tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-47469016583703011672024-03-18T10:39:13.092-07:00When 140 Characters Isn't EnoughSam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.comBlogger57125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-60122802066693245112021-09-20T10:04:00.003-07:002021-09-20T10:04:38.239-07:00<p> </p><p>Articles written in 2021:</p><p><br /></p><p>Tortoise:</p><p><a href="https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2021/06/08/the-treasury-is-failing-schoolchildren/">The Treasury is Failing Schoolchildren</a></p><p><a href="https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2021/06/24/the-red-wall-is-not-reactionary/">The Red Wall is Not Reactionary</a></p><p><a href="https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2021/07/14/dominic-cummings-is-mostly-right-about-the-problems-wrong-about-the-solutions/">Dominic Cummings is Right About the Problems; Wrong About the Solutions</a></p><p><a href="https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2021/09/06/social-care-is-only-the-start-of-rishi-sunaks-problems/">Social Care is Only the Start of Sunak's Problems</a></p><p><br /></p><p>New Statesman:</p><p><a href="https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2021/01/urgent-action-plan-mitigate-damage-school-closures">An urgent action plan to mitigate the damage of school closures</a></p><p><a href="https://www.newstatesman.com/author/sam-freedman">How Gavin Williamson's exams fix makes everything worse</a></p><p><a href="https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2021/08/our-fear-algorithms-has-undermined-year-s-level-grades-and-failed">Our fear of algorithms has undermined this year's A-levels</a></p><p><a href="https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/education/2021/09/the-uk-government-hasnt-even-begun-to-confront-its-huge-education-challenge">The Government hasn't begun to confront its education challenge</a></p><p><br /></p><p>Evening standard:</p><p><a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/williamson-gavin-exams-cancelled-covid-b900615.html">Williamson messed up last summer and now he's repeating the mistake</a></p><p><a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/dominic-cummings-ira-slogan-plot-david-cameron-sam-freedman-b937780.html">Diary on Dominic Cummings </a></p><p><a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/mess-avoidable-young-people-bear-brunt-a-level-results-day-2021-b949985.html">The A Level Mess was avoidable and young people will bear the brunt</a></p><p><br /></p><p>FT:</p><p><a href="https://www.ft.com/content/24268579-bb8c-4224-a8cb-38c179559d01">An opportunity to radically rethink school exams </a></p><p><br /></p><p>TES:</p><p><a href="https://www.tes.com/news/reshuffle-nadhim-zahawi-education-priorities-teachers">The key issues for Nadhim Zahawi</a></p><p><br /></p><p>Institute for Government:</p><p><a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/gavin-williamson-must-end-covid-chaos-classroom">A long term education plan is needed </a></p><p><a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/gavin-williamson-must-end-covid-chaos-classroom">Gavin Williamson must end the Covid chaos</a></p><p>Longer report: <a href="https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/school-exams-2022-and-beyond">Covid Tests - Schools and Exams in 2022 and Beyond</a></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p><p><br /></p>Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-57794177729726549412020-03-14T02:08:00.001-07:002020-03-14T02:26:07.469-07:00Covid-19 resources<br />
<br />
<br />
The Worldometer pages have real time data on confirmed cases and mortality by country <a href="https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/">here</a>. You can click through to country level data and charts. There are also pages with data on additional data on age, sex, pre-existing conditions etc.<br />
<br />
The John Hopkins<a href="https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6"> tracker</a> isn't quite as real time but has a good visualization of cases around the world.<br />
<br />
WHO daily situation reports - which give complete day by day tables - including whether there are cases of local transmission in any country - can be found <a href="https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/situation-reports">here</a>.<br />
<br />
World in Data have a great <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus">site</a> showing the speed at which confirmed cases are doubling in different countries and estimates on test coverage.<br />
<br />
Nextstrain have an incredible site <a href="https://nextstrain.org/ncov">tracking</a> the genomic epidemiology - scroll down for a map showing transmissions tracked globally through genetic mutations.<br />
<br />
WHO have a <a href="https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/global-research-on-novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov">database </a>of all academic publications on Covid-19 which also has links to all the main academic publishers who have made their articles on the topic free to access (e.g. Elsevier <a href="https://www.elsevier.com/connect/coronavirus-information-center">here</a>)<br />
<br />
The Lancet is collating all the articles it's publishing on the topic <a href="https://www.thelancet.com/coronavirus">here</a><br />
<br />
My twitter list of experts from epidemiology; virology; modelling; science journalism etc... is <a href="https://twitter.com/i/lists/1238195614434934785">here</a>.Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com116tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-89662118678791038492017-12-11T11:04:00.000-08:002017-12-11T13:51:29.485-08:00Top books of 2017<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Non-Fiction:</span><br />
<br />
This year I've found myself more and more drawn to ancient history. For some reason I'd always dismissed it as a bit dull compared to modern history - all those coins and bits of pot - but inspired by Tom Holland and Peter Frankopan in particular I've realised how much I've been missing out on.<br />
<br />
This year my classical education began with what is technically a novel but so close to history as to feel worthy of this section - <b>Augustus by John Williams</b>. Williams is more famous for Stoner but for me Augustus is the better book; I'd place it alongside Gore Vidal's Julian and Creation<i> </i>as one of the all time great novels set in the classical era. It's written as a series of diary extracts, letters and speeches from Augustus's closest associates, most poignantly his daughter Julia, who he exiled to a barren island for her polyamorous lifestyle.<br />
<br />
Spurred back into Roman history I read <b>Mary Beard's SPQR </b>- an excellent overview from the foundation of Rome to 212 AD when all men in the Roman Empire were given citizenship. Covering almost a millennium in just over 500 pages means it's pretty high level in places but it's a perfect introduction to the period. I have Beard's Confronting the Classics on my list for next year.<br />
<br />
Later in the year I read Tom Holland's wonderful new translation of <b>Herodotus's Histories</b>, which was remarkably fresh for a book 2500 years old. The description of the Babylonian marriage market will stay with me for a long time. I read this alongside <b>And Man Created God by Selina O'Grady</b>, an arresting guide to the development of early religion across the ancient world. I'm currently working my way through <b>Edward Gibbon's classic Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire</b>, which, at 3.5k pages should keep me busy over Christmas. Even though many of his conclusions have been surpassed by later historians it's stylistically so beautiful that it's worth reading for the language alone, as well as the deeply snarky footnotes. He'd have been a twitter natural.<br />
<br />
The best modern history I read this year was the third (of a planned six) in <b>David Kynaston's</b> "New Jerusalem" series covering British social history from the end of the war to Thatcher's rise to power. <b>Modernity Britain </b>covers 1957-62 and shows in stunning detail how technology, demographics and politics were morphing society, often against the strongly traditionalist sentiments of much of the population. He is particularly strong on schools (rare for me to say that about a non-education specialist) and housing - where he shows how the disastrous trend towards high-rise tower blocks came about, with scant regard for the views of people who'd actually have to live there. Every MP, and aspiring politico, should read this series if they want to understand the origins of contemporary social policy debates.<br />
<br />
I'd also strongly recommend <b>John Bew's Citizen Clem</b> - one of the best modern British political biographies I've read. Attlee was a famously private man who left no diaries and few letters, his memoirs are almost comically repressed and unrevealing, so Bew tries to capture him through his intellectual interests in empire, social reform and poetry. Combined with the recollections of his peers this works triumphantly succeeds in casting Attlee as one of the great figures of 20th century British history - combining clear-eyed patriotism, a steely belief in individual responsibility and a deeply held commitment to socialism. A combination - Bew is not afraid to point out - sadly lacking in today's politics.<br />
<br />
The first two volumes of <b>Charles Moore's Thatcher biography</b> were surprisingly balanced for someone who's Telegraph pieces often read like Littlejohn with a thesaurus. They're broadly favourable towards an undeniably transformational politician but don't hide away from her personal and political failings. His idiosyncratic decision to introduce every character with a footnote showing their educational background is a powerful demonstration of the deep iniquity in our school system.<br />
<br />
I also enjoyed <b>Richard Evans's Pursuit of Power</b> - a comprehensive trawl through 19th century European political, social and cultural history - and <b>The Deluge by Adam Tooze</b>, a complex look at the post-WW1 failure of global leadership that plunged the world into deeper darkness.<br />
<br />
I only read a couple of books on contemporary politics this year - <b>Tim Shipman's Fall Out</b> - was just as good as last year's All Out War - an excellent case study in how not to run an election campaign (or indeed anything). I hope for the sake of Tim's sanity that 2018 avoids any elections/referenda. I'd also recommend another, more personal, study of an election that went wrong: <b>Hillary Clinton's What Happened</b>. A funny and bitter insight into how she coped with losing to the ghastly orange baby. The section on the continuing misogyny of the political world seems even more unanswerable after the post-Weinstein scandals; though, oddly, some on the left seem to want to think her loss was purely down to a lack of ideological fervour.<br />
<br />
Outside of history and politics my favourite this year was <b>Michael Lewis's Undoing Project </b>on Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, whose theories on behavioural economics have transformed multiple disciplines. Some of the sections on the protaganists' relationship are deeply moving and the explanations of their ideas are clear and concise. The only problem with the book is it's too short - it feels like he's missed out several chapters of material at the end by fast forwarding several decades.<br />
<br />
<b>Originals by Adam Grant </b>was a rare business/leadership book that didn't make me want to throw it straight in the bin - some interesting ideas on building trust and culture in organisations. <b>Signifying Rappers</b> was a wonderful little book <b>David Foster Wallace </b>wrote with a friend early in his career - its analysis of hip-hop culture was uncannily prescient. My favourite comic at the moment is <b>Stewart Lee and his How I Escaped my Certain Fate</b> is a fascinating mix of memoir and annotated stand-up that gives an unusual insight into how comedy works.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Fiction:</span><br />
<br />
The best fiction I read this year was <b>Middlemarch</b>. I'd gone through life imagining it was a extremely dreary provincial melodrama - a sort of Victorian Archers. It's actually a very funny, even acidic, study of universal archetypes. Along with Charlotte Bronte's Villette it's probably the best novel I've read by an English author. The other "classic" I read this year was <b>Les Miserables by Victor Hugo</b> which has sublime passages - especially early on - but badly needed a better editor. The last third of the book (400 pages) was a real drag.<br />
<br />
My favourite contemporary novel of the year was <b>Laurent Binet's HHhH </b>- a post-modern take on the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich but a hell of lot better, and funnier, than that makes it sound. Binet manages to hold the suspense of the historical drama (even though I knew what happened) while simultaneously running a commentary on what he's doing. It's very clever. I also read Binet's follow-up<b> The 7th Function of Language</b> - which is much less accessible - I wouldn't bother unless you really enjoy French post-structuralist in-jokes. However, it did inspire me to read <b>Umberto Eco's Foucault's Pendulum</b> (Eco is a character in the Binet book) which is engagingly bonkers and highly learned at the same time.<br />
<br />
I found <b>Francis Spufford's Golden Hill </b>a bit disappointing given all the hype. It's very readable but I guessed the twist halfway through and I was expecting something a bit less obvious. Good for the beach though. <b>Robert Harris's Officer and A Spy</b> on the Dreyfuss case was another great beach read (again suspenseful even though I know the story - how does he do that?) As were <b>Don Winslow's superb, brutal, Power of the Dog and Cartel </b>on the Mexican drug wars (thanks for the recommendation Chris Deerin).<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;">Other books I read this year:</span><br />
<br />
<b>The Inevitable by Kevin Kelly</b> - dreary futurist nonsense - no idea why I bothered.<br />
<b>Creativity Inc by Ed Catmull</b> - leadership advice from Pixar founder - entirely generic.<br />
<b>Electric Shock by Peter Doggett</b> - pretty entertaining guide to the history of pop music.<br />
<b>I want my MTV</b> - an oral history of the early years of MTV - quite niche.<br />
<b>A Perfect Spy by John Le Carre </b>- I really wanted to like it but I was bored by the end.<br />
<b>Respectable by Lynsey Hanley</b> - interesting ideas on class, more an elongated essay than a book.<br />
<b>A History of the World in 100 Objects</b> by Neil McGregor - does what it says on the tin.<br />
<b>Liberty or Death by Peter McPhee</b> - a new history of the French Revolution. Not particularly revolutionary.<br />
<b>His Dark Materials by Phillip Pullman</b> - read again after 20 years in preparation for the new series.<br />
<b>Origin of our Species by Chris Stringer</b> - engaging introduction to human evolution.<br />
<b>A History of Histories by John Burrow</b> - good introduction to historiography.<br />
<b>The Unathorised Version by Robin Lane Fox </b>- quirky review of the historical accuracy of the bible.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com175tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-58746293424704573342016-12-12T11:59:00.002-08:002016-12-14T11:29:53.622-08:00My top 15 books of 2016<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
