt and progress will be severally limited.

Everything from pond dipping to studying bugs under a magnifying glass creates a wonderment of the creatures that live around us. The enlarged view lets children experience the intricate detail that is invisible to the naked eye. The keen2learn range covers insect nets, bottom dragging nets and bug collectors as well as magnifying glasses and specimen viewers.

Pooter bug hunter

Intermag specimen viewer

bottom dragging net

]]> http://www.keen2learn.co.uk/news/teacher-info/children-see-bugs-close-up-through-biology-games/feed/ 0 http://www.keen2learn.co.uk/news/teacher-info/children-see-bugs-close-up-through-biology-games/ http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/keen2learn/~3/92R8mVFoSdY/ http://www.keen2learn.co.uk/news/opinion/friendly-fire-by-educational-secretary/#comments Fri, 19 Apr 2013 15:58:34 +0000 Alistair http://www.keen2learn.co.uk/news/?p=3295 Who would want to be a teacher, more importantly who would want to be a student in the UK at the moment? Ever since his appointment as Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove seems to be lobbing mortars into our teaching resources in an attempt to instigate fundamental changes.

Common with the military application of this weapon it is designed to maim and terrorise rather than mend. The onslaught by Education Secretary has had a disastrous effect on teachers. Moral has slipped, stress has increased and a colossal number of teachers have left the profession. Educational initiatives have come and gone, perhaps they were strategically designed to weaken the enemy than achieve a breakthrough in education.

The recent Easter conferences held by the teaching unions heralded distrust in the government’s approach and threatened industrial action. Crucial to the evolution of our educational programme is its total integration with the teaching resources and its relevance to the future needs of the UK. Our performance, measured against targets set in the UK is lamentable. But targets are by default open to manipulation, which defeat their purpose. Emphatic reliance on such data would be horribly flawed. What is required is a fundamental review of the educational programme designed to stretch our children to match the demands of a now truly global market and the evolving needs of the UK. This has to be achieved in close association with teachers. Their intimate involvement in the design and construction of the programme is surely no great shock. If you want the system to work you have to lead not demand.

At the moment our Secretary of State for Education seems dramatically out of touch with his troops. He is lobbing mortars on teachers, achieving nothing but bloodshed. Of course there is a battle to be won. Our position in the world educational league tables is appalling. The rising stars in educational programmes are seen in the Far East and Scandinavia. Issues surrounding the curriculum, length of the school day and holidays are the latest mortars to land. And for good measure a final barrage announced teaching assistants, all 220,000 of them could end up on the scrap heap.

The teacher strikes in Denmark and adverse reaction in France to the increased school working day appeared to have encouraged rather than dissuade a similar strategy by the Educational Secretary of State.Teachers are backed into a corner and like a wounded animal can only attack to defend themselves. The resultant impasse could take months to resolve. In the meantime a cohort of children will be devoid of their education, a situation that will do absolutely nothing to jack the UK back up the educational league tables.

Maybe the best strategy is for Michael Gove to be relieved of his cabinet duties and allowed to concentrate solely on developing an educational strategy he, the teachers, children and future employers will be proud of. An educational plan fit for purpose developed in close association and agreement with the guys who will implement it, and those who will benefit from it. Now that’s a novel concept.

Estelle Morris has always been a heroine in my eyes. As Secretary of State for Education she had the immense strength of character to resign in October 2002 saying that the job was too much for her and it did not deserve second-best. This statement was made despite her significant credentials and teaching experience. In these days of overpaid chief executives whose competence comes into serious doubt, yet hang on in the post, Estelle Morris created a landmark for honest and true people to follow.

Regrettably very few have had the courage to make the same declaration.I include in this category a number of subsequent Secretaries of State for Education who have been appointed, sometimes on a very short tenure, who failed to leave a lasting mark on the educational programme for the UK.

My opinion of Estelle Morris was confirmed by the recent publication of her thoughts and opinion on the negative effects of competition in schools and especially the development of free schools in the UK. Granted free school will enlist the talents and enthusiasm of a new breed of school governance but no one knows how or if this will last. This new development in the alternative operation of schools smacks of a policy that is far too open to the whims of enthusiasts whose commitment to the school could disappear as fast they appeared. Because they are single units aiming to improve the schooling opportunity in a particular catchment area they could be devastated by changes in population or social change. As Estelle Morris points out no one will be a position to plan any expansion needs. Schools will open and close far more readily as this FAD evolves or is replaced.

The educational system of the future in its various guises could fragment with schools pursuing options that are advantageous to their operation and abandoning national themes. I believe there are startling precedents that free schools and the Department for Educational should consider. When care for the elderly passed as an option to private companies a significant number of nursing homes were rapidly established. In theory, with a captive market they could not fail. The growing aging population would present itself at the door of the homes as customers. Yet behind the scenes lay an operational nightmare.

Staffing levels and competence became their Achilles heel. Getting the right number of qualified and experienced staff for the salaries being paid proved their downfall. Staff turnover became phenomenal. Care homes opened with a flourish and closed after a few years operation as costs rose and profit fell. Individual home were at as much risk as the slick multiple homes operations. As profits fell the payroll was adjusted downwards to balance the books. Staff turnover became even more horrendous. Staff left to seek better wages; training suffered as staff were needed operationally and could not be spared for development. The service level plunged and the many tales of horror started to emerge from many nursing homes.

