SATs Protest: 'Parents, you have done us proud!' declare #LetKidsBeKids

The #LetKidsBeKids have issued the press release below after today's action:

 

To all of the parents, grandparents, friends, and most importantly, children who took part in an amazing today, a huge thank you! You are amazing people who have achieved something enormous! We salute you all! 

Thank you to all of the teachers and headteachers who supported both the events and the children in taking part. This has been in support of you. 

The press has played a massive part in the success of this campaign. We want to thank you for the interest you have shown and for the dedicated and thoughtful way in which so many of you have worked with the supporters of the campaign in order to enable us to share our opinions. In many cases, opinions that, as parents, you have shared with us. 

Thank you also to the many, many supporters who have rallied to the numerous calls to appear on radio and TV and to be interviewed for newspapers. You have done us all proud! It has been amazing to hear so many standing up for what they believe in. 

We have monitored the day from the tagboard http://bit.ly/KidsStrike3rdMayNow and have enjoyed watching the thousands of pictures coming in of children enjoying fun learning everywhere. We are happy to report that no child looked damaged or harmed in any way as a result of missing one day off school. Thank you for your concern DfE. Children visited museums, enjoyed woodland walks, learnt about democracy, engaged in scientific discovery, painted, sang, danced... they did all the things that kids should be doing. Today we Let Our Kids Be Kids. 

Highlights for us today were watching over 600 attendees and Children’s laureate Chris Riddell at the Brighton and Hove rally showing support for their amazing teachers; banner waving children handing over more than 47,000 signatures on our 38 Degrees petition to the DfE offices and knowing that at 12.30 we were united via this statement in shouting “Are you listening Nicky?” across the nation. We really hope she heard us... 

We were also encouraged to hear Nick Gibb MP so publicly demonstrating the problems with SAT tests on Radio 4 when attempting to answer questions for 11 year olds... he said ‘it’s not about him’ and he’s absolutely right. This is about OUR children who feel the pressure of these ridiculous tests just as he did today. 

Throughout the day over 400 events took place across the country; the absence letter has been downloaded over 63,000 times; our hashtag #KidsStrike3rdMay trended and we have been sent thousands of pictures of smiling happy children so far. 

We have a leading statistician compiling the figures (parents are statisticians too!) but for now are delighted to estimate that today we are reporting numbers in HIGH THOUSANDS. This is far bigger than we imagined this would become just over 5 weeks ago... what an amazing show of parent power!

    

This figure does not include the thousands of parents not able to strike due to work commitments who took letters into school to say they supported our action today and also want to see change.

We have shown in just over 5 weeks that there is an enormous enthusiasm nationwide for the cancellation of this year’s chaotic SAT tests. 

Today was about standing together to share our belief that the education system in this country is damaging our children. It was about making our voices heard. It was about working together to bring about change. It was just the start. 

Parents have shown their massive support today for their children’s teachers and have demonstrated clearly that they want to see a change. We need to see teachers, unions and the Government working together with us now to find a way that works. Not just a way to pass tests, but a way that encourages a lifelong love of learning in our children and that develops, through a curriculum rich in a wealth of experiences, the confidence, imagination and passion for learning that will help our children to succeed. 

The NAHT stated that ‘The government must step back from its piecemeal, last minute changes and engage with the profession now – well in advance of next year – in a fundamental review of assessment from reception to key stage three.’ Parents have shown today that they are offering teachers their full support - now. Please support us and act NOW to make this happen. 

To Nicky Morgan: we have shown you today that we want to discuss education with you. Teachers, parents and students. We are asking you again to do the right thing. 

Will you listen to us now?

Michael Rosen spatchcocks SPAG

Government testing demands create a testing industry

Michael Rosen, broadcaster and children's author, has offered the text below to anyone campaigning on the current revised SATs and curriculum for primary schools.  I know SPAG is causing great stress for pupils and teachers, as well as those parents trying to help their children:

Nick Gibb has been on talking about how they've brought grammar back into schools. Please feel free to use any or all of the below as part of any campaign to oppose the Spelling, Punctuation and Grammar tests. 

1. Grammar was hardly taught in state primary schools in the 1950s. it was saved till secondary schools and then it was mostly in grammar schools,and top stream in secondary modern schools i.e. for about one third of all pupils, max.The most that was taught in primary schools, when I was at school, was noun, verb, adjective, adverb - not even subject, verb, object. I publicly call on him to show otherwise, by referring to the 11plus exams of the 1940s, 1950s and early 1960s. (I have now provided an example of these in another post here on Facebook. It confirms that many of the terms used in the SPaG were not used in the 1950s and that the questions were, as I remembered them, 'filling in the missing word' and identifying words that exemplified the most common terms.)

2. The grammar that was taught in grammar schools in the 1950s and early 60s was discontinued because after 25 years of O-level exams no evidence was found that teaching that kind of grammar was helping school students to write better. The evidence for this was in the O-level exam results themselves where no correlations were found between the 'grammar question' and the 'composition' question.

