Source: The Conversation – UK – By Beng Huat See, Professor of Education Research, School of Education, University of Birmingham
Our experts have been digging into the detail of the government’s proposed education reforms, published on 23 February, which include measures to improve teacher recruitment, student achievement and belonging at school. Here’s what they thought.
Read more:
Send reform: will the government’s plans work for children, parents and teachers? Experts react
Improving engagement with school
Simon Edwards, Senior Lecturer in Youth Studies, University of Portsmouth
A central tenet of the government’s new education proposals is building confidence in the education system as a pathway to economic and personal wellbeing. As part of this, the proposed policy includes a focus on addressing the persistent and alarming increase in school exclusions and absence of disadvantaged pupils, many of whom have special educational needs and disabilities.
The proposals include taking a broader, multi-agency approach including experts from beyond the school, such as speech and language therapists, educational psychologists and wider professionals to address the many factors that lead to poor behaviour, educational disengagement and subsequent school exclusion. This recognises the complexity of special educational needs and the issues surrounding disadvantage that extend beyond the school gates.
Underpinning these changes though, is an iron fist in a velvet glove approach. Here, inclusion will be supported with “refreshed behaviour resources”. The underlying message is to comply or feel the consequences.
Moreover, the focus on multi-agency working, although taking much pressure from teaching staff and includes parents in discussions, takes a top-down approach to addressing the child’s and their family’s needs. This risks disempowering parents and further alienating them and their children from the very sense of belonging and inclusion that this policy aims to address. I’m not convinced that this approach will reduce behavioural issues and exclusion rates in the way it intends.
Current research identifies and promotes teaching practices that place the relationships between teacher, parent and pupils at the heart of education.
With this in mind, pupil behaviour and exclusions might be more positively addressed by reducing teacher workload. This would allow teachers to spend more time building and maintaining relationships with pupils and parents. Building an understanding of their needs more fully would allow teachers to adapt teaching approaches and build in the right support from the ground up.
Teacher recruitment and retention
Beng Huat See, Professor of Education Research, University of Birmingham
The government’s policy announcements for schools in England are accompanied by a plan for recruiting the 6,500 more teachers promised in Labour’s election manifesto. One of the approaches is to widen routes into teaching. This proposal is not new, and the announcements provide little clarity on how this will be implemented.
My previous research with colleague Stephen Gorard found that some applicants were rejected simply because they applied to programmes that were not appropriate for their qualifications or experience. Expanding routes further, without simplifying or rationalising the system, risks compounding this problem rather than improving recruitment.
To encourage former teachers to return, the government also proposes supplementing current provision with a step-by-step guide offering advice on applications, interviews, classroom experience and updates on changes in the profession. While supportive in principle, it is unclear whether these are the main barriers. Prior research suggests that many returners seek part-time or flexible working arrangements. In practice, schools have often been unable or unwilling to accommodate such flexibility, limiting successful re-entry.
Read more:
Why UK government policies have failed to recruit enough teachers for years
In a bid to bring greater diversity to teaching, the government proposes anonymising applications. This is a positive step, but it is insufficient. Candidates still appear before interview panels, where visible characteristics such as ethnicity or accent may influence perceptions. The policy proposals do not go far enough in addressing structural barriers, including racial stereotyping, where assumptions about capability are shaped by ethnicity rather than performance evidence.
My research with colleagues shows that ethnic minority teachers are more likely to be appointed by leaders of the same background, indicating that unconscious bias continues to shape recruitment and constrain equal opportunity.
Some minority ethnic teachers are more likely to have requests for continued professional development rejected compared to white colleagues. They may also be less likely to be encouraged to apply for promotion than their white colleagues.
Rawpixel.com/Shutterstock
Closing the attainment gap
Stephen Gorard, Professor of Education and Public Policy, Durham University
The government is pledging to halve the poverty attainment gap during its term. The attainment gap is the difference in scores between disadvantaged pupils and the rest, at key stage two (age 11) or key stage four (age 16).
This is both commendable and feasible. However, the government also plans to change the current definition of temporary disadvantage (ever eligible for free school meals in the past six years) to one based on low income over a sustained period of time.
Using the depth and duration and poverty is an improvement to the current situation that I have been advocating for many years. Using household income could also be an improvement on the binary threshold indicator of free school meals.
However, it is not then clear what the halving of the gap refers to. The gap as it stands does not use income but free school meals, so the pledge has not been meaningfully defined.
It is also not clear that the data available on household income is yet good enough quality to sustain real-life policy. The data is better for those families currently claiming benefits, but inaccurate for many others. Using the current data might simply disguise that the binary threshold is still being used.
More support for the youngest children
Cate Carroll, Executive Dean of the Faculty of Education and Social Sciences and Professor of Education and Pedagogy, Liverpool Hope University
Today’s policy announcements recognise the critical period of early years education. The investment of over £200 million in the Best Start Family Hub network, meaning that hubs will have dedicated expertise in Send and a staff member to act as an outreach and support person, is welcome. It begins to rebuild the local hubs formerly known as Sure Start, which made a real difference to children’s lives.
The policy focuses on families as the primary educators of children – they are placed at the centre of the child’s home and school experience. This is important because parents know their children and are the best advocates for their needs.
Sometimes, though, ensuring a fair partnership in the conversation between parents and professionals can be difficult. Parents are experts about their children, while professionals bring expertise aligned with their profession and training.
The funding targeted towards early identification of children who have special educational needs and disabilities is also vital. International research backs early intervention as key to ensuring that children’s learning and development needs are appropriately identified. More often that not, this is identified in nurseries, so it is critical that this funding captures this phase of education in addition to schools.
This comes with the challenge of training staff working with children in the early years foundation stage so they are appropriately qualified to identify additional needs. By the time children start school, sometimes the interventions are too late to enable them to achieve and thrive.
Beng Huat See receives funding from the Economic and Social Research Council.
Cate Carroll is affiliated with OMEP World Organisation for Early Childhood, Vice President for OMEP World, European Region.
Simon Edwards receives funding from Charles Plater Trust / SLN-COP. He is affiliated with OCR Sociology Forum / OCR EDiP Belonging and Stakeholder group.
Stephen Gorard has received funding from the ESRC and DfE for research that might be relevant to this article.
– ref. Major education reforms in England unveiled – here’s what the experts think – https://theconversation.com/major-education-reforms-in-england-unveiled-heres-what-the-experts-think-276785