A similar situation could occur in free schools. They will have to be competitive to survive and this could be their downfall. Staffing ability and moral will be crucial but without a national pay scale and an interrelationship with other schools to exchange academic ideas the better staff will leave to develop their career, inevitably seeking the highest reward. This could inject a teacher churn rate that will leave any school floundering. Standards could drop and place a free school in jeopardy as parents seek to relocate their children.

The introduction of academies, commercial operations and free schools has invoked an element of market forces previously only seen by independent schools. Although Independent schools have a reputation for high standards they also have to function as a commercial operation. In the current economic climate many have suffered, some terminally as parents move children to lower cost state school option. Estelle Morris’s believes the new school structure could invoke issues previously not seen in the state education. Free schools with their isolated structure could be at the greatest risk. And with the ebb and flow of suspect initiatives from the Department For Education she may be proven horribly right.

Michael Gove kicked off, or was rather kicked around with his new stiffer curriculum. Designed to stop the continuing decline in educational standards, as measured against overseas achievements, the new educational regime has been viewed by the teaching profession as being substantially flawed. Human nature abhors change but the reaction from our teaching resources is so deep rooted it begs the question why the Secretary of State for Education failed in advance to consult those whose will implement the changes. Suffering a vote of no confidence at the conference is a stark wake up to somebody upon whose shoulders rides the future of millions of school children. Getting it so wrong begs the question whether this was arrogance, incompetence or an intense desire to bring UK schooling standards in line with achievements in the Far East. Could be it is all three.

The teachers unions, notably the NUT, want a modification to their working week. They believe that 20 hours teaching in class and 10 hours preparation time would improve the quality of teaching. A brave move especially as the French government is proposing to increase the teaching hours in school for primary schoolchildren. A difficult call in the present economic climate where the desire to improve quality may be overwhelmed by negative press. Certainly the educational conflict in Denmark,  where all  schools have been closed in a battle with the Danish Government, if emulated in the UK will create a huge negative public backlash.

If the curriculum plan goes ahead there is a enormous risk, ironically to the weakest party. School children have suffered hugely over the years. They are the ones who have been processed through a system that has decayed to now lie the mid 20’s position in the OECD world educational league table. It is they who will compete for employment in a global market with indifferent qualifications. If the new system fails the blame effect will be in reverse order. Firstly, the students who didn’t work hard enough, then teachers who wasted time and energy on a lost cause, then the Secretary of State for education who will inevitably have moved on by then to a new position.

Clearly something needs to happen to resolve the educational deficit. Targets have been missed, educational initiatives have failed. Yet we are in the 21^st century. In the time frame where we have seen phenomenal rates of technological developments the overall quality of schooling has become stuck. The number of good schools available has remained static, oversubscribed, and causing frustration to parents anxious to do well by their children. But there are a number of own goals, changes in society have significantly influenced children’s behaviour in the classroom and impaired their ability to learn. The historic unquestioned authority of the teacher has been challenged by the unruly and many a good academic teacher has fallen by the wayside.

The new curriculum takes the issue by the horns. Designed to set a steeper learning curve it aims to increase the level of attainment in content and understanding in primary and secondary school. But reaction from teachers say the level set is too high and the gap with the current standards too wide. If we are to succeed there needs to be a steady ramp upwards towards the new standard. This would avoid the possibility of too many teachers, schools and children falling by the wayside. It would also overcome the dreadful consequence that if in 10 years time no improvement had been seen it will prove once again the changes to the curriculum are yet another failed initiative.

Alistair Owens

A significant difference of opinion is currently raging in France between the Ministry of Education and the teaching resources in primary schools. France is concerned that, in common with the UK, they too are sliding down the only OECD world league table in education. Currently they lie in 29th position out of 45 countries for reading skills in 10 year olds. Before we crow too much Britain lies in the mid 20s for most subjects but is slightly ahead of France in reading skills where we hold 11th place.

The process of learning practice, long recognised as an essential factor in learning retention has become socially divisive say the French Ministry of Education. Setting reading homework in primary school as a means of improving the reading standards should be curtailed as it will be mostly those in better off homes that would comply placing children from poorer families at a disadvantage. Instead the Ministry of Education want to improve reading skills by adding an extra half-day per week to the school teaching programme in primary schools.

Vincent Peillon the Educational Minister of France said the reforms would give “teachers time to teach and children time to learn”. He pointed out that 100,000 young French people currently leave school each year without qualifications and said change has been long overdue until now “no one has had the courage to do it.”

This issue has caused considerable alarm within the teaching resources who are now angered at the increased workload and believe that these changes will not help. They are additionally angered by the Ministers further proposal to shorten summer holidays from eight weeks to six weeks as a further means of improving the quality of primary schooling.

This radical move, which has clearly shaken the corridors of teaching resources in France, has yet to be accepted. Threatened strikes by teachers are almost a forgone conclusion. How many workers would openly accept working harder for longer without a fight? Yet at least it is a radical plan designed to implant a paradigm shift in the programme without which I would imagine little could be achieved. Negotiations are bound to be fraught but the stakes are high for the children involved. The alternative programme is clearly not working and without a substantial shake of the tree little else can be achieved. If only we had such a plan to turn the fortunes of the UK schooling programme around. And then stuck to it.

Alistair Owens

]]> http://www.keen2learn.co.uk/news/opinion/french-teaching-resources-riled-in-plans-to-lift-reading-skills/feed/ 0 http://www.keen2learn.co.uk/news/opinion/french-teaching-resources-riled-in-plans-to-lift-reading-skills/