3. The grammar that Nick Gibb et al have introduced into schools is not there because anyone can or has shown that it improves children's writing. All it can ever show is that pupils incorporate elements of the grammar into their writing in formulaic, mechanical ways e.g. by random and artificial insertion of 'fronted adverbials', 'embedded relative clauses' and 'expanded noun phrases'.

4. The grammar they have introduced was only introduced because the Bew Report of 2011 said that it produced right/wrong answers in test situations. This is not true. It doesn't, as evidenced by the number of questions that produce several possible answers.

5. This kind of grammar is not directly related to how children and adults are using words and language as a whole. A good deal of it is made up of artificial sentences which children have to use to spot parts of speech. There is an alternative to this. It involves observing real language in use, how writers and speakers are using it to communicate and express themselves. It then can involve a combination of imitation, adaptation, invention and a limited amount of naming of parts.

6. Several of the categories in this government directed grammar are heavily disputed by grammarians. It's dishonest to pretend to children and teachers that they are not. It is also dishonest to pretend to children, parents and teachers that there are people who produce a fault-free way of speaking and writing. We all make errors and slips. We vary from each other in how we speak and write. That is because language is one kind of human behaviour so there is no reason to expect that it will be any more uniform than our clothes or our ways of dancing.

7. Our children are being put under stress to get difficult, abstract concepts learned off for these tests. It is very doubtful that many of them will understand the concepts being taught. This is evidenced by the fact that people who write the test papers and the homework booklets themselves don't appear to understand all the concepts involved. Part of the problem here is that the concepts themselves are nowhere near as watertight as it is claimed. `Language is far from suitable as a site for coming up with yes/no, right/wrong categories. Most linguists know this.

The Gladstone story highlights risks attached to Brent's free school policy

The Brent Cabinet probably approved an officer report on school places provision this afternon at their Crest Academy meeting.  The report advocates providing the additional secondary places needed via free schools.

It may be worth looking at the example of the Gladstone Free School  in assessing the risks attached to this policy. The proposal goes back to  2014  when the DfE approved the application. There was a chaotic 'consultation' meeting inJanuary 2014 when it appeared the school wanted to build on playing fields agjacent to Gladstone Park. LINK

There have been huge problems in finding a site. In April 2014 the school advised parents of pupils who had been enrolled for a place in September 2014 that they should seek another school. It again failed to open this September.

The school has this week written to parents to say that after talks in 'high places' they have the support of Nick Gibb MP, Minister for Schools. They claim that he made it clear to ' DfE officials that he wanted this project to work'.

They claims that officers  from Brent Council are working directly with the Education Funding Agency and two estate agents to find the school a site. They say, as they have said before, that they understand there are several sites that 'may prove possible options'.

Gladstone state that once the EFA find a permanent site the school will be found a temporary site for the 'year or two' that it will take refurbishment, remodelling or rebuilding to be completed.

Desite this uncertainty the putative school announces that it is still open for applications: 'Gladstone School - Your Extra Choice!'

They assure parents that as Gladstone is its own admissions authority they can still make 6 choices through the Lacal Authority applications system in  addition to Gladstone. They have extended their first round admissions to February 2016 and ask parents to let others who are concerned about school places know about Gladstone.

In March this year Gladstone announced the day after children had been allocated their places that they would not be opening in September LINK

I asked at the time whether the DfE support for the school should be withdrawn to avoid the confusion and disappointment caused by enrollment but failure to open in 2014 and 2015. It ap;pears there is still a risk for September 2016 despite the active recruiting.

Another proposed  free school,  Gateway,  did not proceed after difficulties in finding a site LINK and it would be interesting to hear how Brent Council expects to get over this problem

Apart from the site uncertainties there continues to be concern  over Gladstone financial issues and the amount of money spent on the school without one child being educated. There are also suggestions of potential conflicts of interest. LINK

There are 6 current directors and 8 previous directos.

source: companycheck.co.uk

To read about other issues of concern over free schools follow this LINK








 

Nicky Morgan slammed for attack on anti-academy parents and communities

 

Campaigners against the forced academisation of Gladstone Park Primary School

From Anti-Academies Alliance LINK
 

Commenting on Nicky Morgan’s attack on those in their community who campaign against academisation, including forced academisation, Kevin Courtney, Deputy General Secretary of the National Union of Teachers, the largest teachers’ union, said; 

“The Department for Education’s press release has been timed to coincide with the passage of the Education and Adoption Bill through the Lords. If passed without amendment, this Bill could result in thousands more schools being forced into sponsored academy arrangements against the wishes of local communities. This is despite the absence of evidence that academy status results in improved standards. Even the Schools Minister, Nick Gibb, has been forced to concede that the Government ‘does not believe that all academies and free schools are necessarily better than maintained schools.’ 

“Crucially the Bill removes the consultation rights for parents, teachers and governors who in future would have no say over whether their school should become an academy, or the sponsor who would take it over. Nor would they be entitled to any information on the relative performance of the proposed sponsors compared with their local authority. It is therefore the undemocratic and illiberal Education and Adoption Bill which is underhand and intimidating, not the parents, grandparents and supporters of campaigns against forced academisation.