For the last five years I've written down every book I read, partly for the obvious reason that otherwise I'd forget, but also because I'm lazy and it's a really easy way to keep a diary. Looking at the book I was reading on any given date gives me the context to recreate everything else I was doing then - who I was with; where I was etc...etc..</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Anyway I read roughly 40-50 books a year so I've gone through this year's list and picked my top 15 in case you're stuck for some holiday reading or a Christmas present. In the order in which I read them....</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>1) Between the World and Me by Ta-Nehisi Coates</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Written as a letter to his son this short, emotionally-charged book looks at the history of American racism through episodes in the author's life. Inspired by James Baldwin and, I'd say, just as good as anything he wrote, it won the US National Book Award in 2015.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>2) The Swerve by Stephen Greenblatt</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Coincidentally another National Book Award winner this is a history of the rediscovering of Lucretius's "On the Nature of Things" and about 100 times more interesting than that sounds. I knew nothing about the original poem or about the late medieval book hunters who saved such treasures from extinction. I'd have liked a broader discussion about the poem's place in the Renaissance - the recent historiography of which Greenblatt pretty much ignores - but it's fascinating on its own terms.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>3) The Iron Wall by Avi Shlaim</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I've been searching for years for a scrupulously fair guide to Israeli/Arab conflict in a field where so many books are written from a deeply partisan perspective. The best I'd found before was Ahron Bregman's "Cursed Victory" but that only covers more recent decades. The Iron Wall takes us all the way from the founding of Israel to the present day and shows compellingly how the remorseless logic of Israeli politics, combined with the weaknesses of Palestinian leaders has made peace impossible. It's difficult to come away from reading it with any hope that a solution can be found.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>4) Second-Hand Time by Svetlana Alexievich </b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The best book I read this year. One of the best books I've ever read. Alexievich's unique style involves weaving hundreds of interviews into a complex narrative that, in this case, tells the story of Post Soviet Russia. Individually the stories are interesting and moving but somehow she turns the collective into something equivalent to the best modernist literature. It was gripping, beautifully written (and translated) and also taught me more about Putin's success than any number of conventional non-fiction books. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>5) Silk Road by Peter Frankopan</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
An ambitious history of the world that takes central Asia as the centre of global movements over the ages. Taught me a huge amount about empires and civilizations that aren't mentioned in the English school curriculum including the incredible story of the Turkic Khazar tribe that converted to Judaism in the eighth century and allied with the Byzantine empire against the Persians.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>6) King of the World by David Remnick</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
When Muhammad Ali died in June reading all the tributes inspired me to read this biography of the five years between 1962-1967 when Ali, at the peak of his career, refused the draft and was banned from boxing. As well as great set piece accounts of the key fights Remnick is particularly good on Ali's relationship with Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam. I also read Thomas Hauser's more detailed biography of Ali which covers his whole career. But start with Remnick.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>7) On the Move by Oliver Sacks</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Sacks' autobiography, completed just before he died last year, offers brutally honest insights into his neuroses and paranoias as well as extraordinary descriptions of the creative process in action. He also crossed paths with any number of fascinating poets, statesmen and scientists which adds to the richness. </div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>8) Revolution 1989 by Victor Sebestyen </b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
A great history of the most important year of my life even though I didn't know it at the time (being 8). I knew the basic story of the fall of Communism but this added lots of detail about the differences between each of the Warsaw Pact countries. The complete bafflement of East German leader Erich Honecker as his world collapsed around his was particularly memorable. He even voted for his own sacking to keep up the tradition that all votes of the East German ruling council were unanimous.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>9) Submission by Michel Houllebecq</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
It's impossible to tell how tongue in cheek Houllebecq is being, which is one reason why reading his novels is simultaneously so uncomfortable yet so fun. Narrated by a typically unpleasant misogynist it has a Muslim party winning the French presidency in 2022, helped by the socialists who are desperate to block the National Front. Weirdly it was released on the day of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, garnering it even more attention than Houllebecq usually gets.</div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>10) The Kindly Ones by Jonathan Littell</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Another controversial French novel - this one from a few years ago - written from the perspective of a Nazi officer explaining, and excusing, his horrendous crimes. It's about 300 pages too long (1,000 pages in total) and drifts off badly towards the end, but the central section, in which the narrator sets out his experiences on the Eastern front, is as good as any war literature I've read. Don't read it on the train into work though. More than once I found myself sitting in an early morning meeting thinking more about the horrors of Stalingrad than whatever I was supposed to be concentrating on.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>11) All out War by Tim Shipman</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I have absolutely no idea how Shipman was able to write a fluent, comprehensive, 600 page guide to the crazy events of our political summer in a few months but somehow he did and I'm grateful. Easily the best Brexit book and particularly nostalgic for me as I worked, in a previous life, with the leaders of the Leave campaign (albeit that I was and am a Remainer).</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>12) A Different Kind of Weather by William Waldegrave</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I only read this because John Rentoul kept tweeting sections of it but it's one of the most honest political memoirs you'll find, describing the insane ambition that drives so many in Westminster from the perspective of someone who now realises how daft it all is. It's also extremely well written, which helps.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<b>13), 14) and 15) Imperium, Lustrum and Dictator by Robert Harris</b></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I'm reading Harris' trilogy on Cicero at the moment and it's absolutely wonderful. Harris expertly weaves Cicero's real speeches in with speculation about some of the key events in the history of Rome. Also, as the tale of oligarchs who use whip up cheap populism to smash the key institutions of the state it feels pretty relevant.</div>
Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com49tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-82793207367036796672016-08-21T05:09:00.001-07:002016-08-21T05:09:24.293-07:00How will GB do in Tokyo?<br />
The performance of the GB team in Rio has been exceptional but not hugely surprising. I had projected they would be third in the medal table with 22 gold medals and 56 medals overall with good chances in over 100 events. For those of us who obsessively follow Olympic sports between games it was clear that GB would be extremely competitive in a wide range of events.<br />
<br />
2nd place in the medal table was a bonus caused largely by China's decline since topping the table in Beijing - they've finished nine golds and around 15 medals below projections. And, over the longer term, the collapse of sports administration (and state doping programmes) in former USSR and Warsaw Pact countries.<br />
<br />
The decline of China is something of a warning to GB. Both China and Australia followed up home games with strong performances in the following Olympics - though GB is the first to get a higher medal total - but both then declined as politicians lost interest and funding reduced.<br />
<br />
So can GB buck the trend and continue to improve at Tokyo? A quick overview of the key sports suggests it's possible:<br />
<br />
The <b>athletics</b> team will see the greatest transition as it's unlikely that Mo Farah, Jess Ennis, Greg Rutherford and Christine Ohuruogu will appear in Tokyo. As they're responsible for nine out of GB's thirteen athletics medals in London and Rio their retirements will leave a big hole to fill. There have, though, been enough strong performances from young athletes to make it possible. On the men's side Adam Gemili (22) missed out on a 200m medal by thousands of a second. And Matt Hudson-Smith (21) made one of the most competitive 400m finals in history. Andrew Butchart (24) came fourth in the 5k behind Mo Farah becoming the third fastest Brit in history after Mo and David Moorcroft.<br />
<br />
On the women's side Dina Asher-Smith (21) came fifth in the 200m and her PB would have won a bronze. She also won a 4x100 bronze alongside two excellent 100m prospects - Desiree Henry (20) and Daryl Neita (19). Cindy Ofili (22) has had a breakthrough season this year and missed out on a 100m hurdles bronze by 0.02 hundredths of a second. Sophie Hitchon (25) won a hammer bronze with the two in front of her too old to make the next Olympics. Katarina Johnson-Thompson (23) clearly has the talent to get a heptathlon gold in Tokyo if she can conquer her nerves and look out for Morgan Lake (19) who reached the high jump final in Rio.<br />
<br />
The <b>track cycling</b> team should be more or less the same in Toyko as in Rio bar Bradley Wiggins and Mark Cavendish. And there are a whole load of young cyclists behind them waiting to step up in the case of injuries and early retirements. Look out for Lewis Oliva (24) in the men's sprint; Jon Dibben (22) and Mark Stewart (21) in the pursuit/omnium and on the women's side Emily Nelson (20) and Emily Kay (21). Whether GB is as dominant in Tokyo as in Rio/London/Beijing will depend on the rest of the world's ability to catch up.<br />
<br />
The <b>swimming</b> team probably has the greatest potential for improvement. There are 34 golds available in swimming - 2nd only to athletics - and GB have only won three this century (Becky Addlington x2 and now Adam Peaty). GB's performance in Rio was much better that London - increasing from 3 to 6 medals and another 7 fourth places - nearly all achieved by young swimmers who should be in Tokyo. Peaty is just 21 and I'd love to see him try and develop his 200m breaststroke to give him the chance of two golds in 2020. Siobhan Marie O'Connor (20) came agonisingly close to gold in the 200m individual medley and has the potential to be challenging for 3 or 4 golds in four years time.<br />
<br />
James Guy (20) came fourth in the 200m freestyle after winning the world championships last year and could be in the mix for 2 or 3 golds in four years time. Max Litchfield (21) came fourth in the 400 individual medley and has improved his PB a lot this year. As did Ben Proud (21) in the 50m freestyle. Duncan Scott (19) smashed the British record in the 100m freestyle and came fifth in the final. And Chloe Tutton (20) came fourth in the 200m breaststroke having broken the British Record earlier in the year (she'd have won a medal if the Russian Efimova's ban had been upheld days before the games). And look out for a few excellent prospects who were a bit young for Rio - Emily Large (just 15) in butterfly and Tazmin Pugh (16) in butterfly and backstroke.<br />
<br />
Collectively this is the most talented group of young swimmers outside of the US and they should peak in Tokyo - potentially winning five or six golds.<br />
<br />
The <b>gymnastics</b> squad probably had the most impressive Olympics of any GB team in Rio with almost as many medals as GB has won in all previous games. On the men's side the core of the team Max Whitlock (23), Nile Wilson (20) and Brinn Bevan (19) will be peaking in Tokyo. If they can find one more world class gymnast by then they could challenge for the all-around title (look out for Jay Thompson - 20 - to come through into the senior ranks). On the women's side it doesn't seem the US dominance will be challenged anytime soon but Amy Tinkler (16) - who won floor bronze in Rio - is a huge prospect. Look out as well for junior champions Catherine Lyons (15) and Tyesha Mattis (17) to turn the team into a real all-around medal contender.<br />
<br />
The <b>rowing</b> team were one of the few in Rio to miss their medal target even though they topped the medal table for the regatta - so certainly room for improvement. Most of the rowers in the winning men's four and men's eight crews are young enough to keep going and should be able to maintain dominance. Helen Glover (32) and Heather Stanning (33) could just about make Tokyo if they want to mount another defence of their title. The main areas for improvement are on the lightweight side where GB won no medals this time having won three in London and sculling where Katherine Grainger and Vicky Thornley were our only medalists.<br />
<br />
Elsewhere most of our Rio champions should be back to defend their titles. Nick Skelton has said he'll retire at 58; Charlotte Dujardin is certainly young enough to compete again but her horse Valegro isn't; Liam Heath is 32 so probably won't make another games; Nicola Adams will be 38 in Tokyo but hasn't ruled out staying on. Everyone else is definitely young enough to come back. Joe Clarke in kayak slalom is just 23. Double diving medalist Jack Laugher is 21 and synchro partner Chris Mears is 23. Giles Scott and Hannah Mills (though not her partner Saskia Clark) will back in the sailing. And Jade Jones (23) / Alistair Brownlee (28) will be able to defend their titles for a third time.<br />
<br />
The overall impression is that, as long as national lottery investment continues as roughly the same levels, GB should be able to perform at least as well if not better in Tokyo. If they can maintain dominance in track cycling and push on to five or six swimming golds then a target of 30+ golds and 75 medals should be achievable.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com32tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-63270421227456619682015-11-25T08:52:00.001-08:002015-11-25T11:06:19.180-08:00The 10 key education headlines from the spending review<br />
<br />
<b>Overall </b><br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<ul>
<li>The Autumn Statement was <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/479749/52229_Blue_Book_PU1865_Web_Accessible.pdf">published</a> today. Overall DfE spending will fall just 1.1% over the next four years. Even in the "unprotected" areas that were expected to be cut by around 25% reductions are much lower - somewhere between 5 and 10%. While this is much better than feared it still means providers across the sector will be seeing significant reductions in spending power over the next few years.</li>
</ul>
<br />
<br />
<b>Schools</b><br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>The 5-16 school budget is protected in real terms. This means that the amount of money currently given to schools will increase in line with expected inflation. However it does not take into account the additional 500k pupils coming into the system over the next five years so will still mean a 7-8% cut for schools (also taking into account changes to employer pensions and national insurance). This is a slightly better deal than was promised before the election.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The extra cash in the schools settlement will help the transition to the National Funding Formula which will start in 2017. There will be a consultation in Jan/Feb next year but we know it will be a phased introduction so schools that lose out won't get the full hit all at once.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>The Education Services Grant, which is currently £820m, and gives a per pupil amount to local authorities and academies to pay for a variety of services is being cut by £600m. This is the only new big cut in the DfE settlement. It will take about £90k out of the budget of a large academy. The remaining money left over will presumably be used to cover LAs statutory duties and the DfE will also look to reduce the number of statutory duties to help.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>£1.3bn over four years will be provided for teacher recruitment and training. It's pretty hard to tell what this is being compared to. But I reckon it means funding will continue more or less in line with current spending.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Capital budgets are essentially flat in cash terms. So existing maintenance and basic needs grants will stay at similar levels and the Priority Schools Rebuilding programme will continue at the same rate. The 500 free school commitment will be met.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<b>Post-16</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<br />
