Topic: Education Secretary Wants A Slap

[Guz-kop]

Why more exams? I don't get it. Aren't exams a bit outdated? I always presumed more coursework was the way forward..

Why is more coursework and less exams the way forward?

I'm not sure it's "more exams" anyway as modular and regular assesments currently includes coursework AND regular exams which they're getting away from.

[TepidT2O]

Course work is an issue.

Firstly, teachers are assessed on their examination performance (as are schools).

You cannot be in charge of correctly preparing them for coursework, and assessing it under strictly controlled conditions if you and your pay is to be assessed on the outcome.

It's open to mild (and gross) corruption by well meaning and pressured staff.  An obvious conflict of interests.

Additionally, too much of the coursework didn't actually measure the skills it was designed to and took up vast amounts of time.

[Nessy76]

Why is more coursework and less exams the way forward?

Because coursework actually tests skills which are of use outside of the examination environment. Exams typically chiefly test the ability to retain knowledge. So fine if you're Rain Man, but if you're someone with excellent analytical skills who would go to the bother of checking his facts before forming and putting forth his argument (as you would in a history coursework scenario, for instance) then an exam does nothing to reveal your skills (which are far more useful in just about every real world situation outside of the pub quiz)

Exams also rely on your ability to do well in exam conditions. Again, not reflective of any real-world situation, and plainly and simply stressful and terrifying for many perfectly capable and highly intelligent students.

And I say this as someone who pretty much sacked off two years of school, then turned up, took the exams and passed a fair few.

That's the basic form of the argument, of course not all exams really consist purely of spouting facts and figures, though it is clear that's the direction Gove wants to go in. Why? Because it's how they did it when he was at school. And the fact that he's quite clearly a complete idiot who has obviously been promoted to a level vastly at odds with his intellectual capacity is, predictably enough, something he is blind to as it would require analytical and reasoning skills that the man simply does not possess.

[SP]

There is an argument that exams with all the stresses that they involve are a very real world experience. In practice 100% coursework and 100% exams are both fundamentally flawed approaches. A moderate balanced approach using both makes more sense - with the balance very much dependent on the subject.

But what does sense have to do with education policy?

[Nessy76]

There is an argument that exams with all the stresses that they involve are a very real world experience. In practice 100% coursework and 100% exams are both fundamentally flawed approaches. A moderate balanced approach using both makes more sense - with the balance very much dependent on the subject.

Oh absolutely, I wouldn't go throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There is something to be said for exams in many subjects, -as I say, personally I did pretty well out of them, but at the moment we test kids from the age of five to eighteen pretty much every two years. The reasons for it have very little to do with improving the kids' education, and far more to do with league tables that give people a false notion of "choice". It means that teachers are pressured into coaching the kids to pass the tests rather than giving them a full education, at primary level in particular.

Course work is an issue.

Firstly, teachers are assessed on their examination performance (as are schools).

You cannot be in charge of correctly preparing them for coursework, and assessing it under strictly controlled conditions if you and your pay is to be assessed on the outcome.

It's open to mild (and gross) corruption by well meaning and pressured staff.  An obvious conflict of interests.

Additionally, too much of the coursework didn't actually measure the skills it was designed to and took up vast amounts of time.

Poor execution doesn't invalidate the concept.

I think the idea that Gove wants to lessen the workload for teachers is a bit of a reach.

For me, politicians should stay out of it as much as possible. Let the professionals do their jobs, decide what works and teach what will be most effective and useful.

[TepidT2O]

Gove isn't scrapping it because of workload....

The curriculum time it takes is perhaps one issue though....


For me, the conflict of interest teachers have has to be a huge issue with the way pressure is being applied to them to gain results results results (end of)

I'm pretty sure also that too often (however you design it) it tests literacy skills more than the subject skills its designed to test.  Now, communicating your subject skills is of importance, but if it is a barrier to a student showing their true ability, then the voracity of it must be questioned.

I know that you are right to point out that execution doesn't mean it's a bad idea, but when so little coursework actually works, I would suggest that it's almost possible to do properly.

However, patently, art, wood work etc have to be largely assessed this way, but they are more the exception.

Politicians certainly should stay out of it.  Too much chopping and changing with party systems is very disruptive for kids.

