Benchmarking

As is usual, the run up to the Easter break brings a clutch of education stories, partly fuelled by the arrival of the conference season for the main teacher associations. Governments of all colours probably always worry about the bad publicity they will expect at this time of year, as much is made of the poor state of health of the school system in England.

This year is proving to be no different to usual, with school funding, teachers’ pay and workload and children’s mental health all taking the headlines, along with testing and its associated consequence of off-rolling, a term unknown to the general public before the last few months, but now probably bidding to be the new word of 2019. What I haven’t heard is anything about education’s contribution to the climate change emergency. Should it feature more in the curriculum and what practical steps ought schools to be taking? In my post headed ‘gas cooking’, I suggested school students might like to conduct an audit of their schools to see what changes should be introduced.

Opposition parties are always quick to say there isn’t enough funding for schools, and I am happy to support their claims. This blog has regularly charted the decline in the level of reserves across maintained schools and the growth in the number of schools with deficits rather than cash balances. However, there are still schools with balances, some quite large in cash terms. How can this be, in an under-funded system? Is the balance between funding based upon pupil numbers, and that designed to cover the cost of ensuring a schools remains open regardless of changes in pupil numbers, right in the new formula now being introduced?

I especially worry about small rural schools, and my concerns have been shared by officials in North Yorkshire as detailed in another recent post on this blog. There needs to be some national benchmarks over finance that governing bodies can measure their schools against on a regular basis. The DfE has already done some good work here, but it needs to do more. At the heart of the debate may be the decision, made way back in the early days of delegated budgets, to fund schools on average salary levels and not actual cash amounts. Thus, schools with young teachers paid less than average benefit, but schools with teachers at the top of the pay scales find funding inadequate to meet their salary bills. The real squeeze on 16-18 funding hasn’t helped either, as many schools deploy their most expensive staff to teach this age-group.

Should we abolish tests in the primary school? There certainly shouldn’t be tests that stress, pupils, teachers and families. However, the data already shows that many disadvantaged pupils fare less well in our system than their more fortunate classmates. I would not want that fact to be lost. We have emerged from a culture when expectations of some children were low, and as a result not much was achieved. Don’t, please let us go back there. Humane, reasonable, tests backed by effective resources and a better use of emerging technologies can create a future golden age as we approach the 150th anniversary of state funded school in in England. Such  a system might be better at attracting and retaining its teachers in what is now a global marketplace.

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “Benchmarking

  1. Labour wants to scrap existing primary tests and replace them with an assessment system devised after consultation with teachers and parents. Sounds sensible if it’s followed through. Gove made a similar promise to scrap Sats before the 2010 election but did the opposite by making them even more high stake and, allegedly, more ‘rigorous’ (is testing children on what ministers, especially Nick Gibb, think children should have learnt).

    It cost £43m to run primary school national curriculum assessments last year. That’s a lot of money to waste on test with no educational value.

    https://www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2019/04/primary-tests-cost-43m-last-year-minister-admits

    • Janet,

      Good to hear from you. If PISA is an up to date form of Labour’s 1970s Assessment of Performance Unit approach – sampling for a benchmark that allows schools to match themselves against at a much lower cost then let’s devise something new. But, the disadvantaged were not winners when there were no tests.

      Have a good Easter break.

      John

  2. Hello,

    Please can I ask what the latest intelligence is on the state of the primary undergraduate market. We can see that since 2010 there has been a 54% drop in recruitment in London butt wondered how this compares regionally and nationally.

    Thank you very much,
    Matt

    • Mark,

      Difficult to tell at this point in the year because of changes when results come out and the effects of ‘clearing’. From a provider point of view undergraduate numbers are worth more than postgraduate if the student stays for three years although not as much as if an undergraduate on another course stays on for a fourth year to complete a PGCE.

      Should fees be cut back by the government that would change the economics of both UG and PG courses and possibly make ITT non-viable in some circumstances, especially for small groups.

      John Howson

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s