<ul>
<li>The base rate paid for all post-16 pupils is protected in cash terms (i.e. won't go up in line with inflation). We don't yet know if the other aspects of the post-16 formula (e.g. disadvantage) will take a greater cut. Either way it's a better outcome than many feared as this protection wasn't offered before the election.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<ul>
<li>Sixth form colleges will now be able to convert to academy status which means they won't have to pay VAT. This is a very significant saving for these colleges and helps simplify the system a bit.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
<div>
<b>Early Years</b></div>
<div>
<b><br /></b></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li>There will be an additional 15 funded hours of childcare for three and four year olds as promised in the Conservative manifesto. These hours will only be available to those families where no parent earns more than £100k and where both parents work (equivalent to 16 hours of work at the minimum wage).</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>There will be an increase in the hourly rate paid to childcare providers from 2017. The new rate swill be £4.88 for 3/4 year olds and £5.39 for 2 year olds.</li>
</ul>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
</div>
Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com26tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-36786685629188566982015-09-06T11:09:00.003-07:002015-09-06T12:04:39.686-07:00ResearchED 2015 Presentation: The 5 Big Policy Challenges for the New Government<br />
I don't usually share presentations as I'm not sure mine ever make much sense out of context. But a few people asked for this one on policy challenges for the new Government.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/d7d64enr5e6aib7/ResearchED%20presentation.pptx?dl=0">https://www.dropbox.com/s/d7d64enr5e6aib7/ResearchED%20presentation.pptx?dl=0</a><br />
<br />
(For the record I did offer a few solutions to some of the problems set out in the paper during the talk...)Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-36265122259889475272015-04-06T02:35:00.002-07:002015-04-07T13:19:13.315-07:00The birth of a zombie statistic<br />
Last week the "i" newspaper <a href="https://twitter.com/Samfr/status/583017529137827840">splashed</a> on a startling statistic: "40% of teachers leave within one year". It has since been repeated in the <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/mar/31/four-in-10-new-teachers-quit-within-a-year?CMP=share_btn_tw">Guardian</a>, <a href="http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/education/article4398504.ece">Times</a>, <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3020255/Four-10-new-teachers-don-t-YEAR-classroom-exhausted-stressed-colleagues-says-union-boss.html">Mail</a>, <a href="http://t.co/dMIyLQ4ldV">Observer</a> and probably hundreds of other places.* It was cited in this weeks' Any Questions. It's been tweeted by thousands of people.<br />
<br />
The only problem is that it's entirely untrue. 9% of teachers leave in their first year (<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/396561/teacher_retention_statistics_november2013.xlsx">Table C2</a>). It's been 9 or 10% a year every year for the last 20 years. This isn't particularly interesting; it isn't news; but it is true.<br />
<br />
The 40% figure comes from ATL - who press released the numbers to generate publicity for their annual conference. To be fair to ATL they never claimed that 40% of teachers leave within the first year. Their claim was that 40% of those who achieve qualified teacher status (QTS) aren't teaching after a year - this includes people who qualified but then never went into a teaching job in the first place. They generated this number by adding the 9% who leave in the first year to another table showing 10,800 people (roughly a third) who achieved QTS in 2011 <i>never started teaching</i> (<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/396561/teacher_retention_statistics_november2013.xlsx">Table I2</a>).<br />
<br />
Even if this number was correct all the newspaper reports would still be wrong because they're making a claim about the numbers who start teaching and then leave within a year. However, the 10,800 number is also wrong because it is generated from pensions data which omits certain groups of people. The correct data to use if you want to see how many people gain QTS and then don't start teaching is here in <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/366065/itt-performance-profiles-2012-2013-statistics.ods">Table 5</a>. This shows just <em>15%</em> of those who gained QTS in 2012 were either not in a teaching job or had an "unknown" status six months after completion. It was 16% in 2011 (<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/254265/PP_2013_2509.xls">Table 1</a>).<br />
<br />
This matters because the 40% figure creates a false narrative about a profession in crisis. I agree with ATL that teacher workload is too high - often driven by nonsense compliance rules around marking and planning. I agree that it's a very stressful and tiring job and that many first year teachers don't get the support they need. But the vast majority of those who start teaching do stay and succeed. Exaggerating the problem through dodgy statistics risks putting off new entrants to the profession - which we really can't afford to do at the moment given an improving economy and changes to teacher training are creating serious recruitment issues.<br />
<br />
<br />
*Massive credit to S<a href="http://schoolsweek.co.uk/nqt-retention-rate-branded-dismal-as-union-reveals-two-in-five-stay-less-than-a-year/">chools Week</a> for being the only publication to realise there was something dodgy about the statistic.<br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com96tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-73182617644874859342015-03-07T02:02:00.001-08:002016-03-16T14:10:18.239-07:00What we should have put in the White Paper<br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">One of the problems with the education debate in England is the tendency
to focus on the merits of individual policies - “should we decouple A-levels?”;
“are free schools working?” – rather than thinking strategically about what
we’d like the system to look like and then using that template for making
policy decisions.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">My big regret about the 2010 White Paper is that it reads too much like
a laundry list of policies rather than a set of design principles for system
reform. The vision of a school-led system is explicit but there’s too little
about what that means. Having a clearer set of design principles would have
made it much easier to explain how various policies fitted into the overall
picture and would have provided a firebreak against Ministers/No. 10 inserting
their own random or contradictory policies into the mix.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">So what would the core building blocks for a genuinely school-led system
look be? I think there are three keys elements: school autonomy; accountability
and capacity-building. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Autonomy</span></b><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"> is important because it leads to: faster
decision-making as you don’t have to wait for a request to go up the
chain; innovation because not everyone is following the same model; accuracy
because decisions are based on local information rather than aggregated
information at the national or regional level. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;">Accountability</span></b><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"> is important because transparent information leads
to: the ability to uphold minimum standards; schools being able to benchmark
their performance against others and identify areas for improvement; parents
being able to more accurately assess their options. <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">But autonomy and accountability aren’t enough. The latter creates
incentives to perform well (along, of course, with teachers’ typically high
intrinsic motivation) and the former gives the agency to perform well but
neither give them the capacity to perform well if they don’t know how. This is
why my third building block is <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">capacity-building</b>.
A school-led system needs the institutional infrastructure to broker support
between strong and weaker schools without impeding their autonomy.<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">At the moment we have all the elements of this system but the balance is
not yet right. Autonomy is impeded by an accountability system that is too
punitive and the infrastructure for capacity-building is under-resourced and
patchy. The links between the accountability system and capacity-building are
too weak leaving struggling schools unclear what they need to do to improve
(though the introduction of Regional Schools Commissioners has mitigated this
to some extent). <o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: normal; margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<span style="mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">So what might a set of principles based on these elements, which would
allow us to realign the system, look like?<o:p></o:p></span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Autonomy:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Schools should have authority over all their functions
apart from those that require co-ordination between schools (e.g. exclusions;
admissions; place planning).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
<o:p> </o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Where functions need to be carried out above the
school level they should – where possible – be done through collective
agreement at the local level.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
<o:p> </o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt 36pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Schools should be funded consistently regardless
of where they are in the country so they have the necessary resources to fulfil
their functions.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
<o:p> </o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Accountability:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Accountability should be based on outputs (e.g.
test results; destination data) and not inputs (e.g. whether a particular form
of pedagogy is being practised).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
<o:p> </o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->The consequences of accountability should be
proportionate and in particular should not disadvantage schools with lower-attaining
intakes.</span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt;">
</div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Accountability systems should reward
collaborative behaviour where it leads to improvements.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt 36pt; mso-list: l2 level1 lfo2; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">4)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->All data/information should be published (unless
doing so would break data protection law).<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Capacity-building:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">1)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Where schools are considered to be below a
minimum standard there should be immediate intervention.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
<o:p> </o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">2)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->For all schools the accountability system should
be linked to means of getting support for areas requiring improvement.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
<o:p> </o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt 36pt; mso-list: l1 level1 lfo3; text-indent: -18pt;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><span style="mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore;">3)<span style="font-family: "times new roman"; font-stretch: normal; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: normal;">
</span></span></span><!--[endif]-->Support should be available to all schools
regardless of where they are in the country.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial";"></span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">I’ve come up with these suggestions by myself and in a hurry
so they’re unlikely to be right and certainly aren’t exhaustive. My aim is to
illustrate the sort of discussion we should be having. Are these the right
principles? If not why and what should we have instead? If they are right what
would have to change in the system to ensure they were kept?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">
</span><br />
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 8pt;">
<br /></div>
Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com81tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-90414038182952307822015-02-12T06:39:00.001-08:002015-02-13T11:03:03.207-08:00What do Labour's spending plans mean for schools?<br />
<br />
Last week I wrote <a href="http://samfreedman1.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/what-do-conservative-spending-plans.html">this</a> on the Conservatives plans for school spending. My conclusion was that over the next Parliament their plans would mean a 10.5% cut to the amount schools get per pupil (depending on inflation).<br />
<br />
Today it was Labour's turn to announce their plans. They pledged to increase the schools' budget in line with inflation and, unlike the Conservatives, they have extended this to include early years and 16-19 provision. <br />
<br />
On the face of it this looks like a much better pledge for schools. And for early years / 16-19 institutions it is. However, Labour haven't pledged to increase budgets <em>per pupil</em>. So while the current budget for schools (5-16) will increase in line with inflation it won't be increased to take account of the very substantial increase in pupil numbers over the next Parliament. <strong>I estimate this will mean a cut to the amount schools get per pupil of 9.5% compared to the Conservatives 10.5%.</strong><br />
<br />
Here's my working:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>The DfE <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/330262/SFR23_2014_Tables.xlsx">predicts</a> there will be 566k more pupils in 2020 than in 2015. As these children have mostly been born already this is a fairly safe prediction. Average per pupil <a href="http://www.sec-ed.co.uk/news/how-much-per-pupil-funding-will-your-school-get">costs</a> are £4.5k a year but there will be larger proportionate increases in secondary and special school places which are more expensive than primary. When this distribution is taken into account (see detailed working at the end of the post*) the total cost is = £2.85 billion. The current schools budget is £41.6 billion so those additional pupils represent an effective 7% cut.</li>
<li>On top of this there are upcoming increases to schools contributions to teacher pensions and National Insurance that represent an effective 2.5% cut. These are explained in more detail in by blog on the Conservatives' plans.</li>
</ul>
<br />