“The unsubstantiated attacks by the DfE on parents and local communities whose only crime has been to defend their school against the Government’s strong-arm-route tactics to force schools into academy status, including deploying bullying academy brokers, is utterly shameful. Under Nicky Morgan’s watch, the Department has plumbed new depths.

“Furthermore some of the ‘success’ claimed by academy heads, as cited in the press release, was occurring before these schools became academies. For example, results of SATs tests taken in May 2012 at Downhills, four months before the school was taken over by Harris,  show progress in English exceeded the national average (89%) by two percentage points (91%); while progress in Maths was just one percentage point (86%) below the national average (87%). It is not possible to make a direct comparison with the Key Stage 2 performance score for reading and maths prior to Downhills becoming an academy because from 2013 the reading national curriculum test and writing teacher assessment results were no longer combined to produce an overall English level. Instead, reading and writing results were reported on separately. This is yet another example of shoddy statistics emanating from the Department for Education.

“The Government’s assault on parents is a far cry from its claims that its academy and free school programme would give parents more ‘choice’ and a greater say in their child’s education. It is quite clear with this latest pronouncement from Nicky Morgan that the Government will stop at nothing to railroad schools, parents and communities into being forced to accept a school system that is neither wanted nor needed and for which there is no evidence base.

“Nicky Morgan should be concentrating on the real problems faced by schools such as a growing teacher recruitment and retention crisis and huge pressure on budgets and growing pupil populations. It is ridiculous that these issues are being ignored while the Government fixates on pushing through yet more privatisation.”

Nick Gibb 'wrong' to attribute increase in children in 'good or outstanding schools' to academisation

By Henry Stuart republished from original article on Local Schools Network
This is another really useful article by Nick which shows how the government misleads on the basics.

 Government ministers have repeatedly claimed that one million more children are in "good" or "outstanding" schools, and that this is a direct result of their academies policy. For example Nick Gibb, speaking at the consideration of the Education and Adoption Bill on Friday 11th September, said "there are 1,100 sponsored academies that started life as under-performing schools, which is a colossal achievement that has led directly to over 1 million [more] children being taught in “good” or “outstanding” schools." (col 208)

Analysis of Ofsted Data View does indicate that it is true that one million more pupils are in schools rated "good" or "outstanding" and it is clearly the case that many schools have been converted to academies. But a basic analysis of the data suggests it was not academisation that caused any improvement.

Vast majority of improved primaries are not academies
78% of the increase has been in primary schools, where only a small minority of schools have become academies. Indeed the latest Ofsted dataset indicates that there are 167 sponsored academy primary schools that are currently rated "good" or "outstanding". Assuming these have the same average size as primaries overall (411 pupils), this gives a total of 68,537 children.

Extra pupils in "good" or "outstanding" primaries           996,604
Pupils in "good" or "outstanding" sponsored primaries    68,637
% in sponsored academies                                                  7%

So for every 100 extra pupils in "good" or "outstanding" primaries, 93 were in schools that were not sponsored academies. The percentage of primary schools that are "good" or "outstanding" has gone from 67% in 2010 to 82% in 2015 but the vast majority of this improvement has been due to improvements in maintained schools, not in sponsored academies. Nick Gibb is entirely wrong to say the improvement results "directly" from the performance of sponsored academies.

Ratings for primaries are improving but more secondaries are being rated "inadequate"
The Ofsted annual report of 2014 made note of the fact that primary schools were continuing to improve but that this was not the case for secondaries (where the majority of schools are not academies). Indeed there is a worrying increase in the number rated "inadequate":

“Children in primary schools have a better chance than ever of attending an effective school. Eighty-two per cent of primary schools are now good or outstanding, which means that 190,000 more pupils are attending good or outstanding primary schools than last year. However, the picture is not as positive for secondary schools: only 71% are good or outstanding, a figure that is no better than last year. Some 170,000 pupils are now in inadequate secondary schools compared with 100,000 two years ago.” (Ofsted annual report 2014 p8)

I have noted here that sponsored secondaries are far more likely to remain or become "inadequate" than similar maintained schools, and here that sponsored academies lead to slower school improvement. The concern is that the direct effect of sponsored academies has actually been this substantial increase in secondaries rated "inadequate".

The data indicates that the Education Bill, in forcing all "inadequate" or "coasting" schools to become sponsored academies, is likely to substantially increase the number of pupils in "inadequate" schools.

Data Notes

Data on pupil numbers come from DfE for 2010 and 2015.

Data on schools overall Ofsted ratings come from Ofsted Data View.

The Ofsted dataset on ratings for all schools (June 2015), from which the numbers of Sponsored academies that are "good" or "outstanding" were calculated can be found here.

My calculations indicate that there are 997,000 more children in "good" or "outstanding" primaries in 2015 than in 2010 and 274,000 in secondaries, giving a total of 1.27 million. However 275,000 of the extra primary pupils are due to the increase in pupil numbers. If we take these out, the total is 999,000 extra pupils in "good" or "outstanding" schools, effectively the one milliion that the government claims.