[CornerFlag]

More tests for primary schools.  That's it, pound these kids into submission Ms Morgan.

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/nicky-morgan-times-tables-tests-for-11-year-olds-will-pilot-in-primary-schools-this-summer/

Computer-based multiplication tests for 11-year-olds will be trialled in schools later this year, Nicky Morgan has confirmed.

The announcement by the education secretary today comes after schools minister Nick Gibb revealed plans for on-screen times tables tests in an exclusive interview with Schools Week last October.

Under the proposals, pupils will be tested at the end of their time at primary school to make sure they all know their times tables up to 12 x 12, in line with the Conservatives’ general election manifesto commitment.

Around 3,000 pupils in 80 primary schools will try the tests for the first time this summer before the system is rolled out across England in 2017. The tests will involve pupils giving times responses to a series of questions, with their answers scored instantly.

The government says this method will make the tests easier for teachers to deliver and give them an “immediate snapshot” of performance.

Ms Morgan referred to government figures which showed that although the proportion of pupils meeting the “required standard” in maths at age 11 had risen from 79 per cent in 2010 to 87 per cent last year, more than 74,000 children were still below it.

She said: “That is why, as part of our commitment to extend opportunity and deliver educational excellence everywhere we are introducing a new check to ensure that all pupils know their times tables by age 11.

“They will help teachers recognise those pupils at risk of falling behind and allow us to target those areas where children aren’t been given a fair shot to succeed.”

Schools Minister Nick Gibb revealed the plan for computerised times tables tests during an interview with Schools Week in October.

Speaking at the time, Association of School and College Leaders general secretary Brian Lightman warned that further testing was not the answer.

He said: “Children are already tested to distraction. The tables are already in the curriculum and it’s up to teachers to use their professional skills to decide how to assess it.

“We do not need centralised tests to do this. We really do not need any more accountability measures.”

The thing is, it's been fairly well established that testing isn't the greatest form of assessment for anyone, from 4 to 94.  Ongoing assessments are much better than teaching to the test which is what a lot of teaching consists of in preparation for examinations.  Adding to testing only harms, not helps a lot of the education of the children as teachers will be pushed to achieve such-and-such performance targets.

Daft once again.  And yes I've seen her avoiding answering one of the questions myself, funny but I have a bit of a blindness with the middle of the 6, 7, 8 and 9's multiplied to one another and it just detracts from the story itself.  More testing for kids.  Ridiculous.

[TepidT2O]

More tests for primary schools.  That's it, pound these kids into submission Ms Morgan.

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/nicky-morgan-times-tables-tests-for-11-year-olds-will-pilot-in-primary-schools-this-summer/

The thing is, it's been fairly well established that testing isn't the greatest form of assessment for anyone, from 4 to 94.  Ongoing assessments are much better than teaching to the test which is what a lot of teaching consists of in preparation for examinations.  Adding to testing only harms, not helps a lot of the education of the children as teachers will be pushed to achieve such-and-such performance targets.

Daft once again.  And yes I've seen her avoiding answering one of the questions myself, funny but I have a bit of a blindness with the middle of the 6, 7, 8 and 9's multiplied to one another and it just detracts from the story itself.  More testing for kids.  Ridiculous.

I'm not sure what other form of assessment is more suitable for times tables than testing to be honest.

These can be learned, and putting them in tests in this way would ensure a greater emphasis on them by schools.

Kids struggle in secondary school because they don't know their times tables well enough.

Of course, this as much to do with school accountability as it is to do with pupil progress.  However, times table testing will probably serve kids better in the future.

[CornerFlag]

I'm not sure what other form of assessment is more suitable for times tables than testing to be honest.

These can be learned, and putting them in tests in this way would ensure a greater emphasis on them by schools.

Kids struggle in secondary school because they don't know their times tables well enough.

Of course, this as much to do with school accountability as it is to do with pupil progress.  However, times table testing will probably serve kids better in the future.

Times tables are probably one of a few where there needs to be some form of testing, but what do you do with a kid who fails that year 6 test?  They're straight into secondary school thinking they're thick because they can't hit something that's made out to be really simple like 6x8 or 7x9 and I'm balls-deep in a physics degree and those numbers don't rush to my mind all that quick so for a 10 year old not confident with numeracy it'll turn them off mathematics which is about the most opposite point of teaching them the subject as there is.