This is actually much easier to calculate than the effect of the Conservative plans because it doesn't rely on assumptions about inflation. There will definitely be a cut in this range if pupil numbers rise as per projections. It also means that if inflation is lower than my assumptions the Conservative plans would actually better for schools than Labour's (unless they have a sixth form). Equally if inflation rises above my assumptions the Conservative cut grows whereas the Labour one stays the same.<br />
<br />
Either way it now looks certain that schools will have a significant cut in their budgets over the next Parliament - though probably smaller than other public sector institutions outside of the NHS. All headteachers and business managers will need to work through the implications for their schools. Austerity is here to stay.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
* According to the DfE figures there will be 307k more secondary pupils; 245k more primary pupils and 15k more pupils in special or alternative provision settings. The DfE doesn't publish per pupil rates for different stages but the average <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/295647/LA_data_proforma_2014-15.xls">primary rate</a> (before things like pupil premium and deprivation funding are added) was just under £3k. The KS3 rate was just over £4k and the KS4 rate was £4.6k. I have assumed the additional funding on top of this is roughly approximate between schools (primaries get more pupil premium but secondaries get more of other types of additional funding). Given the per pupil average is £4.5k I've calculated an additional primary place at £3.5.k and an additional secondary place at £5.75k (to balance KS3+ KS4). I've assigned a figure of £15k per place to special schools - this is definitely an underestimate but I can't find a source for the per pupil amount and I want to be conservative in my assumptions. So:<br />
<br />
307k secondary pupils x £5750<br />
245k primary pupils x £3500<br />
15k special/AP pupils x £15000<br />
<br />
= £2.85 billion.<br />
<br />
Because of the lack of data this is an estimate and may be out by half a percentage point or so either way.<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com16tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-41553415750875272942015-02-02T11:50:00.003-08:002015-02-13T11:01:06.493-08:00What do Conservative spending plans mean for schools?<br />
<br />
Just after the Prime Minister's speech on education earlier today I tweeted: <br />
<br />
"PM confirms Tory school spending plans for next Parliament - flat cash per pupil. Combined with NI/pension changes = at least 10% cut".<br />
<br />
This got picked up by a few news outlets this afternoon as a source for how big the cut would be. So I thought I better explain my working and add a few other points too detailed for a tweet.<br />
<br />
I derived the "10%" from two things. <br />
<br />
First, over the next couple of years schools will need to pay around £350-400 million more into teacher pensions as employer contributions increase. In addition there will be an additional £550-600 million more national insurance for schools to pay as a result of changes to state pensions in 2016. These figures come from a very helpful <a href="https://www.aoc.co.uk/sites/default/files/The%20Department%20for%20Education%20budget%20after%202015.pdf">paper</a> produced by the Association of Colleges. The schools budget is £41.6 billion so these changes represent a cut of around 2.5%.<br />
<br />
Secondly, the "flat cash per pupil" settlement announced by the PM today means that from 2016 schools will not see their income rise in line with inflation. Based on the latest Bank of England <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31438213">estimates</a> I've assumed inflation will run at: 0.5%; 1.5%; 2%; 2%; 2% over the next Parliament - 8% in total.<br />
<br />
Add 8% to 2.5% and you get a 10.5% reduction in the amount schools receive per pupil. Obviously if inflation is lower the cut will be lower and if higher the cut will be higher.<br />
<br />
Some additional points:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>The vast majority of school spending is on staff and we can probably expect pay rises of 1% to continue (though schools have freedom over this so could choose to pay more or less). This means that, in practice, they won't feel the full 10.5% cut as their main area of expenditure will increase at levels below inflation.</li>
<li>On the other hand the protection announced today doesn't cover either the pupil premium or 16-19 budgets. These could be cut by more. 16-19 has been cut over this Parliament so schools with sixth forms are already hurting.</li>
<li>Moreover other budget cuts to welfare and social care have knock on effects on schools that aren't accounted for. This is, naturally, especially true of schools in poorer areas.</li>
<li>It is not yet clear whether these cuts will hit all schools equally. The current Government plans to shift to a National Funding Formula after this election. This could mean some schools in currently overfunded areas lose more while others receive some protection. As schools have surpluses of £4.5bn at the moment - that are not evenly distributed across the country - this would be sensible.</li>
</ul>
<br />
It's also worth noting that, given overall Conservative spending plans, this settlement will still leave schools much better off than other non-health departments like the Home Office. Moreover schools have had a relatively generous settlement this Parliament - seeing their revenue funding increase on average by 1% per pupil in real terms (not including 16-19 spending).<br />
<br />
Labour and the Lib Dems plan to cut less over the next Parliament so have more leeway. Labour have not yet revealed their plans, and I'll update this blog when they do. The Lib Dems have promised to protect all education funding from 3-19 in real terms but have not yet said if this will be a "red line" in coalition negotiations. As all parties have accepted the NI/pensions changes even "real terms protection" will feel like a small cut.<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #222426; color: #dddddd; display: inline !important; float: none; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal; font: 300 18px/23px Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; letter-spacing: normal; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: pre-wrap; word-spacing: 0px;"></span><br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com10tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-11622990993405646612015-01-02T05:22:00.001-08:002015-01-02T05:23:43.036-08:00The Standards Puzzle<br />
"Have standards improved over time?" is one of the most persistent questions in education policy. And understandably so - under the last Government spending on education doubled, so it's reasonable to want to know if that's made any difference to the "output" of the education system.<br />
<br />
Unfortunately our main measuring tools in education - national exams - are useless for answering the question. First because they've changed so often and secondly because they are used for school accountability and so schools have got better at teaching to the test (this isn't a criticism - it's an entirely rational response to a clear incentive).<br />
<br />
Professor Rob Coe at the University of Durham has made the best attempt at using alternative "low stakes" test data to look at standards over time. In his <a href="http://www.cem.org/attachments/publications/ImprovingEducation2013.pdf">inaugural lecture</a> he set out his analysis of international tests like PISA as well as Durham's own tests, used by many schools. His conclusion: "The best I think we can say is that overall there probably has not been much change."<br />
<br />
In the absence of any better evidence I'd have to agree with Professor Coe that this is what the data shows. And yet it feels counter-intuitive. I've worked in education for ten years and it certainly feels to me that schools have improved over that time. Likewise most of the more experienced teachers and headteachers I've discussed this issue with think things have got significantly better too.<br />
<br />
Of course this could simply be cognitive biases at work. We all desperately want things to improve so we convince ourselves they have. But a recently published <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/374649/RR388_-_Longitudinal_study_of_young_people_in_England_cohort_2__wave_1.pdf">DfE report</a> suggests another possible explanation.<br />
<br />
The snappily titled "Longitudinal study of young people in England: cohort 2" (LSYPE2) will track 13,000 young people from year 9 to the age of 20. The first cohort were tracked from 2004-2010. Comparing the two cohorts will show how things have changed over the past ten years. This report looks at the first year's data from the new cohort and compares it with the first year's data from 2004.<br />
<br />
And the trends are very clear. Ironically, given the recent obsession with "character building" amongst policymakers, there have been big improvements in a range of "non-cognitive" measures. Reported bullying has fallen; the percentage who claim to have tried alcohol has plummeted; aspiration has increased - higher percentages say they are likely to go to university; and relationships with parents seem to be a lot stronger too.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXJ8rBYaujlhau5kH17-hDQbHpQXcc4vsO-Uz4aGQfv4sz77v0lmvc1gHSYhH-Lf7akH-B8M1WXXv7oEcmx1rIe0HgW6bPsbylFzoN9cG1EP3vr7oaXbPiv2NyH21eZJulPczw5DV8jgQ/s1600/LYSPE1+trying+alcohal.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjXJ8rBYaujlhau5kH17-hDQbHpQXcc4vsO-Uz4aGQfv4sz77v0lmvc1gHSYhH-Lf7akH-B8M1WXXv7oEcmx1rIe0HgW6bPsbylFzoN9cG1EP3vr7oaXbPiv2NyH21eZJulPczw5DV8jgQ/s1600/LYSPE1+trying+alcohal.PNG" height="464" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg70lFF0fHkhhWaTrEzGX1CkBESz9gilr9vjX2R-8yWhZU3GxF7wVcShtrU_L9cX4SRgaMv8-8LmvgUww1pDgXIz_SD4HnYc_sqDPfLA0Z0re-AHGyShA0yuDW50G6Y086uKi6cDyZ83Dg/s1600/LYSPE1+ego+to+uni.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg70lFF0fHkhhWaTrEzGX1CkBESz9gilr9vjX2R-8yWhZU3GxF7wVcShtrU_L9cX4SRgaMv8-8LmvgUww1pDgXIz_SD4HnYc_sqDPfLA0Z0re-AHGyShA0yuDW50G6Y086uKi6cDyZ83Dg/s1600/LYSPE1+ego+to+uni.PNG" height="444" width="640" /></a></div>
This is entirely consistent with other <a href="http://samfreedman1.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/why-are-young-people-today-so-sensible.html">data</a> showing massive falls in risky behaviours by young people over the last decade - including a huge fall in criminal behaviour. As well as big increases in participation in education <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/322575/Participation_SFR-Final.pdf">post-16</a> and in <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/jan/31/university-applications-record-high-ucas">higher education</a>.<br />
<br />
All of this would suggest I, and others, are not imagining it when we claim that schools are - on average - nicer places to be than ten years ago. And that pupils are making more progress, at least in the sense that more are going on to further and higher education.<br />
<br />
But here's the puzzle: given the improvements in behaviour; the reduction in criminality; the falls in truancy; the increase in aspiration; the improvements in home lives - all of which are known to link to academic attainment - why haven't we seen a commensurate, observable, rise in academic standards? Either academic standards have actually improved, but we just don't have the measurements available to identify it properly, or something is happening in schools that's preventing us capitalising on these "non-cognitive" improvements to genuinely improve standards. So what's going on?<br />
<br />
All thoughts welcome!<br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com33tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-21155451581034788392014-07-15T09:19:00.000-07:002014-07-15T11:20:19.710-07:00Education after Gove<br />
I wasn't expecting to be writing this post today. There has been a rumour going round for months that Michael Gove would be moved to an election role - though as Party Chair rather than Chief Whip. But in recent weeks all the noises were that he would be staying in post until the election.<br />
<br />
Tim Montgomerie said earlier on twitter that: <span style="color: black;">"I understand Osborne opposed Gove move but dire opinion polling presented by Lynton Crosby of MG's standing with teachers forced change." Another possibility is that he's simply got fed up with being blocked on any further policy by the Lib Dems. If holding the fort until the election is all that's left then he's happy for someone else to do it.</span><br />
<br />
Whatever the reason what does his departure mean for education? Here are a few initial thoughts:<br />
<br />
1) There are unlikely to be any major policy reversals. No. 10 have very deliberately ensured the new Secretary of State Nicky Morgan is surrounded by Govites - Nick Boles, Nick Gibb and John Nash. Moreover Gove himself will still be in No. 10 and will be in the PM's daily meeting - he is still in a position to prevent anything he thinks would significantly undermine his legacy. What's more the election is only 10 months away - it's not a time for big U-turns.<br />
<br />
2) I don't know Nicky Morgan and she doesn't have a track record in education but I'm sure, like all ministers, she will want some specific policies that are identified as hers. Briefing around her appointment suggests her thing will be early years and the Conservatives certainly see this as a key election battleground. Labour already have some big and expensive policies in this space.<br />
<br />
3) Some officials will see the appointment of a new Secretary as an opportunity to tweak various policies they are worried about. The slew of upcoming exam changes is an obvious area where they may try to use her appointment to lengthen the timelines of reform. There is also an on-going review of ITT which may not now go as far as might have been expected.<br />
<br />
4) There won't be much time for the new Secretary to learn her brief. Her first crisis might come as soon as next month. Ofqual recently wrote to schools saying they expected greater than normal turbulence in exam results this summer as a result of earlier reforms (including linearity and the end of vocational equivalences). Last time there was greater than normal turbulence - in English results in 2012 - there was a firestorm of complaints from schools than ended in a judicial review. Even if results' week passes without incident, in September we have the launch of a new curriculum; new rules on assessment; the introduction of free school meals in key stage one; compulsory English and Maths post-16 for those without GCSE "C" grades; and about a dozen other things. While the Govian reform phase may be over the implementation phase is at a critical moment.<br />
<br />
5) Gove's enemies may be celebrating prematurely. Though policy is unlikely to change much it will be significantly harder to demonise Nicky Morgan than it has been to attack Gove. He was something of a unifying factor for the teacher unions - the last NUT strike was effectively an anti-Gove demonstration. They may find their campaigns lose some momentum now. <br />
<br />
Now is not the time for a proper retrospective of Michael Gove's time at the DfE. But - as Andrew Old <a href="http://teachingbattleground.wordpress.com/2014/07/15/goodbye-mr-gove/">says</a> - perhaps his greatest achievement has been to normalise comprehensive education for the Conservative party; to shift the argument from "saving" a few bright poor kids through grammar schools or assisted places to creating a genuinely world class system for all. In time I suspect that will be more widely recognised than it is now.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com38tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-45339481978831016552014-06-28T06:02:00.000-07:002014-06-28T06:25:07.815-07:00The London Schools Effect - what have we learned this week?<br />
<br />
Perhaps the biggest question in education policy over the past few years is why the outcomes for London schools have been improving so much faster than in the rest of the country. I wrote about it <a href="http://samfreedman1.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/why-are-londons-schools-doing-so-well.html">here</a> last year. Until now there's been little in the way of research into the question but last week two reports came out - one by the IFS and one from CFBT - that seek to provide some answers.<br />
<br />
