Agenda item
Readiness for new school curriculum - (the implications of the new school curriculum in Tower Hamlets) - To Follow
To consider and comment on the information provided in the report.
Minutes:
Anne Canning (Service Head Learning & Achievement, ESCW) gave a detailed PowerPoint presentation (a copy of the slides for which would be interleaved with the minutes), to supplement the information contained in the report which informed OSC of the radical changes being implemented by the Government to reform the education curriculum, especially at Key Stage 4 and post-16. The presentation focused on the following points:
· Rationale for curriculum changes and implications
· Organisation of the curriculum and implications
· Changes in assessment and implications
· Changes in reporting and implications
· Action being taken by the Authority to address the curriculum changes
Councillor Gulam Robbani (Cabinet Member for Education & Children’s Services) and Robert McCulloch-Graham (Corporate Director ESCW) were also in attendance for this item.
Points highlighted by Anne Canning included:-
· Reasons for change were driven by Government concerns about educational standards compared with other countries, and a need for better preparation of young people for university, training, apprenticeships and employment. Also by consideration that a more traditional curriculum would raise standards although there was no evidence base for this.
· Curriculum reform would be phased from 2013-2016 in primary (including Key Stage 1&2) 2014-2017 in secondary, and therefore some initial changes had already been implemented eg primary schools had already been teaching to new revised programmes of study from 2013.
· At Key Stage 1&2 there were content changes in the curriculum for English, mathematics, science and significant changes for ICT. In general the curriculum was more demanding and heightened focus on “Britishness”. Changes to exam specifications and marking schemes followed from the curriculum changes, with corollary changes in reporting measures and league tables. The final plans for the new KS2 measure were due to be announced imminently but it was expected that it would include a scale from 70-130 with an average score of 100 for 11 year olds. There was an expectation that 85% of pupils achieve to be “secondary ready”.
· The next transformational change to the curriculum was at Key Stage 4. Schools were being encouraged to offer students a suite of at least 8 subjects with significant corollary changes in reporting with “attainment and progress eight” to replace the current common measure of 5+A*-C with English and Mathematics; attainment would be an average score for the 8 subjects. This would force schools to offer a more academic curriculum with a swathe of subjects no longer included in the pupil assessment process; and again there was heightened focus on “Britishness” eg specific standards such as English history. This and the heightened focus on factual learning and linear rather than modular assessment would make exams more challenging. Examination marking would change with A-E grades replaced by a numbering system 1-9, with 9 as the best grade. The bar was to be set at 5 which was slightly above the current C and there was merit in endeavouring to raise the bar. Religious education and sex education must still be provided.
· The steps planned to support students and teachers with the challenges of the new curriculum were outlined.
A discussion followed which focused on clarification being sought and given on the following points:-
· Was the mean/ median score of 100 at KS2 fixed in relation to the cohort? It was difficult to say if it would be a true median for the cohort or a romantic view of what an 11 year old should achieve. A definition was expected before the end of November 2014, a possible measure of progress would be the median for the previous year’s cohort.
· Would religious and sex education be statutory/ mandatory and in particular would there be provision for parental opt out, given concerns over public health implications? There would still be a requirement to deliver sex education, however the content/ scope of this had been reduced so it was much less controversial. To date few parents had withdrawn pupils from sex education on a permanent basis once concerns had been addressed. Age appropriate sex education would continue to be provided and schools often engaged the work of the Parental Engagement Team for support if parents raised concerns with the school.
· Clarification sought and given in relation to curriculum changes for special needs children and nursery/ pre-school. There had always been a modified curriculum for special needs children and progress/ attainment reported in a different way, and bespoke reporting would continue. There had already been 2 years of curriculum change implementation for nursery/ pre-school, with a shift to significantly fewer areas of assessment.
· Referencing the highlighted need for teacher training and retraining, how did the Authority intend to support children currently going through the process, who may have teachers that were less experienced with new teaching requirements? It was expected that support would be needed for teachers who had limited experience in teaching methods associated with linear assessment and the content of the revised curriculum in some schools; the authority would identify specific support needs and address these.
· Given the significant number of children in Tower Hamlets for whom English was a second language, how was the heightened focus on English and grammar to be addressed? Spelling, Punctuation and Grammar had traditionally been an area of good performance in Tower Hamlets and this was reflected in formal reporting.
· Arts subjects appeared to have secondary importance in the new curriculum, so what was the Authority’s strategy to ensure a rounded education for young people? The reduction to 8 subjects for assessment may prove advantageous for cohorts previously taking a larger number of GCSEs, and could benefit schools in maintaining the provision of a wider curriculum. The Arts were not such a priority in the new curriculum, however in Tower Hamlets additional activities had always been prioritised and local organisations heavily involved with delivery of these eg Thames Music. Good schools appreciated the importance of a wide curriculum which promoted the arts as a great driver of high attainment.
· Was the curriculum for free schools and academies different? These were not tied to teaching the national curriculum, but were tied to the same assessment system, and therefore to deliver good assessment outcomes they needed to teach the national curriculum which the assessment was linked to.
· Referencing para 4.28 of the report, clarification sought as to requirements in the new curriculum relating to religious education and provision for obtaining a recognised qualification therein. RE must be offered as a curriculum subject with associated provision for examination/ qualification, It was not compulsory for all pupils to sit a formal assessment in the subject. However, in Tower Hamlets RE was very popular and likely to remain so not least because the subject considers some very important ‘issues’ and those big questions about belief and the meaning of life.
· What monitoring arrangements were in place to ensure that assessment methodology was consistent across all LBTH schools? Progress would continue to be monitored at set points KS2 & 4 with externally assessed tests. The authority was endeavouring to ensure a similar approach across schools, with schools receptive to advice/ guidance; however it was being led by schools themselves which had formed a cross school working party on this, and Officers were confident the schools would deliver.
· Given the expectations of year 3 pupils at KS1 &2 in respect of assessment against the new curriculum, what resources were being earmarked by the authority to support this, and were robust arrangements in place to deliver next year 2015/16. The Authority and schools were aware of the impact of curriculum reform for 2015/16 and particularly mindful of the raised bar and associated expectations. It was working hard to prepare and support teachers with the transition.
The Chair thanked Councillor Gulam Robbani for attending the OSC and Moved and it was:-
Resolved
1. That the contents of the report and presentation be noted; and
2. That Members comments be noted.
Action by:
Robert McCulloch-Graham (Corporate Director ESCW)
Anne Canning (Service Head Learning & Achievement ESCW)
Supporting documents:
- Curriculum reforms 300914 OSC DGBS2209141317pm, item 7.1 PDF 225 KB
- School curriculum Rept Appx A AC2209140917am, item 7.1 PDF 65 KB
- School curriculum Rept Appx B AC2209140917am, item 7.1 PDF 111 KB
- School curriculum Rept Appx C AC2209140917am, item 7.1 PDF 42 KB
- School curriculum Rept Appx D AC2209140917am, item 7.1 PDF 63 KB
- School curriculum Rept Appx E AC2209140917am, item 7.1 PDF 30 KB
- School curriculum Rept Appx Ei AC2209140917am, item 7.1 PDF 173 KB
- School curriculum Rept Appx F AC2209140917am, item 7.1 PDF 407 KB
- School curriculum Rept Appx G AC2209140917am, item 7.1 PDF 59 KB