Assessing the child earlier than that and being allowed to fill in the blank spots as you go along is a much better method than teaching for one big test which pressurises the pupil into mistakes and takes away in-class time for other subjects too because the teacher needs to hit so many marks in their classroom on average.  I did the first year of a primary school teaching degree and one of the points continuously brought up to us was how nearly all the teachers agreed with having to assess children in case of problems such as dyslexia or dyscalculia and finding out reading ages and mental arithmetic and numerical manipulation, and that the pressures of "teaching to the test" caused more problems than fixed them.  So it's not the issue of testing, it's the issue of testing in such a manner.  They could test in a way which a lot of kids get but some children will not understand because they're a count-on-fingers kid and because they're slower they could be punished for that.

[TepidT2O]

Times tables are probably one of a few where there needs to be some form of testing, but what do you do with a kid who fails that year 6 test?  They're straight into secondary school thinking they're thick because they can't hit something that's made out to be really simple like 6x8 or 7x9 and I'm balls-deep in a physics degree and those numbers don't rush to my mind all that quick so for a 10 year old not confident with numeracy it'll turn them off mathematics which is about the most opposite point of teaching them the subject as there is.

Assessing the child earlier than that and being allowed to fill in the blank spots as you go along is a much better method than teaching for one big test which pressurises the pupil into mistakes and takes away in-class time for other subjects too because the teacher needs to hit so many marks in their classroom on average.  I did the first year of a primary school teaching degree and one of the points continuously brought up to us was how nearly all the teachers agreed with having to assess children in case of problems such as dyslexia or dyscalculia and finding out reading ages and mental arithmetic and numerical manipulation, and that the pressures of "teaching to the test" caused more problems than fixed them.  So it's not the issue of testing, it's the issue of testing in such a manner.  They could test in a way which a lot of kids get but some children will not understand because they're a count-on-fingers kid and because they're slower they could be punished for that.

I think it would give secondary schools much clearer information about kids ability to do times tables.  This, it would allow immediate intervention on this basic skill when they start secondary.

Now, ideally primary schools should maybe pass this on already, but they just don't.

I think of this as more if a formative measure to help secondary schools.

[CornerFlag]

I think it would give secondary schools much clearer information about kids ability to do times tables.  This, it would allow immediate intervention on this basic skill when they start secondary.

Now, ideally primary schools should maybe pass this on already, but they just don't.

I think of this as more if a formative measure to help secondary schools.

One problem I see with that is if one test goes wrong for a child and the secondary school sees that as the basis on which to educate that child then you're going to be educating that child outside of their levels one way or another.  I just struggle to believe that so much should hinge on a one-off test.  Will it be standardised?  Will all the children be given the exact same numbers?  Will the teachers teach the exact sums they're to solve?  The teachers should be able to be free to provide the feedback, not have to rely on software that has no way of recognising the teaching methods needed to educate that one particular child.

I'll be interested to see how the trials go but I'm not hopeful for it being anything other than a bust in terms of meaningful information.

[TepidT2O]

One problem I see with that is if one test goes wrong for a child and the secondary school sees that as the basis on which to educate that child then you're going to be educating that child outside of their levels one way or another.  I just struggle to believe that so much should hinge on a one-off test.  Will it be standardised?  Will all the children be given the exact same numbers?  Will the teachers teach the exact sums they're to solve?  The teachers should be able to be free to provide the feedback, not have to rely on software that has no way of recognising the teaching methods needed to educate that one particular child.

I'll be interested to see how the trials go but I'm not hopeful for it being anything other than a bust in terms of meaningful information.

Fair point, I never trust any measure instigated by Morgan

[CornerFlag]

Fair point, I never trust any measure instigated by Morgan

It's like Gove was replaced by Gove.

[TepidT2O]

It's like Gove was replaced by Gove.

Oh no, I can't agree.  Gove had a very definite agenda, a very definite ideology he was aiming for. Morgan just has a random mish mash of random and poorly thought out ideas.