They both agree that the change in GCSE results has been spectacular. There's plenty of data in both reports on this but I found this graph from the IFS particularly powerful because it relates to a metric that isn't something schools are held accountable to - and so feels like authentic proof that something extraordinary has happened in London.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2Ly7KOqliomuW6GblXxx6PA5MgLqT9902DKvQt6UeG-oqoL7HoU8LiRViPVepVFlRswVWxvHHXxAP5Hb4HBiJbsacDEuZaENIMDc-B3nk9b22v_i-pK0TpO2QDD8kk2SdVclZmViQZ6Y/s1600/IFS1.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2Ly7KOqliomuW6GblXxx6PA5MgLqT9902DKvQt6UeG-oqoL7HoU8LiRViPVepVFlRswVWxvHHXxAP5Hb4HBiJbsacDEuZaENIMDc-B3nk9b22v_i-pK0TpO2QDD8kk2SdVclZmViQZ6Y/s1600/IFS1.png" height="344" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
But what, exactly, has happened? Here the two reports seem to disagree. According to the IFS - whose <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/321969/London_Schools_-_FINAL.pdf">analysis</a> is purely quantitative the main reasons are:<br />
<ul>
<li>Changes in pupil and school characteristics - in particular London and other inner-city areas have seen an increase in pupils from a range of ethnic backgrounds (partly) as a result of immigration. The IFS analysis suggests this accounts for about half the improvement in London between 2002-2012.</li>
<li>Changes in "prior attainment" - the authors argue that once higher levels of attainment in key stage 2 (end of primary) tests are taken into account then the "London effect" in secondaries looks less impressive. Indeed once prior attainment and changes in pupil/school characteristics have been controlled for the gap between London and the rest of the country falls from 21 percentage points in the 5 A*-C GCSE with English and Maths measure to just 5 percentage points. Moreover this gap is fairly stable between 2002-2012 - though it does increase a by about 2 percentage points over the period.</li>
<li>There was a big increase in key stage 2 schools for disadvantaged pupils between 1999-2003 and that led to big increases in GCSE scores for these pupils between 2004-08 - but the GCSE improvement was actually the result of prior attainment. The authors hypothesise this may be due to the introduction of "national strategies" in primary literacy and numeracy in the late 90s - these were piloted in inner London authorities (as well as some other urban areas e.g. Liverpool).</li>
<li>London secondaries do have a better record at getting disadvantaged pupils to stay in education post-16. After controlling for pupil/school characteristics they are around 10 percentage points more likely to stay in education. </li>
</ul>
<br />
The CFBT <a href="http://cdn.cfbt.com/~/media/cfbtcorporate/files/research/2014/r-london-schools-2014.pdf">report</a> does include quantitative analysis but is much more focus on qualitative research - specifically interviews with headteachers, academics, civil servants and other experts. This report argues the key reasons for London's improvement are:<br />
<ul>
<li>Four key "improvement interventions" between 2002 and 2014 - the "London Challenge" (a Labour initiative that used data to focus attention on weaker schools and used better schools to support their improvement); Teach First; the introduction of sponsored academies; and improvements driven by local authorities.</li>
<li>They conclude that: <span style="font-family: inherit;">"each of these interventions played a significant role in driving improvement. Evaluations of each of these interventions have overall been positive, although the absence of RCT evidence makes it impossible to identify the precise gains from each set of activities. The exact causal mix also varied from borough to borough because there were variations in the level of involvement in London Challenge, variations in the effectiveness of local authority activity, variations in the level of ‘academisation’ and variations in the level of input from Teach First."</span></li>
<li>The authors argue that there were cross-cutting themes covering these interventions and the wider improvement story. In particular - the better use of data; practitioner-led professional development and, particularly, leadership - both politically and at school level.</li>
</ul>
<br />
At first glance it's hard to reconcile the positions taken in the two reports. The IFS focus on primary, and to a lesser extent pupil characteristics, while CFBT focus on secondary policy changes. I think, though, they are two different bits of an extremely complicated jigsaw that hasn't been finished yet - and because of the lack of evidence/data - never will be. Like the apocryphal blind men with the elephant they're looking at different parts of the whole.<br />
<br />
1) Both reports probably underestimate the importance of changes in pupil characteristics. CFBT completely dismiss this as a driver based on an inadequate analysis of ethnicity data. The IFS analysis is more comprehensive and so does pick up a significant effect but may still miss the true extent because of the limitations of available data on ethnicity. I think this may explain the extent of the "primary effect" in the IFS report. Essentially they're saying the big improvements in GCSE results are partially illusory because they were already built into those pupils' primary attainment. However, they are unable (because of a lack of data) to analyse whether those primary results were <em>also partly illusory</em> because those pupils started primary at a higher level.<br />
<br />
There is a clue that this may be a factor in their analysis of Key Stage 1 data for more recent years. Controlling for prior attainment at KS1 reduces the "London effect" at Key Stage 2 by about half. But the authors are unable to do this analysis for the crucial 1999-2003 period when results really improved. They are also unable to look from the beginning of primary - because we don't have baseline assessments when pupils start school.<br />
<br />
2) The IFS report probably underestimates the secondary effect. As Chris Cook has <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27979096">shown</a> the London secondary effect at least doubles if you exclude equivalents. <br />
<br />
3) The CFBT report definitely underestimates the primary effect because it doesn't look for it. Thought there are some quotes from people who worked in local authorities during the crucial period who highlight their focus on literacy and numeracy during the late 90s.<br />
<br />
So pupil characteristics; primary schools and secondary schools all seem to have played a role in boosting attainment in London. The CFBT report is convincing on some of the factors at play in secondaries; the IFS report is convincing that primaries also played some kind of a role. The big questions for me after digesting both reports:<br />
<br />
<ul>
<li>Are there "London specific" pupil characteristics that wouldn't be apparent from the available data. E.g. are immigrants who go to London different to those who don't? Are some of the ethnicity effects stronger than indentified because key groups (e.g. Polish) are hidden in larger categories?</li>
<li>Are there policy reasons why London primaries improved faster than those elsewhere in the crucial 1999-2003 period? I struggle to buy the idea that the national strategies were the key driver here as they were rolled out nationally (albeit that the pilots were focused on inner London). But the quotes in the CFBT report suggest their might be something here around a general focus on literacy/numeracy. This is a key area for further research.</li>
<li>To what extent were the policy interventions (London Challenge, academies etc...) the main reasons for secondary improvement? Or was it more to do with the number of good school leaders during that period? One of the most interesting tables in the CFBT report - pasted below - shows that inner London is the only part of the country where headteacher recruitment has got easier in the last ten year. And the importance of leadership shines through in the interviews conducted for the CFBT report. Is it possible to more closely identify the relationship between individual leaders and school improvement? What can we learn from these leaders?</li>
</ul>
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiFnZS7gKwe6PZcsBw4dK4AUnNzEls5vwBI9JKEtJpFN_IWAdilNngYxbOT1s2tIRj5PRiKZ7Z6o81IEEysqBdmNsGR-dlQK4wukN0zmD-8LxrnWhssWzgutpNHtznzsGZmNEu2BGAWlw/s1600/Howson.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjiFnZS7gKwe6PZcsBw4dK4AUnNzEls5vwBI9JKEtJpFN_IWAdilNngYxbOT1s2tIRj5PRiKZ7Z6o81IEEysqBdmNsGR-dlQK4wukN0zmD-8LxrnWhssWzgutpNHtznzsGZmNEu2BGAWlw/s1600/Howson.png" height="376" width="400" /></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
And of course the really big question - is any of this replicable in other areas? We're starting to see a raft of local improvement initiatives across the country - Wales Challenge; Somerset Challenge; North East Challenge and so on. It's really important that in these areas we do a better job of evaluating all the interventions put in place from the start so that if we see big improvements we have a better understand of the causes.<br />
<br />
<strong></strong><br />
<strong>Further reading:</strong><br />
<strong></strong><br />
<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/321969/London_Schools_-_FINAL.pdf">The IFS report</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://cdn.cfbt.com/~/media/cfbtcorporate/files/research/2014/r-london-schools-2014.pdf">The CFBT report</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27979096">Chris Cook's analysis</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.lkmco.org/article/london-schools-now-we-have-fuller-picture%E2%80%A6-27062014">Loic Menzies - one of the CFBT authors - on the two reports</a><br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/evaluation-of-the-city-challenge-programme">The London Challenge evaluation by Merryn Hutchings and others</a><br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.towerhamlets.gov.uk/idoc.ashx?docid=97c33ccb-15f7-44d4-91a9-7352903051f5&version=-1">Transforming Education For All: The Tower Hamlets Story by Chris Husbands et al</a><br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com23tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-67509197475455205422014-05-14T10:25:00.001-07:002014-05-15T09:04:47.191-07:00In defence of baseline assessments<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">Earlier this year the DfE announced new <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/297595/Primary_Accountability_and_Assessment_Consultation_Response.pdf">proposals</a> for holding primary schools accountable. These include a "baseline assessment" for pupils in reception. Primary schools that opt-in to using this assessment will then be measured on the progress pupils make over the course of their time in school rather than on the raw results of Key Stage tests.</span></div>
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span> </div>
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">It's fair to say the idea hasn't been universally welcomed. While the NAHT have made some positive noises the NUT have <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-27095495">voted</a> to investigate boycotting these assessments. And I suspect their position is held by the majority of early years teachers. </span></div>
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span> </div>
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">I don't think the DfE proposal as it stands is perfect - for one thing the suggestion that schools could pick from a range of assessments seems unhelpfully complex. But, given we have high-stakes accountability for primaries, and that this isn't going to change any time soon, the principle seems sensible to me. </span></div>
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span> </div>
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">However, opponents of the tests have raised some reasonable concerns, particularly that the assessments could be used to "label" children from a young age. I recently received an email from a correspondent (who doesn't wished to be named) which shows how labelling could be avoided while still allowing primaries to be measured on the progress they were making rather than their raw scores, regardless of intake. I've reposted the email in full as, I think, it shows how the benefits of the assessments could be secured without the negatives opponents are worried about.</span></div>
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span> </div>
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"></span> </div>
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">"My starting point on baseline assessments is that a
teacher's focus for ages 4-7 should mostly be about absolutes rather than
relatives. As an absolute bottom line, every 7yo should have completed learning
to decode (including the complex code, not just the simplified initial code)
and thus to read with reasonable fluency, to write properly, to spell (though
not full spelling code mastery by 7), and have had opportunities to practice
their new skills in worthwhile activities; and similarly for maths. These
aspirations should be there for all children (with the perennial exception of
true heavy-duty special needs), not just the brighter ones. KS1 assessment
ought to be showing us whether these aspirations are met.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">But this creates a problem, in that children arrive at
primary school with very different levels of development and (though many hate
the idea) variable capacities to learn. School intakes are far from
homogeneous, and the accountability system will persistently punish some
schools if we simply compare KS1 outcomes and don't recognise this. In a
high-accountability world, this creates disincentives to work in and run these
schools, which over time will tend to lead to differences in teacher and
curriculum quality, creating a vicious circle.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">I therefore think it is important to have a measure in
the system that provides a primary education baseline, so from the first term
of Reception. I also favour a test over teacher assessment: teachers are too
conflicted otherwise. But I would explicitly make this a measure of schools,
not pupils. I might send schools information about cohort performance: average
score vs national average, range from highest to lowest, probably no more than
this: really just enough for schools to see that there is a fair external
perspective on their intake, and to have a sense of what overall level of
performance at KS1 ought to be expected. But I would definitely NOT give them
individual child scores, nor would I give these to parents. (This sounds
shocking to many ears, but it is in fact absolutely normal - eg schools administer
all sorts of tests for internal purposes whose results don't go to students or
parents.) So children would not be labelled, and schools could not set
differentiated child level targets explicitly designed to meet specific Ofsted
progress expectations. The child level data would sit in the NPD until needed
for KS1 progress/VS calculations for all matched children.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">This would allow proper assessment of progress and
value-added from YR to Y2 at school (and perhaps classroom) level, but without
individual labelling with all its negative consequences and without refocusing
lower primary teachers away from absolute expectations. And I really do think
that this early stage accountability is necessary, as we all tend to judge the
lower end of our children's primary schools by how nice the people are, and
only realise what they haven't been taught when it is already getting rather
late to do something about it. (My older child was in Y2 before I realised that
the school's reading and spelling teaching was lamentable, and I am a fairly
well-informed parent who recognised quickly that the problem was with the
school and not the child. I know many parents lamenting their children's
dyslexia who still don't realise that it was probably avoidable.)<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">Administration of tests to 4/5 yos is of course a
challenge. But<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">(a) modern computer-based tests are quite accessible to
the vast majority of children who will already have seen (and often played)
tablet/PC/phone games<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">(b) they can be adaptive, using quite complex algorithms
