This article from the Sunday Times highlights a big issue that has started to get out of control.
I taught in a secondary school for 9 years, slowly building up the reputation of Mathematics and the results started to follow. We created a set X which was for the brightest most able students. They were fast tracked and sat their GCSE at the end if year 10. During year 11 they completed AS modules, some actually banking these and going straight onto A2 when they went to college.
The students worked really hard and the competition to get into "Set X" was evident. All other students sat their GCSE at the end of year 11.
This continued for a few years and the results improved every year, not just at early entry but also across the year.
So what did early entry do to the students at my school? I believe that it created motivation to succeed. It allowed the most able to push themselves further, still enjoying Mathematics and not becoming bored because it is so easy. It also encouraged students to take Mathematics further, which is something we as a nation are struggling with. New Zealand manage to encourage 66% of 17 year olds and 40% of 18 years olds to take maths post 16 compared with just 13% in England.
So why am I moaning about early entry? I believe in entering some of the most able early, but NOT whole cohorts up to 2 years early, which is what is happening in many secondary schools across the country.
Who does this benefit? The student or the school? Take one example. I was visiting a school that shall remain nameless. A pupil (Year 11) came into the classroom and asked "Well how did I do?" The teacher replied "Unfortunately you didn't get it this time." The pupil left the room, considerably upset that he hadn't managed to bank a C grade. I asked the teacher how many times this pupil had taken the maths exam, the response upset me. This child had been put through the maths exam 3 times and he still hadn't achieve the elusive C grade he was looking for. He still had one more attempt, the June examination, but was he up for it? Had he already given up? Was it fair to put him through all these examinations before he was Mathematically mature enough?
So why did this school enter this child so many times? Was it for the child's benefit or was it to improve the schools A*-C pass rate? I believe in re-sits so I child can improve on their grade but entering children to complete an examination up to 2 years early and then 'banking' their grade is not acceptable in my eyes.
This child had to deal with failure so many times and unfortunately I am not sure if they actually achieved that C grade this summer.
This example only looked at one individual but this happens for whole year groups, where many students are entered before they are ready. They have to deal with failure over and over again but if they do pass (achieve a C grade) they are then taken out of Mathematics lessons and their focus is on other subjects such as English. My first question would be, has each person achieved their potential?Just because they have achieved a C grade, could they possibly be pushed towards a B grade?
Another concern would be encouraging pupils to take Mathematics further. Pupils who stop doing Mathematics in year 10 can sometimes lose the love for the subject and so therefore don't choose to take it further, which is why we only have 13% of students doing maths post-16.
The article I mentioned at the start of the blog was actually about pupils being allowed to take a re-sit but the first grade the pupil receives is the one that will count towards the schools league tables.
When I read this article I was extremely happy that such measures have been thought about. Perhaps schools will now think carefully about entering students when they are ready for their exams and not enter the whole cohort, hoping to bank a few C grades. If the pupil then needs to re-sit to gain a better result they can but this result wont go into the schools league table.
The problem with teaching is that teachers are so limited by the constraints of league tables that schools play the system and teach to pass an exam, whether that be in year 9, 10 or 11. What we as teachers need to do is focus on preparing pupils for real life by ensuring that we challenge their thinking and create students who can solve problems and work independently. IT SHOULD BE ABOUT THE PUPILS NOT LEAGUE TABLES but this will never change while league tables exist.
Update
According to the DfE, only the first GCSE grade will be counted towards league table rankings but a loop hole has already been found. If pupils are entered in different examination series, e.g. different exam boards, the previous policy of a pupil's best grade would still be used.
Head Teachers criticise Gove's plans
Some schools are also complaining that the brightest students would also be held back, as the school would be reticent to enter them early. I don't agree with this at all. If you know your pupils, you know when to enter them for their examination irrespective of their ability!
No comments:
Post a Comment