[SP]

No kid should get to the stage where they fail a times table test in year 6. Times tables are key to basic numeracy. Yet kids are getting to year 6 without those skills. If the threat of the external test means more kids with issues are identified and helped then it is a good thing. It should not stigmatise the child, but would be a damning indictment of the teaching that they have received.

Of course there are many children who would struggle - but they should already be getting additional support. Given the tightening purse strings, this may even force additional funding. If you identify a pupil that has been failed by the system, you have to invest in the remedy.

Is year 6 too late for this? Where I am, they change schools after year 6. Year 5 would be better to allow remedial action before changing schools.

[hide5seek]

No kid should get to the stage where they fail a times table test in year 6. Times tables are key to basic numeracy. Yet kids are getting to year 6 without those skills. If the threat of the external test means more kids with issues are identified and helped then it is a good thing. It should not stigmatise the child, but would be a damning indictment of the teaching that they have received.

Of course there are many children who would struggle - but they should already be getting additional support. Given the tightening purse strings, this may even force additional funding. If you identify a pupil that has been failed by the system, you have to invest in the remedy.

Is year 6 too late for this? Where I am, they change schools after year 6. Year 5 would be better to allow remedial action before changing schools.

Some  kids won't be able to it. I left school without knowing my tables or alphabet (still don't know either) Remedial action sounds great but costs how much?

[TepidT2O]

Some  kids won't be able to it. I left school without knowing my tables or alphabet (still don't know either) Remedial action sounds great but costs how much?

Additional support would come as the kids entered secondary school.  Tables are essentials for accessing higher level maths.
Cost?  Probably nothing.  Just additional/alternative classes to support these kids at secondary school.

[hide5seek]

Additional support would come as the kids entered secondary school.  Tables are essentials for accessing higher level maths.
Cost?  Probably nothing.  Just additional/alternative classes to support these kids at secondary school.

So take them out of another class to teach them the basics they've missed previously? I see no problem bar others kids making the divies lives hell (I was and am one of those divies). Preferably it would be better to catch them earlier but I still think some just can't do it.

[TepidT2O]

So take them out of another class to teach them the basics they've missed previously? I see no problem bar others kids making the divies lives hell (I was and am one of those divies). Preferably it would be better to catch them earlier but I still think some just can't do it.

Maybe some just can't do it....

But we shouldn't just give up trying...

[hide5seek]

Maybe some just can't do it....

But we shouldn't just give up trying...

Totally agree. But the way its thought about needs to be changed. Yes give extra remedial with the understanding that some will still fail but any extra learning is better than none. At the same time work out where that particular child may well excel and push them that way (while continuing there remedial development in the basics).

[redbyrdz]

Additional support would come as the kids entered secondary school.  Tables are essentials for accessing higher level maths.
Cost?  Probably nothing.  Just additional/alternative classes to support these kids at secondary school.

Don't agree with that - they have very little to do with each other, imo. One is memorising, the other logical thinking.

I'd think if teachers were given sufficient time to actually work with the kids, they'd have a good idea about who needs additional help and who not. I'm very sceptical of the whole emphasis on constant testing, I think it only teaches to do well in repeatable, reduced exams while neglecting real-life problem solving and critical thinking.

[B0151?]

From what I remember, I could work them out quickly but I never really could get them memorised to the point if you asked a question on any you'd get an instant answer. For a decent chunk of them I'd have to count up to make sure. Was a high achiever school-wise but think I'd have found a computer test pretty stressful.

[TepidT2O]

Don't agree with that - they have very little to do with each other, imo. One is memorising, the other logical thinking.

I'd think if teachers were given sufficient time to actually work with the kids, they'd have a good idea about who needs additional help and who not. I'm very sceptical of the whole emphasis on constant testing, I think it only teaches to do well in repeatable, reduced exams while neglecting real-life problem solving and critical thinking.

I'm just telling you what secondary maths teachers say.

Tables are a key factor in progressing.

Kids are hugely over tested, I agree.  But this is probably a worthwhile test at a worthwhile time.

[SP]

Some  kids won't be able to it. I left school without knowing my tables or alphabet (still don't know either) Remedial action sounds great but costs how much?