to determine which questions they use to refine the measure, so that even a
teacher watching a child take the test cannot deduce their precise score<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">(c) the incentive to teachers is to under-report
baselines, but it would take a degree of nastiness that I hope not too many are
capable of to nudge a child away from the right answer towards a wrong answer<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">(d) I suspect that screening algorithms will be capable
of picking up anomalous patterns of answers if teachers impersonate children
and try to replicate their mistakes.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoPlainText" style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;">
<o:p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"> </span></o:p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;">So I think it will be possible to establish a worthwhile
baseline test if these technical issues can be dealt with and if the temptation to
use this as an accountability test for nursery classes can be resisted, at this would infallibly
lead to nursery classes starting to teach to typical test items, thus
undermining the value of the baseline."<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com8tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-11421844225851211582014-04-11T11:06:00.001-07:002014-04-11T11:06:06.924-07:00Some thoughts on grief<br />
Until it <a href="http://samfreedman1.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/the-worst-few-days-of-my-life.html">happened</a> it didn't occur to me that our daughter would be stillborn. I'd worried about a difficult birth; 4-day labours; emergency c-sections; brain damage and so on. It didn't cross my mind that when we arrived at the hospital there'd simply be no heartbeat.<br />
<br />
Stillbirth turns out to be relatively common - around 1 in every 200 births in the UK. This rate hasn't fallen in the UK for over 20 years despite significant improvements in other aspects of maternity care. As 90% of stillbirths have no congenital abnormality it should be possible to reduce the rate significantly with better screening.<br />
<br />
*******<br />
<br />
I suspect part of the reason for the lack of investment in stillbirth research - and lack of media attention - is because it's very hard to talk about. The absence of the paraphernalia that usually accompanies a death reduces the number of opportunities to engage with friends and relatives - leaving instead a almost complete lack of activity in a household prepared for the exhaustions of a newborn. And unlike other deaths, where you can share stories about the deceased from happier times, there's no hook for positive conversations.<br />
<br />
Which is why so many of the messages we've received contain words along the lines of "words are futile at this time" or "there are no words" or "I know nothing I can say can make anything better". Of course this isn't true. For me at least the hundreds of messages we've received have been very helpful in processing what's happened. Without them we'd have had almost no communication at all outside of our immediate families. And the box of cards we now have are pretty much the only thing we have to remember her by.<br />
<br />
*******<br />
<br />
I've found the process of grieving much as one would expect - it comes in waves and there are increasingly long periods - hours at a time now - where I feel pretty normal (and then feel guilty for feeling normal). But everyone's grief is individual and there are some odd quirks which I think are less common. After the horror of the initial few days I've held it together pretty well. The only times I've really felt myself going to pieces was after someone has done me a significant and unexpected kindness. I don't know why - perhaps because it reminds of the enormity of what's happened?<br />
<br />
The most noticeable thing has been the difference in the way my wife and I think about her. Because I never had the chance to meet her I think of her in terms of lost possibility; the girl - and woman - she could have been. My wife, though, had a physical relationship with her over many months - making the loss much more visceral. She thinks of her by the name we chose. For some reason I can't.<br />
<br />
*******<br />
<br />
At some point in the future we'll be holding a fundraising event for <a href="https://www.uk-sands.org/research">Sands</a>, the UK's stillbirth charity, in honour of our daughter and to help pay for research that will hopefully stop other families going through this.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com5tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-5141565467155901162014-04-03T08:15:00.001-07:002014-04-03T08:15:21.851-07:00The worst few days of my life<br />
As many of you know my wife, Linda, and I have been expecting our third child. On Monday afternoon Linda had a 38 week check-up and was told everything was fine. Later that evening she went into a normal labour and early on Tuesday morning we arrived at the hospital. When the midwife did the initial check she was unable to find the baby's heartbeat. After some Casualty-like scenes of panic a doctor confirmed the bad news. Shortly after our daughter was delivered stillborn. As yet the doctors are unable to establish a reason why this happened and in most cases like this they never do.<br />
<br />
Needless to say we are heartbroken. The last few days have been the hardest of our lives. But we're very lucky to have our wonderful twins as well as an incredibly supportive network of family and friends. They will see us through this.<br />
<br />
I'm writing this public note so that I don't have to tell everyone individually and so that people understand why I'm not returning calls, texts, emails and DMs at the moment. But I am very grateful to everyone who has already offered condolences and support. I'll be back in action soon.<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-67816795944385961462014-04-03T08:15:00.000-07:002014-04-03T08:15:12.934-07:009 things you should know about the new PISA "creative problem-solving" test<br />
Today sees the launch of the first international test of "creative problem-solving". It is the latest addition to the suite of PISA tests run by the OECD which have become hugely influential in global education policy-making.<br />
<br />
This test was taken by pupils in late 2012 at the same time as PISA tests in maths, science and reading but the results were held back for a separate launch. I was invited to a pre-embargo briefing yesterday and the information here is taken from a mix of the published reports and answers given by OECD experts at the briefing.<br />
<br />
1. The purpose of the test was to measure students ability to solve problems which do not require technical knowledge. The PISA subject tests in maths, science and reading are also based around problem-solving but they do require knowledge in these subject areas (e.g. mathematical concepts and mental arithmetic). Examples of <a href="http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisa2012problemsolvingquestions.htm">questions</a> include working out which ticket to buy at a vending machine, given a list of constraints, or finding the most efficient place for three people to meet. Unlike the subject PISA tests it was completed on computers which allowed for more sophisticated interactive assessment.<br />
<br />
2. Overall the results correlated fairly closely with the PISA subject tests. Unsurprisingly students who are good at maths problems are also good at ones involving general reasoning. The correlation with maths results was 0.8 and with reading was 0.75.<br />
<br />
3. But England was one of the countries that did significantly better in this test than in the subject ones. It came 11th overall but the individual rankings are misleading. It makes more sense to think of clusters of countries that did about as well as each other. The leading group of seven consists entirely of Far East countries and jurisdictions. England is in the second group with countries that traditionally do well in PISA like Australia, Canada, Finland and Estonia. Then comes a third group made up other larger European countries and the United States. The countries below the OECD average are primarily smaller European countries and developing nations. <br />
<br />
4. This is unhelpful for a number of the big narratives in English education policy. It undercuts the "England is falling behind in the world" narrative so beloved of right-wing newspapers. On a test of intellectual reasoning (which is what this is) our 15 year olds do as well as any other nation bar a small group of Far East jurisdictions (only two of which - Japan and Korea - are not cities or city states).<br />
<br />
5. But it's also perhaps unhelpful for those who argue that our education system is dominated by an obsession with tests and narrow curriculum knowledge. It turns out we're actually pretty good at "21st century skills" already. Our students performed better in this test than you would expect based on their maths, science and reading ability. Likewise all the employers arguing that our system isn't delivering the kind of problem-solving skills they need should reflect on these results. <br />
<br />
6. The reason England outperformed it's subject PISA scores is that students at the top end did better on the problem-solving test than on the subject ones. Students at the bottom end did no better. This suggests that we're doing something with our more gifted students that we're not doing with our weaker ones. In other countries - e.g. Japan - the opposite was true weaker students did better in problem-solving than subject tests but the strongest ones didn't. <br />
<br />
7. In England there was no statistically significant gender difference in performance on this test (in maths and science boys do better; in reading girls do). Interestingly immigrants scored below non-immigrants which is a change from the maths and reading tests where there is no significant difference.<br />
<br />
8. The domination of Far East countries puts pay to the notion that their success in PISA subject tests is somehow down to rote-learning or fact-cramming. It also puts pay to the idea that all Far East systems are the same. While Shanghai and Hong-Kong are still in the top group they did much worse on this test than would be expected given their stellar scores in maths, science and reading. Conversely Korea, Japan and Singapore all did better than would be expected.<br />
<br />
9. While the test results are interesting they don't tell us why some countries do better than others. Both Singapore and Korea - who come top - have both tried over the past few years to add "21st century competencies" to their curricula to make them less purely focused on academic knowledge. But it's unclear whether their high scores in this test are due to that or because their traditional strength in the academic basics transfers to "creative problem-solving" tests of this type. The OECD presenters were clear that they thought it was impossible to teach problem-solving skills in the abstract without content, but they also felt it was possible to embed them in a knowledge-based curriculum.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com9tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-32939909863039703132014-03-29T02:26:00.000-07:002014-03-29T02:27:03.166-07:00Weekly Update 29/3/14<span style="font-size: x-small;"><strong><span style="font-size: small;">News:</span></strong></span><br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: small;">DfE published the final <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/297595/Primary_Accountability_and_Assessment_Consultation_Response.pdf">proposals</a> for a new primary accountability framework. Michael Tidd summarised the main <a href="http://michaelt1979.wordpress.com/2014/03/27/summary-of-primary-assessment-changes/">changes </a>and gave his <a href="http://michaelt1979.wordpress.com/2014/03/27/primary-assessment-consultation-outcomes/">take</a> on them (spoiler: he's not impressed).</span><br />
<br />
The NUT went on strike. Michael Tidd didn't <a href="http://michaelt1979.wordpress.com/2014/03/22/why-im-leaving-the-nut/">think</a> that was a good idea either. Nor did <a href="http://johndavidblake.org/2014/03/26/what-are-teacher-strikes-for/">John Blake</a>.<br />
<br />
DfE also published <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/296186/DfE_consultation_response_16-19_Accountability_final_for_publication.pdf">plans</a> for a new 16-19 accountability regime.<br />
<br />
And <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/298587/Consultation_Document.pdf">plans </a>to cut £200m from LAs and academies<br />
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.47px;" />
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.47px;" />
<strong>Best Blogs/Articles:</strong><br />
<br />
Why <a href="http://www.city-journal.org/2014/24_1_literacy.html">literacy is knowledge</a> by Robert Pondiscio <br />
<br />
David Didau on the <a href="http://www.learningspy.co.uk/leadership/behaviour/">importance</a> of school behaviour policies (it regularly amazes me how many schools still don't apply one consistently)<br />
<br />
Deevybee on whether <a href="http://deevybee.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/my-thoughts-on-dyslexia-debate.html?m=1">Dyslexia</a> is an appropriate label<br />
<br />
Cherryl KD on <a href="http://cherrylkd.wordpress.com/2014/03/22/trainee-teacher-with-sen-specialism/">training</a> teachers with a SEN specialism <br />
<br />
Alex Quigley with some <a href="http://www.huntingenglish.com/2014/03/22/irreverent-tips-new-bloggers/">tips</a> for new bloggers<br />
<br />
A <a href="http://www.aft.org/pdfs/americaneducator/spring2014/Christodoulou.pdf">sample</a> of Daisy Christodoulou's book in American Educator <br />
<br />
Harry Webb on the <a href="https://websofsubstance.wordpress.com/2014/03/26/the-future-of-educational-research/">future</a> of education research<br />
<br />
Michael Tidd (again) on seven <a href="http://michaelt1979.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/7-questions-you-should-ask-about-any-new-post-levels-assessment-scheme/">questions</a> you should ask about your post-levels assessment system<br />
<br />
Shaun Allison on <a href="http://classteaching.wordpress.com/2014/03/22/excellence-visits/">why</a> some of his school's departments are so successful<br />
<br />
Annie Murphy Paul on the <a href="http://anniemurphypaul.com/2014/03/the-key-to-innovation-making-smart-analogies/#">importance</a> of analogies<br />
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.47px;" />
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.47px;" />
<strong>New Research:</strong><br />
<br />
Fascinating <a href="http://www.hefce.ac.uk/media/hefce/content/pubs/2014/201403/HEFCE2014_03.pdf">report</a> from HEFCE on different in degree outcomes for different groups. The main focus has been on state school pupils doing better than private ones but there's a lot of interesting/worrying stuff in there.<br />
<br />
Dan Willingham on a new study <a href="http://www.realcleareducation.com/articles/2014/03/26/reading_is_not_formulaic_why_equations_cant_be_920.html#.UzLW8X5YJlc.twitter">showing</a> readability levels may well be inaccurate<br />
<br />
Big new Gates Foundation funded <a href="https://www.edsurge.com/n/2014-03-07-sri-studies-how-schools-use-khan-academy">report</a> on Khan Academy - which still leaves us unsure as to whether it has any benefit.Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-71270705135903488932014-03-22T02:37:00.001-07:002014-03-22T02:37:47.079-07:00Weekly Update 22/3/14<b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;">News:</b><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;" /><br />Another week dominated by Ofsted. On Monday Policy Exchange <a href="http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/watching%20the%20watchmen.pdf">published</a> their eagerly awaited report with some radical recommendations. It was blogged about by <a href="http://networkedblogs.com/USQCa">David Didau</a>, <a href="http://community.tes.co.uk/tom_bennett/b/weblog/archive/2014/03/17/watching-the-watchmen-the-policy-exchange-versus-ofsted.aspx#.UyZNUqqAhrM.twitter">Tom Bennett</a>, <a href="http://pragmaticreform.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/ofsted-feet-to-fire/">Joe Kirby</a>, <a href="http://mrlock.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/the-policy-exchange-report-on-ofsted/">Stuart Lock</a>, <a href="http://goodbyemisterhunter.wordpress.com/2014/03/18/some-thoughts-on-the-ofsted-style/">Robert Peal</a> and <a href="http://samfreedman1.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/my-take-on-policy-exchanges-ofsted.html">me</a>.<br />