So the education system failed you. Identifying the kids that the system has failed is fundamental to being able to help them. Times tables and the like are key foundation stones that the rest of the subject depends upon. If the foundations are not right, it sabotages the whole rest of the student's learning - and leads the student to hate school - who wouldn't if you just cannot do the work. Often there is no additional cost, just more individual attention from the current class teaching staff.

[hide5seek]

So the education system failed you. Identifying the kids that the system has failed is fundamental to being able to help them. Times tables and the like are key foundation stones that the rest of the subject depends upon. If the foundations are not right, it sabotages the whole rest of the student's learning - and leads the student to hate school - who wouldn't if you just cannot do the work. Often there is no additional cost, just more individual attention from the current class teaching staff.

Agree with much of this. But you just know the idiots coming out with this policy will just use any pupill failings as another stick to beat teachers with.

http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/all-the-politicians-who-have-struggled-with-their-times-tables-on-live-television--Z1xHVP9bRox?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100

[SP]

Agree with much of this. But you just know the idiots coming out with this policy will just use any pupill failings as another stick to beat teachers with.

http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/all-the-politicians-who-have-struggled-with-their-times-tables-on-live-television--Z1xHVP9bRox?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100

Undoubtedly, but unintended consequences here could serve the general good. On an individual level, if a teacher fails to identify pupils with difficulties with times tables prior to these tests, is there an issue with there competence? Just to be clear, I don't expect teachers to get their students 100% pass rates, but I would expect them to be able to have identified all those that may not pass and put a plan in place. Certainly, I would expect there to be questions asked in the staff room about any that are missed.

All of the above ignores the freak failures of kids having off days, panic attacks or illness affected results. Those should be tackled with discrete resits. Indeed, the whole thing should probably be handled as a low key computer based test handled as part of the school routine, rather than a big SATs kind of thing.

[hide5seek]

Undoubtedly, but unintended consequences here could serve the general good. On an individual level, if a teacher fails to identify pupils with difficulties with times tables prior to these tests, is there an issue with there competence? Just to be clear, I don't expect teachers to get their students 100% pass rates, but I would expect them to be able to have identified all those that may not pass and put a plan in place. Certainly, I would expect there to be questions asked in the staff room about any that are missed.

All of the above ignores the freak failures of kids having off days, panic attacks or illness affected results. Those should be tackled with discrete resits. Indeed, the whole thing should probably be handled as a low key computer based test handled as part of the school routine, rather than a big SATs kind of thing.

Agree with all of this, particularly second paragraph.

[Red Raw]

I haven't seen how the questions are likely to be posed, but in my opinion teaching tables, particularly by rote, is like teaching the alphabet without learning about words or stories.

The power of testing and league tables to distort assessment procedures and learning outcomes should not be underestimated.

[SP]

I haven't seen how the questions are likely to be posed, but in my opinion teaching tables, particularly by rote, is like teaching the alphabet without learning about words or stories.

The power of testing and league tables to distort assessment procedures and learning outcomes should not be underestimated.

The proposed testing should not impact on teaching methods. It is a test of the end result, which is that the kids can multiply 2 single digit numbers together without having to work it out each time. How you get there does not have to be by rote. But that instant recall is the desired result, as it makes all the numerate subjects so much easier to comprehend.

[Red Beret]

Agree with much of this. But you just know the idiots coming out with this policy will just use any pupill failings as another stick to beat teachers with.

http://i100.independent.co.uk/article/all-the-politicians-who-have-struggled-with-their-times-tables-on-live-television--Z1xHVP9bRox?utm_source=indy&utm_medium=top5&utm_campaign=i100

It wont be "the system has failed these kids" it will be "the teachers failed these kids" or "the kids clearly weren't all that smart to begin with".

I've not followed this thread too closely but I'm concerned about a potential movement towards a "one size fits all" education system, where kids are left to either sink or swim.  Gifted kids' growth will be stunted unless their parents shell out dosh they probably don't have whilst those who struggle will end up on the scrap heap.

[Red Raw]

The proposed testing should not impact on teaching methods. . .

Ongoing, low-stakes, testing is an important part of formative assessment that most teachers carry out on a daily or weekly basis.  As soon as it becomes a high-stakes test (like SATs) I can't see how it won't impact teaching.  Headteachers and academy managers will expect good results and there will be increased pressure on teachers and children to 'perform' for the test.  Parents will also stress over it and this too will filter down to the kids.  Sadly I think the end result, certainly over the next couple of years, will be a much narrower focus, less emphasis on critical thinking and less creative teaching of maths.