<br />
On Friday we heard Ofsted's <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2014/mar/21/michael-wilshaw-ofsted-speech-ascl?CMP=twt_gu">response</a> from Sir Michael Wilshaw. He promised a shift (over the next 18 months) towards shorter inspections for good schools and a review of the framework.<br />
<br />
Which seems to fit with the conclusion to my blog on Policy Exchange's report: "<i>Under the current regime I suspect we will see incremental shifts in the right direction but no big bang reset</i>."<br />
<br />
NAHT published a really interesting <a href="http://t.co/yZw3oXH0IB">draft manifesto</a> which I hope others engage with<br />
<br />
Tristram Hunt is <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/mar/21/sexism-schools-holding-female-teachers-back-heads-hunt">backing</a> Future Leaders campaign to stop discrimination against women in headteacher appointments<br />
<br />
On and the Varkey-GEMS Foundation <a href="http://news.tes.co.uk/b/news/2014/03/17/world-39-s-greatest-teacher-will-win-a-personal-fortune-of-1-million.aspx">announced</a> a $1 million prize for the world's best teacher. Good luck everyone.<br />
<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;" /><b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;">Best Blogs/Articles:</b><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;" /><br />Harry Webb on the many <a href="http://websofsubstance.wordpress.com/2014/03/16/nothing-can-be-known-so-do-as-i-say/">weaknesses</a> of the "nothing can be known about education" viewpoint<br />
<br />
Tom Sherrington argues for a <a href="http://headguruteacher.com/2014/03/15/the-progressive-traditional-pedagogy-tree/">symbiosis</a> between traditional and progressive pedagogy<br />
<br />
Daisy Christodoulou has <a href="http://thewingtoheaven.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/replacing-national-curriculum-levels/">collated</a> a variety of alternatives to NC levels<br />
<br />
Chris Hall on the <a href="http://britisheducationpolicy.wordpress.com/2014/03/21/the-rcts-have-landed-but-has-anyone-noticed/">lessons</a> from the first batch of EEF randomised control trials<br />
<br />
Jo Facer on a <a href="http://readingallthebooks.com/articles/2014/3/15/why-students-should-read-more-an-assembly">wonderful sounding</a> assembly in which she explained the importance of reading<br />
<br />
Fascinating piece from Rob Webster on his <a href="http://ioelondonblog.wordpress.com/2014/03/19/be-careful-what-you-wish-for-parents-professionals-and-the-new-sen-system/">research</a> showing that getting a statement for a pupil with SEN can actually lead to worse outcomes.<br />
<br />
Classroom routines from Elissa Miller who <a href="http://misscalculate.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/classroom-routines.html?utm_content=bufferc271d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer">sounds</a> like the most organised teacher in the world<br />
<br />
The anonymous Heather F on her <a href="http://heatherfblog.wordpress.com/2014/03/15/teaching-badly-really-badly/">really</a> bad teaching<br />
<br />
Gifted Phoenix with more <a href="http://giftedphoenix.wordpress.com/2013/11/20/a-summer-of-love-for-english-gifted-education-episode-3-improving-fair-access-to-oxbridge/">info</a> on FSM admissions to Oxbridge than you'll ever need<br style="background-color: white;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;" /><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;" /><b style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;">New Research:</b><br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;" /><br />If you're a teacher and have a <a href="http://www.shinetrust.org.uk/site/pages/43_news.php?pg=494">innovative idea</a> you can win £15k to pay for a year long research pilot<br style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: Arial, Tahoma, Helvetica, FreeSans, sans-serif; font-size: 13px; line-height: 18.479999542236328px;" /><br />
Sunday Times on new <a href="http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Education/article1388318.ece">research</a> showing that state school pupils get better degrees those from private schools with the same qualifications (unfortunately paywalled + the full research is not yet published)<br />
<br />
A new Sutton Trust <a href="http://www.suttontrust.com/our-work/research/download/265">report</a> on parenting and attachmentSam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-49987494098339592182014-03-17T09:48:00.001-07:002014-03-17T09:48:53.947-07:00My take on Policy Exchange's Ofsted report<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: inherit;">First thoughts</span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">This is one of the best think-tank reports I've read in a very long time. It's timely, pragmatic, while not being too safe. It's also well written (rarer than you might think).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">And importantly it's the first report I've seen that makes real use of social media expertise. The authors acknowledge that they've built on the ideas emerging from twitter and the blogosphere and the final product is much stronger as a result: </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><em>"We would like to thank all the teachers and other educationalists who have continued to debate the role of Ofsted on blogs and on Twitter and in doing so, influenced our work - even if they didn’t know they were!</em></span><span style="font-family: inherit;"><em> Social media is a democratic phenomenon which offers a tremendous opportunity for closing the gap between practitioners and policymakers. If ideas are good and arguments are compelling, then it has never been as easy as now to shape what politicians and policymakers are thinking."</em></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">How I wish that social media had been in full flow when I was running the Policy Exchange education department back in 2008 - it would have significantly improved my thinking.</span><br />
<br />
The full report is: <a href="http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/watching%20the%20watchmen.pdf">here</a>.<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<strong><span style="font-family: inherit;">The key recommendations</span></strong><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The report sets our a new design for inspections with a shift to regular short inspections based primarily on data and self-evaluation. Only schools where inspectors had concerns (or couldn't tell) would get a longer "tailored inspection". This seems eminently sensible and is line with Ofsted's slow shift towards risk-based assessment over the past decade. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">There would be no teacher observations in these short inspections. Again I strongly agree. And set out my reasons why this would be an important shift <a href="http://samfreedman1.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/what-next-for-ofsted.html">here</a>.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Longer tailored inspections would include teacher observations - but inspectors engaged in these visits would have to be trained to a high standard. This feels like a bit of a fudge. Obviously if we are going to have observations then inspectors must be trained but there's no reason given for why they are necessary. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">The problem is that even with the best training available observations are not hugely reliable. The report acknowledges that the gold standard models of observation can achieve 61% agreement between 1st and 2nd observers (p.19). That still an awful lot of teachers getting the wrong grade for their teaching - with potentially significant knock on effects for their career. And to achieve that 61% could require up to six separate observations by different people (p.20) which is phenomenally time consuming and expensive.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Of course inspectors, as part of a longer visit, would want to spend time in classrooms but there would need to a really clear added value to formalising these observations to justify the cost both of resources and to individuals. </span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;">I remain of the view that the purpose of even a longer inspection should be to understand whether senior and middle leaders understand their school and not to make potentially invalid judgements about individuals' teaching. As I've said previously:</span><br />
<br />
<em>"Inspections should focus on systems. Essentially Ofsted should be looking at what the school is doing to ensure consistent good teaching. They should be inspecting the school's quality assurance not trying to do the quality assurance themselves. In their classroom visits they should be checking the leadership know their teachers and understand how best to support their future development. They should be checking that they have thought about professional development and about performance management. They should be seeing if the behaviour policy is being enforced; and if the school curriculum is actually being used."</em><br />
<br />
<br />
<strong>Other recommendations</strong><br />
<strong></strong><br />
The full list of recommendations can be found in this <a href="http://pragmaticreform.wordpress.com/2014/03/17/ofsted-feet-to-fire/">blog</a> by Joe Kirby. I agree with nearly all of them - particularly a new requirement that inspectors take a data interpretation test and the suggestion that Ofsted end the practice of having thousands of part-time, contracted, additional inspectors.<br />
<br />
I have an issue with the suggestion that schools should only be considered outstanding if they "engage in a serious and meaningful way in some form of school to school improvement with other schools - as chosen by the school itself". This is laudable but very hard to inspect without visiting the other schools adding cost and complexity. It could also lead to quite a lot of fake collaboration. I'd rather have an additional category of "system leader" for those schools that were indisputably playing that role.<br />
<br />
I also remain unconvinced that we need a separate system for inspecting academy chains. Ofsted are already doing inspections of multiple schools within a chain - which led directly to the recent reduction in the number of schools run by EACT. It's not clear what another framework would add.<br />
<br />
<br />
<strong>Will any of it happen?</strong><br />
<br />
There's no question Ofsted have woken up - in recent months - to the extent of the public relations challenge they have. The social media engagement of their Director of Schools Mike Cladingbowl has been welcome and extremely encouraging. The reforms he has proposed in recent months fit with the direction of travel of the Policy Exchange report - shorter more risk-based assessments, emphasising that individual teachers shouldn't be graded - but they are much less radical. <br />
<br />
Under the current regime I suspect this will continue - with incremental shifts in the right direction but no big bang reset. Whether we see the Policy Exchange recommendations implemented in full (or even the end of lesson observations all together) will probably depend on who gets to choose the next Chief Inspector and who that is. <br />
<b><br />
<span style="font-family: JoannaMTStd-Bold; font-size: small;"> </span> </b><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: inherit;"></span><br />
Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com12tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-7890382160877708242014-03-15T02:19:00.001-07:002014-03-15T02:28:01.881-07:00Weekly update 15/3/14<b><br /></b>
<b>News:</b><br />
<br />
DfE <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/fairer-schools-funding-2015-to-2016">published</a> their school funding consultation for 2015-16 - next step towards a national funding formula<br />
<br />
The FT ran a lengthy and very <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/ebe8018c-aa45-11e3-8497-00144feab7de.html">perceptive</a> profile/interview with Michael Gove<br />
<br />
Labour <a href="http://www.yourbritain.org.uk/education-and-children-policy-consultation">released</a> a policy consultation on education. And Tristram Hunt <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/mar/12/school-inspections-political-meddling-gove-ofsted">wrote</a> about Ofsted<br />
<br />
The Mail launched an <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2577851/Infants-choosing-meals-parents-brought-chop-veg-cold-food-served-classrooms-headteachers-blast-Cleggs-1bn-free-school-meals-scheme-fiasco.html">attack</a> on the universal free school meals policy. As <a href="http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s0ti2u">did</a> ex-SPAD Dominic Cummings (and <a href="https://dominiccummings.wordpress.com/2014/03/14/a-few-thoughts-on-free-school-meals-ofsted-and-an-answer-to-s-jenkins/">here</a>). Special mention to Andy Jolley who's been <a href="http://notveryjolley.wordpress.com/">tirelessly</a> plugging away at the flaws with the policy<br />
<br />
Post-16 institutions <a href="http://feweek.co.uk/2014/03/13/colleges-win-budget-protection-from-18-funding-rate-cut/">won</a> some respite from funding cuts to 18 year old learners<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Best Blogs/Articles:</b><br />
<br />
David Didau takes a <a href="http://www.learningspy.co.uk/myths/afl-might-wrong/">shot</a> at Assessment for Learning<br />
<br />
Sir David Carter on <a href="http://leadingtogether.wordpress.com/2014/03/09/leading-together-making-progression-from-primary-to-secondary-better/">supporting</a> transition from primary to secondary<br />
<br />
ChocoTzar on the <a href="http://chocotzar.wordpress.com/2014/03/14/the-friday-decompression/">role </a>of schools in supporting troubled teenage lives<br />
<br />
Laura Mcinerney <a href="http://lauramcinerney.com/2014/03/09/should-we-be-placing-unqualified-teachers-in-inadequate-schools/">argues</a> School Direct trainees shouldn't be placed in inadequate schools<br />
<br />
John Dunford on <a href="http://www.teachingleaders.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/TL_Quarterly_Q5_14_Dunford.pdf">using</a> the pupil premium effectively<br />
<br />
Toby Greany has a nuanced <a href="http://ioelondonblog.wordpress.com/2014/03/06/the-self-improving-school-system-competing-policies-undermine-the-coalitions-admirable-aims/">critique </a>of the Government's self-improvement system narrative<br />
<br />
Chris Chivers' <a href="http://www.inclusionmark.co.uk/index.php/about/the-2014-sen-framework">overview</a> of upcoming SEN changes<br />
<br />
Joe Kirby on the <a href="http://pragmaticreform.wordpress.com/2014/03/08/whymcqs/">benefits</a> of using multiple-choice questions<br />
<br />
Susan Young <a href="http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/news-and-media/blogs/susan-young/teaching-school-alliances/#.UyGMT7rLFnk.twitter">summarises</a> a conference on the future role of Teaching Schools<br />
<br />
John Mayer on <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/11/opinion/we-need-more-tests-not-fewer.html?_r=0">why</a> we need more tests, not fewer<br />
<br />
Rob Coe on <a href="http://www.cem.org/blog/would-you-let-this-test-into-your-classroom/">how</a> to design assessments (technically from last week but so good I had to include it)<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>New Research:</b><br />
<br />
DfE have released a series of <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/setting-research-priorities-in-education-and-childrens-services">papers</a> listing research priorities and questions<br />
<br />
Dan Willingham on a new study <a href="http://www.realcleareducation.com/articles/2014/03/11/do_we_underestimate_our_youngest_learners_895.html">showing</a> young children can understand complex concepts<br />
<br />
Reform/SSAT <a href="http://www.reform.co.uk/resources/0000/1208/140306_Plan_A__2014_Final_Report.pdf">report</a> on how academies are (or are not) using their autonomy<br />
<br />