. . . instant recall is the desired result, as it makes all the numerate subjects so much easier to comprehend.

I am not opposed to kids being taught tables or even tested on them in a classroom environment.  Equally though, I am not convinced that rapid recall of facts is a good indicator of ability in any subject.  Being able to remember all the kings and queens of England for instance does not make a good historian, and I don't believe that the recall of multiplication facts is the best indicator of ability in maths, I would even go as far as to say that it can act as an early disincentive for some pupils to take maths further.  In both cases I believe that critical thinking and problem solving skills are more valuable.

[TepidT2O]

Rapid recall of facts is absolutely essential if students are to make rapid progress as they get older.

There's no bucking the system, not having deep core knowledge impedes progress.

[SP]

If you have to think about multiplying digits, it distracts you from the calculation / data that you are trying to process. The analogy is if you have difficulty reading, just about all your subjects are sabotaged. As if you have to concentrate on deciphering each word, you are less focussed on the meaning, and your learning outcomes are less successful.

Having an end stop to pick up basic competencies is not a bad thing. There should be no stigma for the teacher if the pupil has already been identified as needing additional support though.

[Nessy76]

The key here, surely is that testing does not make kids better at anything. And if you want to know how good kids are at times tables, or anything else, you should keep a record of their progress over the academic year rather than punt it on a one-off test.
You're six. Your pet dog just died. Do your times tables test. How do you think he'll get on?

How is that going to give you a more accurate picture of his ability than the work he does day in day out?

It's obvious nonsense.

[redbyrdz]

The usefulness of being able to instantly recall 7 x 9 stops as soon as it becomes a x b. The ability to deduct from principles and pattern recognition are enormously more important than memory recall. But they're harder to test, because someone has to follow the train of thought and not just look at the result.


And perhaps we don't actually want to teach kids how to think for themselves - they might start questioning how the world is run... Just teach them to sit still mermorise facts, that'll keep them occupied.

[SP]

The usefulness of being able to instantly recall 7 x 9 stops as soon as it becomes a x b. The ability to deduct from principles and pattern recognition are enormously more important than memory recall. But they're harder to test, because someone has to follow the train of thought and not just look at the result.


And perhaps we don't actually want to teach kids how to think for themselves - they might start questioning how the world is run... Just teach them to sit still mermorise facts, that'll keep them occupied.

You are talking about Maths as an academic subject. Arithmetic is a skill that transcends Maths, and is essential for all of the sciences, even the dismal ones. It is an essential life skill. The number of things that really need to be memorised is fairly small, but times tables is one of them.

[TepidT2O]

You are talking about Maths as an academic subject. Arithmetic is a skill that transcends Maths, and is essential for all of the sciences, even the dismal ones. It is an essential life skill. The number of things that really need to be memorised is fairly small, but times tables is one of them.

Harsh on biology there..

[SP]

The key here, surely is that testing does not make kids better at anything. And if you want to know how good kids are at times tables, or anything else, you should keep a record of their progress over the academic year rather than punt it on a one-off test.
You're six. Your pet dog just died. Do your times tables test. How do you think he'll get on?

How is that going to give you a more accurate picture of his ability than the work he does day in day out?

It's obvious nonsense.

The testing does not make the kids better in itself. The testing is designed to identify kids that have been failed by the system. The in-house continual assessment clearly does not work perfectly as kids are falling through the system. In principle, another safety net to catch people falling through the system can be justified. I would be delighted if the system failed to identify any pupils that had not already been identified - but you know that won't be the case.

All a "fail" should do is provoke an investigation. They should be simple Computer based tests so a resit should not be logistically problematic, and there should be no blemish on the kids academic record. It is a tool to ensure that they have been taught correctly, not a tool to brand a kid a failure.

[redbyrdz]

I really don't get that. What's so bad about working your times out when you need them? Why do you have to memorise the sums? To me only a lack of understanding of mathematical principles makes memorisation necessary.

[SP]

Harsh on biology there..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dismal_science

Biology is not a dismal science. Biologists are dismal, but that is another topic.