University of Southampton <a href="http://schoolsimprovement.net/pupils-do-better-at-schools-in-academy-chains/">say</a> centralised academy chains are the most effective (can't find the full report)<br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-7269126228676904862014-03-01T01:35:00.003-08:002014-03-01T01:35:45.532-08:00Weekly Update 1/3/2014<br />
Probably the most significant education story this week was the DfE "persuading" E-ACT, one of the largest academy chains, to find <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/education/2014/feb/25/sponsors-e-act-academy-schools">new sponsors</a> for ten of their academies. Jonn Elledge's analysis is <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/02/why-was-governments-academies-programme-so-rushed">here</a> and Robert Hill wrote an excellent <a href="http://roberthilleducationblog.com/2014/02/25/e-act-and-four-challenges-for-dfe/">blog</a> about the wider significance of this move.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile Liz Truss has been in <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10659666/Chinese-teachers-are-more-effective-than-those-in-Britain-the-education-minister-has-said.html">Shanghai</a> with a group of headteachers. Chris Husbands offered an excellent <a href="http://ioelondonblog.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/how-did-shanghai-win-this-years-education-world-cup/">explanation</a> of why they're flavour of the month at the moment.<br />
<br />
And the long-awaited teacher workforce survey was <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teachers-workload-diary-survey-2013">published</a>. David Weston picked out the most salient <a href="http://www.teacherdevelopmenttrust.org/10-things-you-need-to-know-about-the-teacher-workload-survey/">points</a>. For me the most revealing chart was this one showing the difference of opinion between heads and classroom teachers in what would improve the quality of teaching and learning (respondents could choose up to three options).<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTFS7OWlIwUprfF4NrXp08jiB7bLXOuukfspQqraJXOTlkEpJF1S0KkPzxhj_8eTp6VD9Y4kciRT0TBo9Yv9RNn9nI4KC-yMhL7OgctCzF9MJZT-A0KlBUo4voUiCI6st2V6ESMpJdLD4/s1600/workforce.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTFS7OWlIwUprfF4NrXp08jiB7bLXOuukfspQqraJXOTlkEpJF1S0KkPzxhj_8eTp6VD9Y4kciRT0TBo9Yv9RNn9nI4KC-yMhL7OgctCzF9MJZT-A0KlBUo4voUiCI6st2V6ESMpJdLD4/s1600/workforce.png" height="395" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Also this week two of my favourite blogs for a while. A superb <a href="http://improvingteaching.co.uk/2014/02/23/being-the-1-what-does-it-take-to-make-cpd-effective/">post</a> from Harry Fletcher-Wood on what it takes to make CPD effective and Rob Peal <a href="http://goodbyemisterhunter.wordpress.com/2014/02/26/three-shockers-from-the-guardian/">taking apart</a> three Guardian articles (the middle one of which is a real shocker).<br />
<br />
<br />
<b>Other Highlights</b><br />
<br />
David Didau on a <a href="http://www.learningspy.co.uk/leadership/inconvenient-truth-thoughts-school-improvement/">surplus model</a> of performance management<br />
<br />
Kris Boulton <a href="http://tothereal.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/what-is-teaching/">asks</a> "what is teaching?"<br />
<br />
Kate Chhatwal on <a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/education/2014/02/invisible-prejudice-that%E2%80%99s-holding-female-teachers-back">sexism</a> in headteacher appointments<br />
<br />
John Tomsett on the <a href="http://johntomsett.com/2014/02/22/this-much-i-know-about-the-trouble-with-educational-research/">trouble</a> with education research<br />
<br />
Micon Metcalfe on the<a href="http://www.teacherdevelopmenttrust.org/no-more-grades/"> practicalities</a> of getting rid of lesson grades<br />
<br />
A nice bit of <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/02/22/you-think-you-know-what-teachers-do-right-wrong/?tid=pm_pop">polemic</a> from Valerie Strauss on why people who think they know what teacher do, don't<br />
<br />
Dan Willingham on why you <a href="http://www.danielwillingham.com/1/post/2014/02/why-you-shouldnt-hire-like-google.html">shouldn't</a> hire like google and why <a href="http://www.danielwillingham.com/1/post/2012/06/new-study-fluid-intelligence-not-trainable.html">fluid intelligence</a> isn't trainable<br />
<br />
Horatio Speaks on <a href="http://horatiospeaks.wordpress.com/2014/02/22/the-saboteur/">identifying</a> and stopping the saboteur pupil<br />
<br />
Harry Webb with a good <a href="https://websofsubstance.wordpress.com/2014/02/24/teaching-students-how-to-think-better/comment-page-1/#comment-3342">summary</a> of arguments for knowledge-based curricula<br />
<br />
New Sutton Trust research on <a href="http://www.suttontrust.com/news/news/ballots-and-banding/">changes</a> in admissions policy (and Conor Ryan's <a href="http://www.suttontrust.com/news/blog/ballots-and-banding/">blog</a> on the report)Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-87735118599888304482014-02-22T01:40:00.000-08:002014-02-22T05:29:57.702-08:00Weekly Update 22/2/2014<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;">
</div>
<br />
A rare, quiet, half-term, week from the politicians. But this week's adventure was Five go to Ofsted with top bloggers <a href="http://community.tes.co.uk/tom_bennett/b/weblog/archive/2014/02/19/meet-the-fockers-ofsted-talks-to-the-bloggers.aspx#.UwTW-xD1SFQ.twitter">Tom Bennett</a>, <a href="http://headguruteacher.com/2014/02/20/meeting-ofsted/">Tom Sherrington</a>, <a href="http://www.learningspy.co.uk/blogging/learned-visit-ofsted/">David Didau</a>, <a href="http://www.clerktogovernors.co.uk/the-journey-of-the-blogi/">Shena Lewington</a> and <a href="http://teachertoolkit.me/2014/02/18/an-edu-blogger-mandate-for-ofstednews-by-teachertoolkit/">Ross McGill</a> invited to meet with Ofsted's schools director Mike Cladingbowl. Naturally there all blogged about it. (And Bill Lord wrote a <a href="http://lordlit.com/2014/02/20/blimey-where-did-that-come-from/">good blog</a> about the wider significant of the lack of primary presence at the meeting).<br />
<br />
The big news was a bold statement from Mike Cladingbowl that inspectors shouldn't be grading individual lessons - and the meeting was followed up with <a href="http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/why-do-ofsted-inspectors-observe-individual-lessons-and-how-do-they-evaluate-teaching-schools">new guidance</a> from Ofsted on this issue. Quality of teaching - based on evidence beyond the lesson; such as pupils' books - can be graded, though. So there remains a dangerous lack of clarity that will, I expect, prevent many schools from dropping their own lesson grades (Alex Quigley would go <a href="http://www.huntingenglish.com/2014/02/21/progress-made-ofsted-stillhe-reiterated-print-today-message-see-crucially-however-issue-remains-splitting-hairs-solution-lesson-observations-w/">further</a> - and I agree). But it's a start and it's great to see Ofsted starting to engage with these issues - and with the blogging world.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bg7xDpRCAAA2XGv.png:large" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="320" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bg7xDpRCAAA2XGv.png:large" width="203" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Five go to Ofsted (thanks to @JamesTheo)</div>
<br />
<br />
<b>Other highlights</b><br />
<br />
Joe Kirby on building a <a href="http://pragmaticreform.wordpress.com/2014/02/22/instruction/">rigorous</a>, content-led, curriculum.<br />
<br />
Deputy John on the <a href="http://deputyjohn.wordpress.com/2014/02/15/the-blight-of-interventions/">blight</a> of constant interventions<br />
<br />
Tessa Matthews on the <a href="http://tabularasaeducation.wordpress.com/2014/02/15/everychild/">forgotten children</a> neither bad or good enough to get attention<br />
<br />
Tom Loveless on the poor <a href="http://educationnext.org/what-do-we-know-about-professional-development/">evidence base</a> for professional development.<br />
<br />
Robert Hill on the <a href="http://roberthilleducationblog.com/2014/02/15/quality-not-quantity-is-the-litmus-test-for-academy-chain-expansion/">over-expansion</a> of some academy chains and how to stop this happening in the future<br />
<br />
And David Carter on <a href="http://leadingtogether.wordpress.com/2014/02/16/leading-together-academy-groups-accountability-and-expansion/">chain accountability + expansion</a> from the perspective of someone running an excellent one.<br />
<br />
Michael Tidd with further <a href="http://michaelt1979.wordpress.com/2014/02/15/are-plans-for-post-levels-assessment-developing-meeting-or-exceeding-expectations/">thoughts</a> on assessment after levels.<br />
<br />
Rob Peal on <a href="http://goodbyemisterhunter.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/cultivating-character-yes-teaching-character-no-no-no/">teaching character</a> (or rather why it can't be taught).<br />
<br />
And Briar Lipson on why it <a href="http://www.floreat.org.uk/blog/what-does-it-mean-to-teach-character/">can</a> be taught.<br />
<br />
David Weston on the <a href="http://www.teacherdevelopmenttrust.org/the-coherence-of-scottish-education/">consensus-driven</a> Scottish education system<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4746901658370301167.post-6468292990821396152014-02-18T10:24:00.003-08:002014-02-20T12:06:44.266-08:00The North-East conundrum <br />
Last year Ofsted released a report on disadvantage and education called "<a href="http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/unseen-children-access-and-achievement-20-years">Unseen Children</a>". There are all sorts of interesting charts and graphs in there but one set has been puzzling me on and off since the report was released.<br />
<br />
They show the percentage of schools with the "most" and "least" deprived cohorts judged good or outstanding for leadership by region. The first chart (below) looks at primary schools and finds that for both the most and least deprived schools the North-East comes out on top, fractionally ahead of London and the North-West.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5GpQk-JIvejtoy9PEv-DdK80xInQUFy1j6kg43cWSv9U_04pOm-ey0R2j_toK5AywudPK8q4EJ_TlGQvCnjPaPxSfZgJJVcH85PPR-kYlFOIEeR7LPkBkLlbOU0hOzADYmc1Su1wBfIM/s1600/NE+primaries.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5GpQk-JIvejtoy9PEv-DdK80xInQUFy1j6kg43cWSv9U_04pOm-ey0R2j_toK5AywudPK8q4EJ_TlGQvCnjPaPxSfZgJJVcH85PPR-kYlFOIEeR7LPkBkLlbOU0hOzADYmc1Su1wBfIM/s1600/NE+primaries.png" height="570" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
But then look at the equivalent graph for secondaries. Suddenly - in the "most deprived" category - schools in the North-East plummet to the bottom of the table. And it's not just a leadership issue - the same applies in the "teaching" category - where just 29% of deprived secondaries in the North-East are rated good or outstanding.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiT79vTenf24wiB-h79Boli_r1CJ6wCWP6ry5cUH-RTGrufoXPzsB1Z_r7nyddClAAAkKw2FhkeY2dHG0-B8cvF-_flHHdKkT_c27Iy-jGzYnuCMBZ4FhyHp43-1IE0iKl0z-B9TmJU3w/s1600/NE+secondaries.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhiT79vTenf24wiB-h79Boli_r1CJ6wCWP6ry5cUH-RTGrufoXPzsB1Z_r7nyddClAAAkKw2FhkeY2dHG0-B8cvF-_flHHdKkT_c27Iy-jGzYnuCMBZ4FhyHp43-1IE0iKl0z-B9TmJU3w/s1600/NE+secondaries.png" height="593" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<br />
My first thought was that maybe there just aren't many secondaries included in this measure for the North-East, which is the smallest English region. Annoyingly the Ofsted report doesn't give any numbers but over 60 secondaries in the North-East are eligible for Teach First - which is a rough proxy - so it's a not insignificant number.<br />
<br />
Then I looked at exam data, after all Ofsted inspections are pretty data driven these days. Unfortunately I can't look at the data for these particular schools as I don't know which ones Ofsted have included. However looking at results for pupils on free school meals shows a less exaggerated version of the same pattern. Primary results in the North-East last year were the second best in the country after London, alongside the North-West. This matches the Ofsted figures fairly well.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgddYbMMidfcf1G9z1p5posMI-P3ONxVA9s0u7FtKMwimzxLh0yYJz7DY3OAe-ereAJCWFdn_7r28ceGQdcFVtKlVmTuNnMZEYM1UCUTQdVD9EKGW_IzQaYuhp1jdHrAOstlOyMaBGIcH0/s1600/KS2+levels+4+by+region.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgddYbMMidfcf1G9z1p5posMI-P3ONxVA9s0u7FtKMwimzxLh0yYJz7DY3OAe-ereAJCWFdn_7r28ceGQdcFVtKlVmTuNnMZEYM1UCUTQdVD9EKGW_IzQaYuhp1jdHrAOstlOyMaBGIcH0/s1600/KS2+levels+4+by+region.png" height="384" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
But a similar table for GCSE results shows the North-East slipping behind the West Mids/North-West and much closer to the other regions. This implies progress for these pupils during their secondary education is lower. And looking at the data for Teach First eligible schools suggests this is the case. In 2012, nationally, 65.7% of pupils in Teach First eligible schools made expected levels of progress in English and 64.3% in Maths. In the North-East the figures were just 60.9% and 59.1%. In Inner London they were 74.9% and 75.9%. Even in other poorly performing regions, like the South-East, pupils made a bit more progress than in the North-East.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFaNomT1BTUR0e4MWjnq57h1JSP73tnEZnbyIgtPZjRYNKQrbmT0u3O33rpiwvplSMZ1nE1LgcDYutZEuOhmoUWYQS22_8tHnv2FZ6rXoM1KAEl5eFzgfdd11aAVje0VTbczoxqMD_Ll8/s1600/GCSEs+FSM+by+region.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgFaNomT1BTUR0e4MWjnq57h1JSP73tnEZnbyIgtPZjRYNKQrbmT0u3O33rpiwvplSMZ1nE1LgcDYutZEuOhmoUWYQS22_8tHnv2FZ6rXoM1KAEl5eFzgfdd11aAVje0VTbczoxqMD_Ll8/s1600/GCSEs+FSM+by+region.png" height="352" width="640" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
So even if the Ofsted data is exaggerating the issue it is pointing to something real. Primary schools in the North-East serving deprived pupils are amongst the best in the country (outside of London) but the secondary schools serving those pupils are making less progress - on average - than elsewhere.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
This is particular puzzle as most of the reasons given for regional differences - cultural or economic issues; immigration; supply of high-quality teachers - should apply to both sectors equally. And they seem to in other parts of the country (the West Midlands is an exception the other way - the secondaries seem to be doing better than the primaries).</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
If you're expecting an answer to the conundrum I'm afraid I don't have one. The only half-baked theory I can come up with is that the unusual labour market in the North-East (high dependency on the public sector for employment leading to higher teacher retention) might have different impacts on primary and secondary schools.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
But I'd love to get better theories (or better analysis), especially from people who know the region much better than I do. It seems like an important question if we're to get to the bottom of how to help schools drive up standards outside of the capital.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b>*Update*</b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
Thanks to everyone who responded to this blog. No one offered any obvious suggestions that I'd missed but there were a few theories that act as a nice set of hypotheses for future research. So here's a list of the four most popular theories:</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
That the issue is small 1 or 2 form entry primaries feeding into large secondaries with wide catchment areas. Some people noted that rural areas in other parts of the country also seem to have this issue.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
That some LAs in the NE are three-tier.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
That the economic situation and lack of jobs in the NE lead to a lack of aspiration or a belief that aspirations can't be fulfilled as young people progress through secondary.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
A shortage of "system leader" type heads who can/will take on responsibility for supporting other schools.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
Sam Freedman (@samfr)http://www.blogger.com/profile/07413287655324567750noreply@blogger.com5