Steve Smethurst writes on the latest issues in the press http://www.naht.org.uk/stevesmethurst.rss The assertion that 'history is written by the victors' appears to have been proved this month in Libya. The country's schools had been shut for the entire Autumn 2011 term due to the civil war but, following the toppling of General Gaddafi, some 1.2 million children returned to their desks earlier this month (January). There were a few changes for them to take in. Classroom walls were missing the formerly compulsory portrait of their toppled leader, their main text books were no longer the three volumes of Gadaffi's Green Book, and there was also a pruned back curriculum. Gone were two entire subject areas. “The subjects of political awareness and community studies have been cancelled,” the minister of education, Suliman Ali al-Saheli told the press, before adding that they have some ideas for substitute subjects but these are still being pondered. He then told them that: “the history subject has been cancelled and replaced by a new one put together by experts in this area to give us a real history.” A 'real history'? That'll be the day. Unfortunately history isn't an exact science. It's not even an inexact one. It's far too subjective and all too often based on guesswork, assumptions and fragments of evidence. Just how easy it is to manipulate can be seen from those who deny the holocaust ever took place. It's still within living memory for many, there's a wealth of evidence, yet it is being denied and many people actually believe that it never happened. So what will the new Libyan history syllabus make of Gadaffi? Will he be painted as a murdering tyrant? Will he be wiped out completely as if he never existed? Or, arguably most unlikely, will he be regarded as a 'freedom fighter' for overthrowing the monarchy in a bloodless coup, as he did in 1969? All three options are possible. However, reports that Michael Gove has been called in to advise the Libyans on their history syllabus appear to be unfounded. Although it appears that he is still keen to re-write the British GCSE syllabus. The Education Secretary wants us to 'celebrate the distinguished role of these islands in the history of the world and portray Britain as a beacon of liberty for others to emulate'. Apparently he's aggrieved that the current syllabus is too focused on the rise of Nazi Germany and the development of the Amercian 'wild' west – albeit these are events that played a massive role in shaping the Europe that we live in today; and also the USA that we follow so slavishly. Mr Gove said last year that history should: "give people the chance to be proud of our past and, in particular, proud of the heroes and heroines that fought for freedom over time. And that doesn't mean airbrushing out times when horrific things have been done." And, as Mr Gove's party won the last general election, who's to say he can't write whatever history he likes? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=521 Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:23:33 GMT 20120120092333 Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:23:33 GMT 20120120092333 Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:24:06 GMT 201201200992406 According to research from the National Literacy Trust, there are now almost four million children in the UK who do not own a book, which works out at roughly one in three. Seven years ago it was one in 10, so it's a massive decline. Should we be worried? The obvious answer is yes. The report shows that the number of books in the home is directly linked to children's reading levels: more books = better readers. The Trust's research also reveals that: 43% of boys say they enjoy reading, compared with 58% of girls 19% of boys say they only read in class, while just 11% of girls agree with this statement 24% of boys think reading is boring, compared with 13% of girls 45% of girls like going to the library, while only 35% of boys do But perhaps the decline in book-reading isn't quite as bad as it appears on the surface, although I'll be the first to admit that it does look quite troubling. Even so, books are very much 'last century'. Everything is digital now - just like film has disappeared for cameras, and vinyl for music, so paper is on the way out. We really shouldn't be surprised that children don't own physical books any more. My wife owns a Kindle and while I [a book enthusiast] find it soulless and aesthetically devoid of any kind of appeal with its dull greyness and Victorian screen saver, she loves it. And this is despite our one-year-old vomiting all over it [that's my boy] and ruining the integrated light that was housed in its lime-green cover. If the Kindle had a bit more character or style in its appearance I might be converted to its undoubted practicality. But it doesn't, so I'm not. However, while I still buy books and lug them into work in the hope I might get 15 minutes to read them on the train, she has her dinky little e-book thing, and carries hundreds of 'books' around with her as if she were Hercules. I suspect that if you ask her in a year's time if she owns any books, the answer will probably be 'no', yet she will still be an avid reader. Our son, incidentally, has lots of books. Currently, he prefers to eat them than to read, but we hope that situation will change with the passing months. Yet somehow, I suspect it may not. He is fascinated by our mobiles, laptops and Kindle and much more likely to read on screen. Books may not be able to hold his attention. It's because 'once upon a time', as most children's books used to start [and by the way, what a meaningless statement this is – how can anything be 'upon a time'?] there were few other ways of conveying stories and providing knowledge, entertainment and escapism. Not to mention keeping children quiet for a few hours. But now there are hundreds of means: TV, video, DVD, computer games, websites, movies and so on. The change can already be seen in our schools. Don't forget that there's a primary school in Bolton where all the students have been given iPods and if nothing else convinces schools to ditch printed books, then the economic argument – the cost of buying text books versus the download costs – will eventually win the day. I think it's a shame, but we're fast approaching a time when we may not actually need books to foster reading any more. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=512 Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:22:13 GMT 20111215112213 Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:22:13 GMT 20111215112213 Thu, 15 Dec 2011 11:36:07 GMT 2011121511113607 Perhaps the two are unrelated, but the vote by teaching unions to strike on 30 November has been followed with almost indecent haste by an article from Prime Minister David Cameron in the Daily Telegraph in which he vents his fury on schools. Not all schools of course. Free schools are exempt from his spleen. This is partly because they haven't got off the ground yet, but also because they are the Government's prized 'shock troops of innovation'. Instead, Mr Cameron is furious with 'coasting schools' and has vowed to 'shame' them. Personally, I've no idea what the phrase 'shock troops of innovation' actually means and I suspect no one in Government does either, but it sounds dramatic. In fact it sounds very military, as does much of the language Mr Cameron uses. There's also 'war zone', 'smashing through', 'entrenched failure' and 'shining a spotlight on complacency'. As the article appeared on 12 November, perhaps we can attribute this to a weekend spent at Remembrance functions, but it also ties in with the creation of the Phoenix Free School in Manchester. In September, the school's patron, Lord Guthrie – a former chief of the defence staff ('top General' in layman's terms) – called for a generation of schools to be modeled on the Armed Forces – 'to create a culture of respect among children from the toughest and roughest backgrounds'. To be fair to the PM, this is a clear example of 'innovation' and 'troops' – and there will undoubtedly be a shock or two in store for the students. So that's that part of his message cleared up. Anyway, back to his gripe – coasting schools. There is apparently a 'hidden crisis in our schools'. This relates to schools in the shire counties where half the children get five good GCSEs. It's a problem because at Mossbourne Academy in Hackney, they've achieved this standard with more than four fifths of their pupils. Partly as a result, Mossbourne's head, Sir Michael Willshaw, will shortly become the new head of Ofsted. “He's one of the finest head teachers this country has had,” says Mr Cameron, with just a hint of sucking up. And Sir Michael has 'coasting schools in his sights', said the PM, in yet another military metaphor. Cynics among those who responded to the article [there were 152 comments from readers at the time of writing] noted that one or two of those who supported Mr Cameron had a history of posting several hundred and even thousands of comments on the site. Could they be employed by Government to refute negative postings, they wondered? Certainly one had posted 2,664 comments on a variety of subjects and 23 over the course of the past 24 hours. The obvious conclusions are that these people are passionate about education, very opinionated and with a lot of time on his hands - or that something more sinister is going on. The same could almost be said of Mr Cameron. He's passionate about education, has strong opinions and employs minions to write articles while he's at Remembrance events. Surely there's nothing more sinister than a desire to improve education and raise standards? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=504 Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:34:19 GMT 20111115103419 Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:34:19 GMT 20111115103419 Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:42:55 GMT 2011111510104255 An article in the Guardian caught my eye yesterday (Thursday, 18 November). “Unruly pupils 'hidden' from Ofsted inspectors” claimed the headline. There were a few things I wondered about as I read it. The first was related to Tom Trust, a witness to the mass hidings. He is a 'former elected member of the General Teaching Council for England (GTCE)'. Why, I wondered, was he saying all this now? Didn't Mr Trust feel like making this kind of comment when he was at the GTCE and it was a fully functioning (well, you know) body? But perhaps he did and no-one listened. The second individual quoted was Sue Cowley, 'an educational author and trainer', who is perhaps known best as the author of 'Getting the buggers to behave'. She advocated Ofsted inspectors turning up at schools unannounced to stop this kind of misbehaviour from school leaders. Perhaps if Ofsted inspections were more supportive, less punitive and more consistent in their approach this might not be the worst idea in the world, but I can't see it being welcomed with open arms. Incidentally, I should point out that her book title refers to pupils, not school leaders. But the most wonderment came from the journalist's statement that “more than one-in-five schools was judged to be either "satisfactory" or "inadequate" in terms of pupil behaviour by Ofsted last year.” Why on earth, I wondered, would you lump together 'satisfactory' with 'inadequate'? If a school is satisfactory, then it meets requirements. It's a pass. Inadequate, however, is a fail. As a reader, I'm left clueless as to how many are 'failing'. It might be one in 10 or it might be one in 2000. The author's clear implication is that satisfactory isn't good enough. Yet the word means 'good enough'. If I was a school leader I'd be pulling my hair out. I might even be tempted to misbehave. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=399 Fri, 19 Nov 2010 09:21:57 GMT 20101119092157 Fri, 19 Nov 2010 09:21:57 GMT 20101119092157 Fri, 19 Nov 2010 09:25:28 GMT 201011190992528 You know the funny thing about coincidences? People draw significance from them. So, when Conservative MP William Hague, now the foreign secretary, shared a twin room with a senior aide while on the political campaign trail, few would have taken too much notice. They were fighting the 'austerity election' and it came fairly soon after the expenses scandal in which our elected representatives were found to have little shame when it came to grabbing every penny they could while those who knew better looked the other way. Who wants to look like a spendthrift prima donna who insists on their own room in those circumstances? Then came the photographs which showed Mr Hague walking down the street with said aide. It has to be acknowledged that the pair did look a little camp. Nothing wrong with that, but when seen alongside the room-sharing it does become cause for sniggering. That's the coincidence factor for you. Strange then, that on the same day the William Hague story broke (mainly because he issued a statement to stress that his marriage was strong and he hadn't ever been in a relationship with another man), so did the story that, in Australia, a primary school head teacher had decided that his pupils should no longer sing the line: “Gay your life must be,” when singing the classic kids song, Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree. Garry Martin, the head at Lapage Primary in Melbourne, took the decision to change the line to: “Fun your life must be.” The Melbourne Age reported the head as saying: "All I was doing, relatively innocently, was substituting one word because I knew if we sing `Gay your life must be,' the kids will roll around the floor in fits of laughter." He added that his pupils sometimes used the word 'gay' in a disparaging way. "For example, if a boy is not particularly good at sport and they will refer to that child as gay," he said. "It was just a decision that I thought would minimise a disruptive atmosphere." Coincidences, eh? “Gay is bad and something to be sniggered at,” is the message from opposite ends of the earth, from our political leaders, and our school leaders. Mr Martin has subsequently been criticised for insulting gay people and even for 'violating the copyright' of the song. The senior aide to William Hague has resigned. And across the English-speaking world it's all served to reinforce the behaviour of children (and adults) who use 'gay' as an insult. It's such a shame. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=356 Fri, 03 Sep 2010 07:04:59 GMT 20100903070459 Fri, 03 Sep 2010 07:04:59 GMT 20100903070459 Fri, 03 Sep 2010 10:27:21 GMT 2010090310102721 When best isn't good enough Acle is a small market town on the Norfolk Broads in Norfolk. It is roughly halfway between Norwich and Great Yarmouth and, according to Wikipedia, is notable for having the only bridge across the River Bure between Wroxham and Great Yarmouth. But now, of course, it's notable for something else too – which is that its school (850 pupils, mixed sex) doesn't have any outstanding boys, just lots of very capable girls. That's because last week Acle High School's head teacher, Tim Phillips, decided that the prospective candidates to be the head girl and head boy were a bit of mixed bag. Girls, brilliant. Boys, bit of a disappointment. The selection process had begun with the school's 56 prefects being invited to apply for senior prefect positions, with head girls and boys being chosen from this group. There were 24 applicants, 18 girls and just six boys. From these a shortlist of 16 was drawn up: 12 girls and four boys. These were then interviewed on the quality of their application and contribution to the school. This process eliminated a further two boys and two girls on the grounds they were not strong enough candidates, leaving 10 girls and two boys as senior prefects. In most schools, this would mean that the two boys would have little competition for the head boy and deputy head boy roles. But not in Acle. Mr Phillips explains: “Of the 12 senior prefects, the strongest by a long way were all girls, so we chose two head girls and two deputy head girls.” It was at this point that quite a few people choked on their cornflakes. Surely, they argued, the eligibility criteria for being 'head boy' is that you're the best 'boy'. Girls aren't usually eligible. What about the lack of a male role model in the school? Or the lack of a male representative for the other boys? Or, how about the way the two male senior prefects will feel about the decision? Then there's the fact that girls mature more quickly than boys – it's only to be expected that they'll do better in this kind of test. There's bound to be some teasing too: “Hahhaa, even girls make a better boy than you…” Mr Phillips explained the move by saying: “I believe in equal opportunities, People would have had a right to complain if I had appointed a weak candidate. I believe there is a wider issue of why the strongest boys don't put themselves forward for senior positions and we will be looking to work on that with students in Year 10.” He also added that it was important to have senior prefects showing the right qualities of leadership, teamwork and organisation. “These are not token appointments. The intention is to develop their leadership skills by performing roles at school events and acting as hosts,” he said. It's a fair point, but is he right? Clearly, a head teacher is appointed to make such decisions – whether to dispense with tradition and expectations and to shake things up a bit. Perhaps the boys needed a jolt/incentive, and perhaps the girls deserve the accolades? Mr Phillips is paid to make such calls and to manage the fall-out that incurs as a result. He seems quite capable of doing this. A quick look at the school's website shows a 'stop press' item: “Stop Press: all Acle High School students who travel to school on a contract coach are required to wear a seat belt on each and every journey. No fuss. No argument. Just do it. Of course, if you think an accident can't happen when you're on the bus... click here... and here... and here... and here. Each 'here' is a link to a story about children dying in coach accidents. Mr Phillips appears to be no-nonsense school leader. But then schools need strong leaders – and if the boys at his school are looking for a strong male role model, I would suggest that they could do worse than follow the example of their head… But what do you think? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=344 Sat, 17 Jul 2010 17:16:16 GMT 20100717171616 Sat, 17 Jul 2010 17:16:16 GMT 20100717171616 Sat, 17 Jul 2010 17:16:33 GMT 201007171751633 Degrees: do you agree or disagree? With the World Cup going on and the rampant slashing of quangos that's been seen across the education sector, you might have missed the news about what the new Schools Minister told officials on his first day in the job. No, it wasn't how much the cosmetic name-change from DCSF to DfE was going to cost, it was the rather elitist view that he passed on to his senior civil servants (who duly leaked it to the press). What Nick Gibb told them was: "I would rather have a physics graduate from Oxbridge, without a PGCE, teaching in a school than a physics graduate from one of the rubbish universities with a PGCE." At first glance, it sounds like elitist claptrap. But is it? Certainly, the implications are clear. First, that degrees from Oxford and Cambridge count for a lot more than ones from other universities. Having got mine from Crewe and Alsager College of Higher Education, I concede that he may have a point here. While it was a fine establishment (and possibly even finer now it's part of Manchester Metropolitan University), 'Crude and All failures' College perhaps didn't require the intellectual rigour of Magdalen or Christ's. Second, Mr Gibb has little faith in PGCEs producing good teachers. I don't necessarily agree, but I can see where he's coming from on this. A four-year degree in education is more likely to attract people with a vocation and passion for teaching. Also, it is four year's training. Not one. It's not something to be taken when you've run out of options for other careers. Which, with the best will in the world, a PGCE sometimes is. Then there is the physics aspect. We have a shortage of scientists. And why wouldn't you want to learn from the brightest and the best (apart from the obvious, in that they might not be very good at passing on their knowledge)? It reminded me of the World Cup. Argentina's manager, Diego Maradona, is a genius of the game. A Rhodes Scholar of football. Or at least he was as a player. With little experience of management (two brief spells in the mid-1990s) and lots of experience of excessive consumption of food, drink and white powder, he was appointed manager of the national team. The reason why? He's a legend. He was the best player in the world, so who better to manage? Obviously, Argentina didn't win the World Cup, although they did better than England, a team managed by a man with pretty much every qualification under the sun. So does that make Nick Gibb right? No, because knowing a subject inside out doesn't mean you can teach it. And anyway, how many Oxbridge physics graduates are going to seek out a career teaching in secondary schools? Even I can work that one out with my 2:2 from Crewe. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=336 Wed, 07 Jul 2010 15:39:38 GMT 20100707153938 Wed, 07 Jul 2010 15:39:38 GMT 20100707153938 Wed, 07 Jul 2010 15:43:33 GMT 201007071534333 It's not pretty. George Osbourne looks set to cut the education budget and Christine Gilbert faces the chop. With the Chancellor of the Exchequer reporting that Government has inherited 'a truly awful financial situation' from the previous administration, he has announced the introduction of a four-year plan to deal with the mess. “Tough action,” said George Osbourne, “is unavoidable”. And it seems that education is not going to be spared. The first signs of the new austerity are already beginning to show. In the Midlands, around 150 teachers and school staff in the Black Country and Staffordshire are being made redundant, or redeployed, following cuts to education budgets. The Express and Star newspaper reports that 109 full-time teaching posts are to go at 55 schools. The paper also notes that Walsall Academy in Bloxwich has had its budget slashed by £300,000 and more jobs could go as a result. Over in the East Midlands, things are little better with Chaddesden Park Junior School, in Derby issuing a warning to parents over school meals and debt. Even to the extent that from now on children will have to take in their own spoons to eat yoghurts, as they cannot be provided. The doom and gloom continues with the Guardian warning that unemployment for school leavers is set to rise because the number of university places has been halved. The newspaper also reminds us that the Government is cutting the Future Jobs Fund, an extension of the Young Person's Guarantee, and the two year Jobseekers' guarantee – all programmes to help guarantee work or training for longer-term unemployed people in the recession, saving some £995m. This, it feels, is a short-sighted move. But at least one newspaper is happy with an education cut. The Daily Mail today carried the news story that the Chief Inspector of Schools, Christine Gilbert, is to step down from her post “as part of a cull of advisers close to the old Labour regime”. This closeness stems from the fact that Ms Gilbert is married to a former Labour minister, Tony McNulty who resigned from the Cabinet 18 months ago over the expenses scandal. She has apparently been told she “can leave at a time of her choosing within the next few months,” according to the Daily Mail's Whitehall insider. Yet, rather than pondering what the implications might be for education, the Daily Mail angle was more geared towards the “dramatic changes” the couple would have to make to their “envious” lifestyle. The couple “enjoyed a combined income of £300,000, chauffeur-driven limousines paid for by the taxpayer and thousands in expenses,” claimed the Mail, with maybe just a hint of sensationalism. The former head teacher was due to stay on in the post until October next year but now appears set to be going sooner than anticipated. With Becta and the GTC having already been given the chop, it's safe to say this won't be the last change we're going to see. But will it usher in a more welcome system of inspection? Don't hold your breath. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=325 Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:48:26 GMT 20100620184826 Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:48:26 GMT 20100620184826 Sun, 20 Jun 2010 18:48:26 GMT 201006201864826 10 things we know about Michael Gove The election means that it's goodbye to Ed Balls and hello to Michael Gove. Want to know more about him? Here are 10 very important things the internet tells us about our new Secretary of State for Education: 1 One of his earliest childhood memories was watching his father skinning and gutting fish by hand. www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/election/article-1268403/MICHAEL-GOVE-My-birth-mother-knows-I-Ill-try-track-down.html 2 At the time of writing, two weeks after the General Election, his website still insists: “Michael is a key part of David Cameron's Shadow Cabinet team – the Shadow Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families.” www.michaelgove.com 3 His priority in his constituency appears to be “Helping Curley Park Rangers FC get the facilities they deserve.” www.michaelgove.com 4 He was initially a Labour supporter and activist, and considered a career in the church before he became a journalist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Gove 5 Whilst at The Times he joined Frances Lawrence, widow of murdered headmaster Philip Lawrence, to fight street crime and its causes. Their campaign influenced legislation to ban combat knives and led to the creation of an award scheme for good citizenship among the young. http://www.conservatives.com/people/members_of_parliament/gove_michael.aspx 6 He is viewed as one of the 'Notting Hill set', alongside David Cameron, George Osborne and Ed Vaizey. And Michael Portillo has predicted that Gove will one day lead the Conservative party. http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/may/12/profile-michael-gove-schools-secretary 7 In the House of Commons the majority of his questions have been about Home Information Packs. http://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/michael_gove/surrey_heath 8 During the expenses scandal, he agreed to pay back £7,000 he claimed for furniture costs at his London home. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/10099486.stm 9 He may not be all that keen on Charlie Whelan. “I would never go as far as calling Charlie Whelan an 'aggressive hooligan', 'serial killer' or 'killing machine', – but then, civil servants and senior Labour figures have already said that. I would not suggest he was a force from hell – but then, Alistair Darling has described him as that. And I wouldn't ever imply that he was 'economical with the truth' – but then, he himself had admitted that.” http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/willheaven/100030132/michael-gove-has-declared-war-on-charlie-whelan-and-his-new-militant-tendency/ 10 Michael Gove is a banana. http://www.libdemvoice.org/opinion-michael-gove-is-a-banana-19313.html http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=306 Wed, 19 May 2010 23:22:36 GMT 20100519232236 Wed, 19 May 2010 23:22:36 GMT 20100519232236 Thu, 20 May 2010 10:27:35 GMT 2010052010102735 End of term approaches And so the moment came. Mick's final speech to Annual Conference as General Secretary. There are many ways you could write up his words. After five years as a popular and successful General Secretary, you could repeat all the heartfelt thanks he gave – but then a lot of the recipients were in the audience. You could look to the future and how all those in education will need to work together to produce more positive outcomes for the country's children. But Mick's column in the next Leadership Focus will focus on that. Or, you could, like he did, highlight some of the things that have been overshadowed by Sats in the past few months and haven't had the attention they deserve. As he said: “We mustn't lose sight of other challenges and struggles that have been faced – and sometimes won – by colleagues across our membership.” The first of these is in Northern Ireland where the NAHT is opposing restrictive practices. He told delegates: “Classroom observation is an essential part of the quality assurance process that is our prime responsibility. The discussion should not be about numbers and hours, it should be about the quality of the process, proportionality and provision of support.” He then turned to Wales, where the challenge is to establish funding systems that do not rob one sector to fund another. As he noted: “this situation is not made easier by having 22 separate local authorities, each with its own strengths and weaknesses, foibles and irritations.” But it is an issue that NAHT is fully focused on resolving. He also noted that the NAHT's lobbying for delay in implementing the single-funding formula has “certainly temporarily averted disaster”. Sadly, this effect may only be temporary given the uncertainty with the election looming. He also used his speech – as he had an informal briefing to the press earlier in the day – to return to the issue of false and malicious allegations against school leaders. “Since we released the report 'Guilty by Accusation' in 2007, precious little has been done to protect innocent staff from false accusation that is then recorded on their personal file,” he said. “This is an offence against the law that insists that citizens are innocent unless proven guilty. Accusers can make unjust claims with impunity. Currently there is no redress. “We have asked the new Ombudsman to consider a system of fines for those who accuse our colleagues unjustly. All of those who invent or elaborate for malicious, pecuniary or vindictive purposes should be liable to be fined and not a letter of their accusation should enter a teacher's record. It is time to end this injustice,” he said. And, with a few more words of thanks, that was it. “I bid you farewell,” he said. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=300 Mon, 03 May 2010 12:10:28 GMT 20100503121028 Mon, 03 May 2010 12:10:28 GMT 20100503121028 Mon, 03 May 2010 12:10:28 GMT 2010050312121028 Comedy moment of the day (Sunday) A series of debates on workload, bureaucracy and the recruitment crisis isn't where you'd expect to find the most fertile ground for comedy. Especially once Catriona Williamson mentioned a chilling statistic in her proposal of Motion 8, which instructed National Council to seek to work with Government and other agencies to introduce a new initiative to be known as Every Head Matters. The stat she unveiled was that once a working head reaches the age of 60, their life expectancy is a mere 18 months. This sent a huge murmur around the auditorium. When she finished and the request for speakers to come to the two-minute microphones was made, a retired head teacher from St Helens made his way to one. “I'm assuming that the life expectancy of male head teacher is considerably less than 18 months [as women live longer than men]?” he asked. “Well, I'm 62 now, so clearly I won't be here next year. "This will be my last conference, so I'd just like to say goodbye.” The motion was passed. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=299 Sun, 02 May 2010 14:08:12 GMT 20100502140812 Sun, 02 May 2010 14:08:12 GMT 20100502140812 Sun, 02 May 2010 14:08:12 GMT 201005021420812 Who won the political debate? You've probably seen the televised election debates with the three political leaders. Today, the NAHT did an education version with the Secretary of State for Education, the Shadow Secretary and the Liberal Democrat spokesman. As has been noted several times at Conference, it's a shame to reduce everything to a soundbite – but it is much quicker that way. I've also pandered to those who like to know what colour tie each was wearing. Ed Balls, Labour, blue tie.“The NAHT leadership is great. I've visited 250 schools over the past three years. I went to a great turnaround in Nottingham. School leader is a vocation, you are a great profession. I know the job is challenging. It's about passion and moral purpose. The accountability system isn't fair. We're looking at teacher assessment, but it denies parents information. There'll be money for headteachers. Don't vote for the others.” Michael Gove, Conservative, red tie.“Mick Brookes is great. There are too many spin doctors. They're like rats. I want to listen to you. To trust you. To empower you. I'm a parent. I was a pupil. You should have the freedom to lead. The inspection system is broken. It should be about observation, not data. You need more power on behaviour. Guilty by Association was a great document. Doesn't bureaucracy grow like topsy? We need to trust you. Vote for us and we'll talk about Sats.” David Laws, Liberal Democrat, pink tie.“Mick Brookes is brilliant. 'Freedom to flourish' could be a LibDem slogan. You can't throw the baby out with the bath water. The Government deserves credit for investment. Too many people leave school with no qualifications. Government targets distort education. There's too much political meddling. We'll put cash into deprived areas. There are too many external tests. And teaching to the tests. League tables = catchment areas.” And then the big question, who won? The LibDems, by a landslide. Or at least by telling everyone what they wanted to hear. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=298 Sun, 02 May 2010 13:32:41 GMT 20100502133241 Sun, 02 May 2010 13:32:41 GMT 20100502133241 Tue, 04 May 2010 11:10:31 GMT 2010050411111031 Ofsted provokes a polished performance As predicted, the focus shifted away from Sats on the Saturday afternoon at Annual Conference. With four of the first five motions debated solely about Ofsted, and the other on 'assessment and accountability', you got the feeling that with one battle (almost) won, it was time to prepare for the next. Many members took to the microphones and all the motions were passed with overwhelming or unanimous votes. I'll spare you the details as you've all heard stories about Ofsted and it really is horrifying. But what was particularly encouraging was hearing guest speaker NUT General Secretary Christine Blower's comments on the fight ahead. She told delegates: “If we set our face, as the majority of the profession, the NUT and NAHT together, so that we complain every time something unfair happens – which will be almost every time – then we will be successful.” And then Lancashire delegate Tony Roberts was able to sum up what everyone else was thinking…. “The key issue is trying to make some progress on the fact that the quality of your Ofsted team is pot luck. If you get a number-crunching numpty with the interpersonal skills of Simon Cowell, you've got a problem. “If you get an inspector who's woken up after a Sunday night of passion to find his wife has put a 'notice to improve' on his pillow, then you're stuffed. “These people are paid £64,000 a year, which is the same as an MP, and the only performance management survey that we've seen was conducted by themselves. “Ofsted costs the taxpayer £200m a year – and over 18 years that's a huge amount of money. We campaign and we campaign… But, you don't tinker with it. You don't rationalise it. Or review it. Because, in Lyndon Baines Johnson's immortal words, 'you cannot polish a turd.' "Scrap it!” http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=297 Sun, 02 May 2010 00:20:27 GMT 20100502002027 Sun, 02 May 2010 00:20:27 GMT 20100502002027 Sun, 02 May 2010 00:20:27 GMT 2010050200122027 Fighting talk from the new President Mike Welsh, the new NAHT National President, has come out fighting. When you are only in post for a year, it's vital that you make your mark early if you're going to achieve things, and his speech to conference certainly had that feel about it. He started by telling delegates the reaction his deputy had when asked if she wanted to graduate to headship. “It was during the last 30 minutes of an Ofsted inspection in February this year. She knew the inspection had gone well and I asked her if she now wanted to go for headship. “Her answer was a clear and resounding: 'No – I never want my career on the line for what we might hear in 30 minutes time'.” With that statement echoing around the conference hall, he set down some markers for the year ahead. First, there were strong words for the press: “We have simplistic messages going out. Schools are used as easy targets, and the national media carries a largely negative commentary… The all-embracing sound bite in modern life elevates the shallow. It does not encourage taking on the difficult or hard tasks, which might not be immediately rewarding. It does not encourage perseverance in the face of adversity. It does not encourage positive risk taking.” Politicians too were castigated: “How far are our politicians away from reality? We are offered more ineffective accountability, more structural change, and more blame. Current and prospective Governments have a view of education, which is materialist in outlook and is designed for a bygone age. Ministers need to understand that Waterloo Road is a fictional series, not a documentary.” He then reminded delegates that there was a way forward: “It's the NAHT Charter – with fair and real accountability. It accepts that we are accountable to society, and parents in particular. Nor is it a soft option.” He concluded by sending out a warning that the NAHT would defend its members to the hilt. He said that while he acknowledged that most local authority officers, and even Ofsted teams, were fair and professional, “the message must go out, loud and clear, that the Association can no longer tolerate its members having their careers at the mercy of rogue elements.” “We will take these people on,” he said, “if necessary in the courts, to end the culture of the 'disappeared'.” It should be an interesting year. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=296 Sat, 01 May 2010 19:14:32 GMT 20100501191432 Sat, 01 May 2010 19:14:32 GMT 20100501191432 Sat, 01 May 2010 23:50:35 GMT 2010050123115035 Comedy moment of the day (so far) The lord mayor of Liverpool, Mike Storey, endeared himself to members instantly with his 'welcome to Liverpool' speech. “I'm a serving headteacher,” he said. “I'm also a member of the NAHT.” He then told everyone about the pitfalls of being a mayor. He said that when he first took over the role, he was taking the train for his first official engagement, as his school in Halewood is opposite the rail station. While he was on the train into the centre of Liverpool, he realised one of his parents was sat directly opposite him. He takes up the story: “I smiled, as you do. And nodded. But there was no absolutely no reaction at all,” he said. “So I smiled and nodded again. “It was at that moment that I had the sinking realisation that it wasn't one of the parents after all. “It was at this point that I uttered the immortal line: 'I'm really sorry. I thought you were the mother of one of my children…'” http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=295 Sat, 01 May 2010 16:05:32 GMT 20100501160532 Sat, 01 May 2010 16:05:32 GMT 20100501160532 Sat, 01 May 2010 16:06:18 GMT 201005011640618 Let the debates begin At the time of writing, 21 motions are set to be debated at this 113th annual conference. The two that immediately grabbed my attention are right at the start. Both relate to Ofsted. The first, if passed, will instruct the NAHT's national council 'to take robust action' over the current inspection process and the accountability of individual inspectors. But what does 'robust action' mean? Is that industrial action, or a strongly worded letter? The debate should make that distinction a bit clearer. The second motion is in a similar vein. It begins: “We deplore the current Ofsted framework and the negative culture surrounding school inspections…” It goes on to urge delegates use their votes to inform National Council that NAHT members believe “Ofsted is not fit for purpose” and that the NAHT should seek its replacement. So, robust action to get rid of Ofsted… sounds good, doesn't it? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=294 Sat, 01 May 2010 13:13:01 GMT 20100501131301 Sat, 01 May 2010 13:13:01 GMT 20100501131301 Sat, 01 May 2010 13:13:01 GMT 201005011311301 A keynote speech in brief Andy Hargreaves is a Burnley fan. And bringing in a new head half way through the year didn't save them from special measures. Andy contributed to the NAHT charter for assessment and accountability: Active trust and supportive responsibility. He applauds the NAHT for only making a statement about what it is against, but also because it makes “a carefully thought-out, professionally committed, evidence-based, best-practice driven statement about what it is for – for the benefit of the profession and all the children we serve.” Neil Howe and William Strauss's The Fourth Turning is a marvellous book. You should also read The Spirit Level: why more equal societies almost always do better, by Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett. It has great graphs. You can't make demands of people unless you have a relationship with them. You can only force children to work harder through fear for a very brief period, before the effects of your pressure and compliance culture in the classroom fall away. Andy's new book is The Fourth Way: the inspiring future for educational change, which he co-edited with Dennis Shirley. The first way was seen in the 1970s – the good old days when you could go for a drink on Friday lunchtimes, and parents didn't mind. The second way was the introduction of draconian inspection regimes. The third way is what we have now – chains of schools. It's where schools work with other schools, but in a somewhat corporate, privatised way. The teachers within them belong to a brand, a particular kind of pedagogy, all of which is within a profit-driven entity. “This does enhance a bit of lateral energy in the system, but it creates no loyalty.” If NAHT members had to play 'snog', 'marry' or 'avoid' to chains of schools – the overwhelming choice is…. 'avoid'. Robert Hill has written a very good report for the National College on chains of schools and what they promise – and also some of their limitations. Tony Giddens was the brains behind The Third Way. He's a former director of the London School of Economics. “It was a good idea, a great idea.” Tony Giddens now endorses 'The Fourth Way” and thinks the Third Way has become a corruption of what it once stood for. Finland and Canada are at the top of the PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) lists produced by the OECD for two good reasons: political stability and “they are not constantly inundated with external bureaucratic initiatives.” The English think that they are the embodiment of Britishness, the Welsh, Scots and Irish are just the celtic fringe. That attitude needs to change. The Fourth Way: is about active trust – people working together and rolling up their sleeves and doing the job. “Trust builds confidence, and confidence builds competence.” “If you go into multinational companies, they do not test everything that comes off the assembly line. They don't test drive all their vehicles. It is a waste of money. It is monumentally bad capitalism.” Best business practice does not test everything. We only need to test a sample. Finland, New Zealand and other high performing countries only test a sample of students. For schools that are stuck at the bottom, current practice is to get rid of bad people and bring in good people. Yet the vast majority of fast turnarounds do not work. It takes at least three years. We should give all persistently under-performing schools – under strong assistance from outside leadership – a two to three-year amnesty from any external standardised testing. That way they can concentrate on teaching and learning, and engaging innovation so they can excite and engage all their students. At the moment we give the biggest breaks to those at the top, who already have everything going for them. Tim Brighouse is a legend. And, finally, delegates learned that Andy Hargreaves does a surprisingly good Tony Blair impression. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=293 Sat, 01 May 2010 13:10:57 GMT 20100501131057 Sat, 01 May 2010 13:10:57 GMT 20100501131057 Sat, 01 May 2010 13:10:57 GMT 201005011311057 It's all Sats, folks You might have thought with both the items on the press conference agenda discussed, then that would be it for the day and everyone would wander off for lunch. But, there was one topic that all of the assembled members of the press were keen to discuss: Sats. All it took was one question and the press conference came to life. Here are a selection of comments made by school leaders in response to a query about the damaging effects of the test: Roy Tedscoe, deputy head at Coleraine Park Primary in London: “There is a huge stifling of any type of creativity in Year Six, almost to the point of only doing numeracy, literacy and test practice every morning. We all hate it and we all think it's wrong. For children to suffer in this way at a very young age seems to me to be absolutely abusive and wrong. It's what's driven us to get to the point that we're at.” Mike Stewart, headteacher Westlands School, Torquay: “Just to be clear, secondary school heads don't want KS2 Sats either. It is absolutely vital that we receive students with a creative flair and a knowledge and ability to enjoy education. That is not what a Sat test does. It restricts the curriculum and reduces the child, in some cases, to a whimpering wreck. It turns them off education and reduces their ability to interact with teachers. We've scrapped KS3 tests, so can we please scrap KS2 tests?” Kevin Baskill, headteacher, Christchurch Primary School, Ilford, Essex: “We have outstanding Y6 teachers – why can't they be trusted to assess their pupils' work? They are trusted in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. They're also trusted in Y2 and in KS3. They know the children and they should be making judgments on them.” Donal McCarthy, headteacher, Regina Coeli Catholic Primary School, South Croydon, Surrey: “Is it fair to judge children on four years of learning through KS2 in a 45-minute snapshot? You might have just had a conversation with their parents about some investigation or other real-life situation that affects their performance. It's not that we're against testing though, it's the use those tests are put to.” Margaret Evitts, headteacher, Gungrog CIW Infant School, Powys, Wales: “Whenever I venture over the border, I'm horrified to find that children actually identify themselves as a number. They're not valued for what they can do, or for being a child. They'll say they're a 2 or a 3 and they should be a 4 – and these are 11 year olds! It's horrendous. I'm so thankful I don't have to operate that system in our schools.” Stephen Watkins, headteacher, Mill Field Primary School, Leeds: “I'm ashamed to say that when pupils enter my school or leave, I look at them and think about the percentage effect on my end results. I have a school with a 50% turnover of pupils in any one year. My current Y6 class of 29 children only has 8 pupils in it that have been through my school, yet it's judged on the results of this class.” • In a news flash, we now have confirmation that on Sunday the NAHT will welcome the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, Ed Balls, and Shadow Ministers David Laws (Lib Dem) and Michael Gove (Conservative) for a debate on education. The 75 minute session will follow the format of the televised debates of the three party leaders. Each spokesman will have 10 minutes to set out his party's policies and then the debate will be opened to the floor for questions. It should be fun. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=292 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:42:01 GMT 20100430164201 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 16:42:01 GMT 20100430164201 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 17:21:26 GMT 201004301752126 Have you got too much cash? The second item on the press conference agenda at the Annual Conference was budget surpluses. The NAHT is concerned that unreliable statistics will be used by Government to try to claw back funding from schools. Figures released by the DCSF show that £1.8billion is being held in school accounts and, given the need for efficiency savings and cuts, there is the fear of a 'quick win' via a national claw-back. General Secretary Mick Brookes said: “There is a large element of guesswork involved in the understanding of schools finance. We suspect that actual uncommitted balances in schools will amount to far less than this.” Torbay headteacher Mike Stewart told reporters of several ways in which the figures were inaccurate: “Balances for specialist schools (and there are some 2,000 of them) have to carry forward five-twelfths of their budget as an accounting requirment as it is spent over the school year, not the accounting year. “Schools are also saving for capital expenditure and are putting together group deals to address their needs. They may appear to have high balances in these cases. “Also, we are trying to off-set cost of redundancies, as there will be a reduction in student numbers coming through. Those three things make a huge difference to the figures. If you took 5% off every school, then 92.5% of schools [those without a large surplus] would not be able to manage.” Paul Woodward, headteacher of St White's Primary in Cinderford, Gloucestershire, reminded reporters about school grants too: “We can spend them up until 31 August, yet they are counted in these figures in April, making it artificially inflated.” Chris Hill, headteacher at Hounslow Town Primary School in Middlesex said: “A quick glance at the figures would make it look like we have a large underspend, but we hold the budget for 17 other schools in terms of extended schools.” Mick Brookes added: “Another issue is local authorities put large amounts into your budgets at the last minute – and you're not going to say no to it, are you? But it all adds to your balance.” He concluded by saying: “The NAHT suspects that the DCSF is preparing to accuse schools of unjustly hoarding cash, when that is clearly not the case in the overwhelming number of schools. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=291 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:20:45 GMT 20100430152045 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:20:45 GMT 20100430152045 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 15:21:51 GMT 201004301532151 Ripped-off schools The NAHT press conference was held at lunchtime on Friday, before the main conference began. Two items were on the agenda (and neither was Sats – more on that later). The first was the issue of 'ripped-off schools'. The NAHT is calling for a major enquiry into the supply and maintenance of IT equipment and maintenance in schools having uncovered evidence of 'dodgy practice', inflated costs of equipment and variations in the quality of support services. General Secretary Mick Brookes told reporters: “There is real evidence here of mis-selling and poor maintenance that could be a major scandal. We believe that there should be a major enquiry into the provision of and maintenance of IT equipment. “My colleagues in schools are experts at leading teaching and learning but not so many of them have the sort of expertise necessary to make the right choices when it comes to the purchase of IT Equipment. They need support that they can trust. “It should be possible to set up a schools Which? report of IT provision that will quickly establish what equipment is a 'good buy', 'exceptional value' and which one not to touch with a barge pole!” He added that there was evidence of “bulk-buying based cartels making savings on procurement but failing to pass those savings on to schools. We need a Government inquiry into what's going on.” http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=290 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 14:38:04 GMT 20100430143804 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 14:38:04 GMT 20100430143804 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 14:38:04 GMT 201004301423804 Who's at the Conference? A quick flick through the delegate list reveals a few interesting nuggets. Did you know that 13 National Past Presidents are attending? For anyone worried that might be unlucky, bear in mind that when Mike Welsh takes up duties as National President on Saturday, the number will have swelled to 14 as Dr Chris Howard joins their ranks. The number of Life Members attending also gives the impression of an organisation where people form close bonds and are passionate about the role of school leaders. The majority of regular delegates are what you would expect, and are mostly heads (or principals, if from Northern Ireland) of primary schools. But there is a healthy number of special school and secondary heads, plus a fair few deputy and assistant heads as well. The broad appeal of the 'association for all school leaders' is also shown by delegates also numbering a school improvement partner, a school business manager, executive heads, consultant heads and even an interim head. The numbers (412 at last count) are completed by head office staff from Haywards Heath, guests, and members of the press. Guests include an eclectic mix from overseas. There are representatives from the Queensland Association of State School Principals, the Ontario Principals Council and the USA's National Association of Secondary School Principals. As for the hacks, you'll be able to read about the conference in the Mail, Independent, Mirror, Telegraph and Times – all of whom are sending reporters. And I can confirm that there's no sign of Prime Minister Gordon Brown on the provisional list – or his Secretary of State for Education – but perhaps he's left Balls up in Rochdale? Now there's a headline for the assembled journalists. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=289 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 13:11:55 GMT 20100430131155 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 13:11:55 GMT 20100430131155 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 17:23:30 GMT 201004301752330 Welcome to Liverpool Hello and welcome to Liverpool: home of the Beatles, the Mersey ferry and what appears to be the largest concentration of angst in the world. The latter is to do with whether the city's red team will finish fourth, fifth, or worse, in the Premier League this year. Last night's Europa Cup defeat hasn't helped either. Hmmm. Try being a Leeds fan, that's all I have to say on the matter. There'll be no sympathy from me. But enough football chat. I'll be your guide to the 113th Annual Conference of the NAHT, being held at the BT Convention Centre here in Merseyside. I can't claim to have been to the previous 112, but I'm slowly heading towards double figures with the insides of conference halls from Harrogate to Brighton, and particularly Telford, fresh in my mind. This has all been in service of Leadership Focus magazine, which you'll receive if you're an NAHT member. So, if you can't be here for the bank holiday – and even if you are here for the bank holiday – pour yourself a glass of wine and keep up-to-date with events as they happen. With industrial action over Sats getting ever closer, a General Secretary making his farewell appearance, a new one in the wings, and a general election less than a week away, you really wouldn't want to miss a thing. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=288 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:58:23 GMT 20100430105823 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:58:23 GMT 20100430105823 Fri, 30 Apr 2010 10:58:57 GMT 2010043010105857 If I think back to my teenage years, I know that I liked to stay up late and I also know that getting for school was something I didn't exactly look forward to. I wasn't ever brimming with 'rise and shine'. It's not a great leap of imagination to conclude that I was probably a bit of a pain – moody, sulky and grouchy in the mornings. But is that because I stayed up too late? Did I view the late evening as 'my time', after others had gone to bed, and so stayed up later than I should have done. Perhaps I was being faintly rebellious. Or maybe that's when all the good TV was on. Either way, when it came round to morning I and didn't fancy getting up for school, it was viewed as my own stupid fault; and in Yorkshire, during the cold, wet winters, when you don't have central heating, it's nice and warm in bed. Why would you want to get up? So, could a curfew be the answer to sleepy teens then? Well, at least in countries with a hot climate. The government in South Korea certainly seem to think so. Being the appointed guardians of the country with the most extensive internet access in the world, they've become worried by the excessive amount of late-night online-game playing being done by teenagers. And so they've introduced a crackdown. And before your mind starts to wander into the gutter, I should point out that teenagers are 'gaming'. The government blocked access to online pornography sites some time ago. If it seems draconian, then you have to remember that it was only in March that a baby actually died from starvation due to its parents' addiction to online gaming. Ironically, they were bringing up a 'virtual daughter'. Myung-bak Lee, South Korea's president, thinks the proposals are necessary because his country is going to the dogs. Or, in a more direct translation, the proposed measures are checks against, "a society rampant with excessive emotional behaviour, disorderliness and rudeness". Things are so bad that the country's Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism is to force addicts of popular online games like 'Barameui Nara', 'Maple Story,' and 'Mabinogi,' to select six-hour blocks during which they cannot play games. Gamers who are under 18 years old will have to choose one of three blackout periods, running from 12am-6am, 1am-7am, or 2am-8am. It will also slow down internet connections for players who stay logged on to certain online games for extended periods of time. Certainly, gaming sites are addictive. But at the same time, studies have shown that the 'darkness hormone', melatonin, has a time-delay in teenagers. It kicks in after midnight, as opposed to around 10pm for adults. Although there is the caveat that this might be caused by staying up late and looking at a flickering screen. On the other hand, the hormonal upheaval of puberty could be causing it too, and memory tests performed on teenagers by Professor Russell Foster, chairman of Circadian Neuroscience at Brasenose College, Oxford, have shown that students' brains do work better in the afternoon. He argues that body clocks shift as we hit our teenage years and it's because we're biologically programmed that way, not because we get a kick out of staying up late. His scholarly work has prompted Dr Paul Kelley, of Monkseaton High School in North Tyneside, to follow the example of several American schools and delay classes for teenagers until 10am as “continuous early starts created 'teenage zombies' in the classroom.” Professor Foster says: “Teenagers have a biological predisposition to go to bed late and to get up late, so if you can start the school day later you should do so. Adolescent body clocks can be delayed by up to four hours so they don't start to function properly until 10 am or, in some cases, as late as noon.” So will you be changing the times of your lessons? Or sending out a letter requesting that parents ban their teenagers from using their computers late at night? Or both. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=285 Mon, 26 Apr 2010 17:47:19 GMT 20100426174719 Mon, 26 Apr 2010 17:47:19 GMT 20100426174719 Mon, 26 Apr 2010 21:03:14 GMT 201004262190314 It's May 6th. The election. Had you guessed? I suspect you knew it was coming. The country has been going manifesto mad in the build-up. The Royal British Legion, Action for ME, Age UK, the Campaign to Protect Rural England... just a small selection of the organisations to have produced one. A manifesto – a written statement declaring publicly the intentions, motives, or views of its issuer, according to the dictionary – has become the vehicle of choice when seeking to persuade politicians into doing what you want them to do. Naturally, the NAHT has one too. You can find it here, and among its calls are: NAHT calls on the Government to take immediate action to provide school leaders with:• Freedom to act with authority;• Appropriate structures for support and challenge;• Clearly defined procedures with clear roles and responsibilities;• Support in tackling poor behaviour;• Time for professional development;• Improved work/life balance. It's probably the best manifesto out there. However, my favourite one was published by the (highly influential of late) website Mumsnet. It was published at the beginning of April with some fanfare and an introduction from the Mumsnet chief executive Justine Roberts. "Mumsnetters are not shy about voicing their opinions of the three main parties' policies and though we feel we've had some success in tweaking family policy, there are many more changes Mumsnetters would like to see. So we thought we'd publish our own 'Mumifesto'," explained Justine. It's a mumifesto, good eh? Among their calls were: • A guaranteed place for your child at a local state school of your choice • The abolition of college tuition fees • Compulsory grammar lessons at primary and secondary level I suspect few people saw anything to make them think twice until it came to the health section, which included “the introduction of restrictions on vending machines stocking Fruit Shoots in public buildings, including schools and hospitals.” And judging by the comments on the Mumsnet website, some still didn't twig... but it was, of course, an April Fool. The joy comes from reading the comments that were posted by mumsnetters: “It's a wish list and unattainable. Have you costed it? How will this be afforded?” wrote one astounded poster, before coming to her senses with “It's a wind up, of course. April 1st – no one could seriously advocate that mince. Doh! Had me going.” But the NAHT's manifesto? Definitely not an April Fool – so why not download it and forward it to your MP, and suggest that they give it some serious thought? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=273 Wed, 07 Apr 2010 17:17:54 GMT 20100407171754 Wed, 07 Apr 2010 17:17:54 GMT 20100407171754 Wed, 07 Apr 2010 17:19:54 GMT 201004071751954 Think of Cornwall and what springs to mind – is it beaches, surf, traffic jams and pasties? What if you were told to think of it in terms of violent extremism? Perhaps then you might consider Mebyon Kernow, the left-of-centre political party whose main ambition is to establish greater autonomy for the county through the establishment of a legislative Cornish Assembly. Bear in mind though that the party stresses its members are 'civic' rather than 'ethnic' nationalists and despite all the black pirate-like flags with the white cross you see in the south west, they only want the same as the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish in terms of devolved government. Can this really explain why Cornwall County Council, as part of the Home Office's anti-terror strategy, is to hold a 'how to spot a potential terrorist' conference for secondary school teachers in the coming months? It is funding it to the tune of £3,500. And, obviously, if as a result of attending a conference, a secondary school teacher from St Ives was able to identify a pupil at risk of developing extremist views and – in doing so – stop them from committing mass murder, I think we would all consider the £3,500 to be money well spent. But, really, how likely is this? Certainly terrorism is a risk. Children as young as seven have been identified by police as being groomed for terrorism in Britain. And the Channel Project, a national programme run by the Association of Chief Police Officers, has found at least one student who wrote in his school book: “I want to be a suicide bomber.” Furthermore, in excess of 200 young people are being monitored by police, having been identified as at risk of committing terrorism following a sudden change from wearing Western clothes to strict Islamic dress, or for expressing devout Islamic views. Sir Norman Bettison, the Chief Constable of West Yorkshire Police, has also been quoted as saying: “we would hope that teachers [in such cases] might intervene, speak to the child's family or perhaps the local imam who could then speak to the young man." But what of Cornwall – is this conference a good idea? The county might head a list of those with extreme civic demands, but Islamic fundamentalists bent on Jihad? I think not. I can sympathise with David Hampshire, the county's religious education adviser, who said: "Just because we're far away in Cornwall, this agenda is still important in preventing violent extremism." But surely the risk is far less in Cornwall than in cities like Leeds or London. Let's face it, caravan-rage on the A30 is more likely to lead to grievous bodily harm than an Al-Quada sleeper cell in Lostwithiel. A spokesman for the Department for Children, Schools and Families claims that the conference: "will tell [teachers] how to recognise who could potentially be coerced into extremism – for instance if they're saying unusual things or living on society's fringe." But teachers are already tuned in to look for signs of neglect, abuse or distress in their pupils. If they were to spot one becoming increasingly withdrawn and scrawling 'Death to the infidel, DIE, DIE, DIE!' all over their exercise books, I suspect they wouldn't just think, “Hmm, Ali's in a bad mood today,” and then head home for the weekend. The human rights group Liberty is also skeptical of the plan. Spokeswoman Corinna Ferguson said: "We should be working on more positive things with young people rather than treating them as suspects. The idea of teachers being constantly suspicious of pupils rather than trying to engage in a positive way is quite scary.” I'm with Corinna, what about you? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=264 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 08:55:41 GMT 20100315085541 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 08:55:41 GMT 20100315085541 Mon, 15 Mar 2010 08:55:52 GMT 201003150885552 The Leadership Focus office – at a magazine company in central London – has mirrored the country in being split today over the case of Andrea Charman, who has stepped down as headteacher at Lydd Primary School in Kent. If you don't recognise the names of the headteacher or the school, then all I probably need to do is mention 'Marcus the lamb'. The school became embroiled in an ethical controversy following the decision to have a lamb sent for slaughter. The controversy centred around the fact that pupils had raised, and even bottle-fed, Marcus and some were said to be 'traumatised' by its death. The background to the story is that the headteacher had sought to teach pupils about where meat comes from – and that the slaughter was planned from the outset. It is also important to note that she had sought governor and pupil approval for the plan. The decision to slaughter the lamb was approved by the pupil's school council, with a 13-to-1 majority. It was also approved by the board of school governors. Now, following personal threats to her safety, a Facebook page that called for her to be banned from teaching and internet comments that called for the school to be burnt down, Ms Charman has resigned, citing 'personal reasons'. Opinion is completely divided on this one. For every Facebook protester and member of the 'save Marcus' lynch mob, there is someone equally angry at the headteacher's demise. “The thought of a good headteacher who has improved the standards of education for these kids then being the victim of a witchhunt. It makes my blood boil,” wrote one person on the Times forum. Another was equally unsympathetic to the protesters: “What happens when [the pupils] find out about the Tooth Fairy, Armageddon?” The rights and wrongs of what happened to Marcus in Lydd can be debated to death, if you'll excuse the pun. But what strikes me about this whole saga, is that no-one saw this coming. Why couldn't anyone see that this was a massive news story waiting to happen? However good the intentions, it was always going to cause upset, be controversial and have serious consequences. It might not be what anyone would wish for, but the fact of the matter is that as a school leader your actions are under the microscope. If you choose to do something controversial, it will be picked up by the press and your world may come crashing down as a result. Tread carefully. There are wolves out there. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=255 Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:24:22 GMT 20100211132422 Thu, 11 Feb 2010 13:24:22 GMT 20100211132422 Thu, 11 Feb 2010 16:35:14 GMT 201002111643514 How would you respond to this letter from a parent? It was sent during the recent snowy weather. “I heard the NAHT's General Secretary's comments regarding the current weather issues around London with some dismay. “Specifically, he said: 'Schools are places of learning, not crèches for children,' and 'Parents have to make arrangements for when their child is ill to be looked after and I think this comes in the same category.' “My wife and I have two children of school age in Kent and both of us have been at work throughout this week. Our local school being closed has caused us considerable inconvenience and cost. “Your General Secretary appears to be blissfully unaware of the UK's economic state and his comments do teachers a disservice. This is no time for such belligerence; the country is in recession.” Ignore for a minute that this particular parent works for a major bank and as such can be held partially responsible for the harsh (economic) climate that we're all having to endure. Does he have a point? If one or two teachers can make it in to school, then why not have them doing basic crowd control rather than teaching. With a bit of prior warning (which there usually is), there can be activities planned for such situations. If a school is turned into a crèche for a day or two, what's the problem? It would, after all, allow working parents to avoid the inconvenience and cost of finding other childcare arrangements at short notice. But this is a simplistic argument. Unfortunately it's one that many parents will see as common sense. They forget that while children may be able to get into school, conditions may worsen during the day. Buses could well stop running. Also, teachers often have longer journeys than pupils and may need to drive long distances each way. Plus, how angry would parents be if their beloved slipped on a school path and broke their leg? Negligence litigation, anyone? Also, with technology, many schools can set work through their VLE for pupils to complete from home, giving them an education rather than being shut in a room with a supervisor. One teacher summed it up quite nicely on the BBC website... “As a deputy head of a primary school, I was party to the discussions and planning that goes into the decision to close the school. We have to take a huge amount of factors into consideration, whether the children can get to school, whether the staff can get to school (some who live 45 minutes away on a good day!) and if it is actually safe. “I am not someone who appreciates some of the mad health and safety things we see day to day, but having gone for a short walk to the shop this morning and seen five cars smash into pavements and one into the back of a parked car - I think that asking our children to walk to school, with people still driving on un-gritted roads, is just daft.” It seems that there is much education still to be done with parents in convincing them that school closures are a last resort – it's not done because you fancy a day off by the fire reading the Guardian, gazing out at the lovely snow-covered fields. But is there much likelihood they'll listen? A snowball's chance in hell? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=251 Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:46:26 GMT 20100127114626 Wed, 27 Jan 2010 11:46:26 GMT 20100127114626 Wed, 27 Jan 2010 12:35:50 GMT 2010012712123550 What makes you really ANGRY – is it infuriating, pushy parents? What about Ofsted inspections that won't take into account things that are relevant to your situation? Or is it simply people WRITING WITH THE CAPS LOCK ON? Whatever the cause of your annoyance and frustrations, we want to hear from you. That's because to combat rising stress levels among school leaders we have decided to institute a 'rant-line'. If you want to vent your frustrations, give it a call. You don't need to leave your name or that of your school. Just dial in and start shouting, swearing or even arguing coherently about the injustices you are facing. It won't be like the Sun newspaper and Higgy the Human Sponge*, as calls will go straight to voicemail. Any particularly cogent arguments will be passed onto the NAHT leadership to inform their thinking. They may also be typed up and reproduced in Leadership Focus – but if this happens it will be used anonymously (unless you tell us otherwise) and no-one will ever know it's you. So give it a go – get those frustrations off your chest. Call us on 020 7880 7663 and let it all out. *PS, for those of you who want to know more about Higgy the Human Sponge... Back in the early 1990s, Stuart Higgins, a future editor of the Sun, was still working his way up the greasy pole in Wapping. As tended to happen to most of the newspaper's staff, he incurred the wrath of the paper's famously volatile editor, Kelvin MacKenzie. He did this by always remaining calm in the face of full throttle rants by the editor. But, one day, as MacKenzie was midway through throwing his toys out of the pram, he was struck by a bright idea. "Higgy, you take it all, don't you?" he screamed across his desk. "You just sit there soaking it all up. You're like a sponge..." And so, the next morning, 'Higgy the Human Sponge' made his debut as MacKenzie published Higgins' direct telephone line in the Sun, with a tempting incentive to readers to call him: "Higgy can't live without a tongue-lashing!" And while Higgins valiantly attempted to perform his normal newsdesk duties, he was bombarded by thousands of spectacularly abusive calls, many of them from mischievous work mates. And, apparently, he stayed very calm throughout. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=246 Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:57:39 GMT 20100118115739 Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:57:39 GMT 20100118115739 Mon, 18 Jan 2010 13:50:53 GMT 201001181315053 Some things are just hard to do. Entering the kingdom of heaven if you're rich is reported to be quite tricky. Not chewing a fruit pastille is another toughie. And, as I found out last night, getting back into exercise after the excesses of Christmas is intensely difficult. Not to mention painful, even 24 hours after the event. But if you're an education journalist, seemingly the most difficult thing of all to undertake is to write about school meals without mentioning 'Turkey Twizzlers'. So, while I have fallen at the second paragraph (damn!), many others don't even get this far. In reporting that junk food is alive and well in pupils' lunchboxes, Bernard Matthew's turkey treat (discontinued back in 2005, incidentally) is regularly regurgitated as a symbol of all that is wrong with school food. Take the current fuss in the news about packed lunches, for example, which has got journalists' knickers in a twizzle. Apparently, British children eat five and a half billion packed lunches each year, but research shows that only 1% of said lunchboxes meet the tough nutritional standards that have been set for their classmates on school meals. The Food Standards Agency, which carried out the study, found that 82% of lunchboxes contained foods high in saturated fat, salt and sugar, with items (chosen by parents) including crisps, sweets and biscuits. Only one in five packed lunches contained any vegetables or salad. But what to do about it? Ofsted may insist that schools have a policy on packed lunches, but it's a policy with little bite. As reported in Leadership Focus recently, when one school leader tried to ban crisps from lunchboxes, she found that she was faced with a petition from outraged parents and a legal notice from crisp manufacturer Walker's stating that crisps are actually healthy and that she was wrong to ban them. Makes you wonder why you bother, doesn't it? The same feeling was no doubt shared by John Waszek, headteacher at St Edward's College in Liverpool. He has been criticised by Liverpool Council for breaching a new audit system that aims to help schools in the region meet national guidelines that ban junk food. What was his crime? Keeping a box of KitKats at the school. He explained: “During two or three break times a week, I invite Year 7, Year 12 and Year 9 pupils into my office for what is very valuable pastoral time. It's something we like to do, and it has very positive feedback from the parents. I ask the students would they like a tea, coffee or hot chocolate and they can have a little KitKat if they want one.” Fortunately, Mr Waszek said he “just laughed” at the reprimand, adding that the school had previously been warned that it was breaching rules by handing out a sausage roll to members of a sports team after a game during the winter. It seems to me that getting the balance right between encouraging healthy eating and having to comply with ridiculous regulations is easily the equal to not chewing fruit pastilles. And it's not just education too – just look at the police scolded for sledging on their riot shields and the medical students almost sacked for taking pictures of each other lying down for a second or two at work. While there are clearly terrible problems in the world, eradicating every small moment of pleasure isn't going to solve them. So, I urge everyone to go out today and see if they can eat a fruit pastille without chewing. And if you're feeling really rebellious, see if your pupils can do it too. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=243 Fri, 15 Jan 2010 09:05:17 GMT 20100115090517 Fri, 15 Jan 2010 09:05:17 GMT 20100115090517 Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:56:42 GMT 2010011811115642 Sigh. Big sigh, in fact. Don't you just hate it when people interfere in your work? You know best. It's your job after all. So why can't people just let you get on with it instead of putting barriers in your way and doubt into your mind? No, it's not Ofsted, it's the journalistic equivalent – the signing-off process. Sometimes, if you're writing an article about something particularly sensitive, complex or legally dubious, you might email a draft of the article to the interviewee so that they can check it over and make sure you haven't completely messed things up. On other occasions, it will be a necessary evil in order to secure an interview with a bigwig who is all too well aware of the extreme lengths you're prepared to go to in order get their name into your publication. But whatever the reason, copy approval is a fraught process. Few journalists submit to it with any degree of enthusiasm. And when they do they will usually stress quite forcefully that the reviewer is to check for “factual inaccuracies” only. You're the writer, after all. But do interviewees do this? Do they heck. Take a recent article which quoted a school leader at length about his work. Out of the goodness of my heart – and possibly with just a small element of fear that I'd got my wires crossed in the writing – I sent him a draft. Along with the usual proviso. Then came the call. “Just a few little things,” he said. “If you wouldn't mind.” What did he want to change? Only four things, A comma to be changed to a semi-colon. That his job title should read Head Teacher (with capitals and a space) not headteacher. That 'teaching' really should be 'pedagogy' in the fifth paragraph. And that where he'd referred to 'kids', what he really meant was 'children'. “They're not baby goats,” he laughed, a little nervously. Now, to my mind, none of these are factual inaccuracies. And before you say it, especially not 'kids'. Commas/semi-colons…. that's something for the sub-editors to argue over and it's hardly life or death. Head or headteacher? That is governed by a publication's 'style guide' and is kept the same in every article for consistency, and definitely not changed on the whim of the interviewee. Pedagogy? If this was an academic tome, fine. But it's a plain-English magazine, so no. Sorry. Then the one that got me. Kids. His reasoning for wanting the change was that people would think he was being patronising if he was seen to be calling children 'kids'. Really? I said. Yes, he said. I agreed to the change for his sake, but it does depress me that he felt the need to amend his phrasing like that. Is it so bad to call kids 'kids'? Surely not? As a journalist I'm well aware of the power of words, yet it amazes me that a headteacher would worry about something as minor (to my mind) as that. The episode has given me an insight into just how risk-averse, politically sensitive and fearful our teaching profession has become. And that's not a good thing. It also now means I'll think twice before calling a kid a kid, which depresses me too. Sigh. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=220 Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:35:30 GMT 20091113113530 Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:35:30 GMT 20091113113530 Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:31:12 GMT 2009112522103112 The sentiment “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing,” isn't hard to believe. It really is very easy to do nothing. Whether it's putting up with people dropping litter, blasting out their personal music while travelling on a public transport, or turning a blind eye when someone puts their feet on the seats on a train… And that's only antisocial, disrespectful, rude behaviour, not even remotely approaching 'evil'. I'm sure we can all convince ourselves that we'd respond to evil if ever it crossed our path, but would we really? I suspect we would, it's just that it would take 'evil' before we would react. Let's face it, people in Britain put up with all sorts before we take a stand. Terrible meal in a restaurant? “It was fine, thanks.” Who hasn't done that? If there's any complaining to be done, it's on the way home to fellow diners, where there's no danger of 'causing a scene'. I sat through an Andrea Bocelli concert the other week while a man behind me hummed along – did he think I'd come to listen to him? Meanwhile two women in front chatted through the songs, and another one took photographs with her mega-zoom camera, ('click, click, zoom, click') despite all the notices about photography being banned. Yet, the most I could manage was a few tuts and a glare. So that's why I applaud the stand taken by Stockport headteacher Martin Henderson this week. He's an inspiration to me. The Westmorland Primary School head has warned parents they will be banned from his school if they swear. He issued the ultimatum following complaints from a group of parents about the use of obscenities between other mothers and fathers and towards their children on school grounds. The letter said: "This must stop immediately. Parents who persist in using foul language will be asked to stay away from the site... using a banning order. I do not want to take this action but… your children deserve the best and should not be witness to such behaviour." He explained: "I think it's often just in day-to-day conversation and no offence is meant but there are little ears listening. Parents have been heard to shout aggressively at their children. It's usually 'get here, you little b******' and that sort of thing.” Some people have responded by saying the school is in a rough area and what does he expect. Well, he expects better. And so he should. If no-one ever makes a stand, then standards drop and drop until they are the expected norm. Well done, Mr Henderson. Your school – and your neighbourhood – are lucky to have you. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=192 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:32:56 GMT 20091001143256 Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:32:56 GMT 20091001143256 Mon, 05 Oct 2009 09:57:18 GMT 200910050995718 Schools Secretary Ed Balls has been making headlines this week with his comments that the academy programme has seen “the largest wave of new schools since the Victorian era”. Two hundred are now up and running, with another 200 on their way. Taken at face value, four hundred new schools really is something to shout about. It's also something that the teaching profession should applaud. How many times have teachers complained about run-down and dilapidated facilities? More often than not, the buildings they were working in were (apart from the Portakabins) genuinely Victorian. They had leaking roofs, inconvenient space and needed running repairs at the speed of Usain Bolt. The main problem that academies face, however, is that we can't take the improved facilities at face value. It's not as simple as an investment in new buildings – they come with strings attached. Which is why one prominent union leader speculated last week that: “The jury is still out on whether academies work. Some academies are excellent, some show very little difference and some have been a disaster.” If it wasn't for the attached strings, this could seem a little harsh, as the teaching environment is only a small factor in educational improvement. And as anyone who has dealt with builders will know, projects aren't always completed on time, on budget or to everyone's satisfaction. The other big academy news this week has been the dropping of the £2m sponsorship requirement to run one. Balls commented: “I don't think money should be the first qualification to run a school,” glossing over the fact that it had been previously and he didn't seem to mind then. Most NAHT members will doubtless agree that money should not be the first qualification. But what should? Balls has said it's about “the injection of a different educational DNA and new leadership.” Does this mean he thinks school leaders, the National College, the DCSF and himself have all failed? Seemingly, yes. Why else would we need new DNA and new leadership? The new DNA and the new leadership may well prove to be a revelation and closer links with business may be one worthwhile outcome from the initiative. So I do have my hopes for academies being a success. But I also have my fears – one being that they will attract all the more able pupils, teachers and school leaders from neighbouring non-academies and further contribute to a two-tier education – much like it was in the days of grammar schools and secondary moderns. Another fear is that sponsors will be keen to push their own agenda – whether it's religious, social or political. Those that have invested the £2m will want something for their money. So, are we going to end up with the situation where you either send your child to the nice, modern, creationist school or the one by the sink estate which isn't quite so flash, but where at least they teach about evolution? Or will the next Government just pull the plug on them and introduce something completely different? Actually, my money is on the last one… http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=177 Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:46:59 GMT 20090908134659 Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:46:59 GMT 20090908134659 Tue, 08 Sep 2009 13:46:59 GMT 200909081314659 If it wasn't for one solitary topic, finding newspaper headlines about school leaders in mid-summer would be like trying to find an underpaid London Underground driver. Fortunately, there is one subject that never lets us down. And it guarantees to fill column inches over the six-week break. Amazingly, it's not even bad news, like 'A levels dumbed down' or 'behaviour worsens'. The subject in question is tributes to retiring headteachers. And newspapers do deserve a little credit for publishing such stories. It's easy to fill the pages with muggings, stabbings and celebrity indiscretions, so it reassuring that there is still a place for people saying nice things about other people. It reinforces the view, too, that being a headteacher is a privileged and respected position in society. It's an acknowledgement that the role is a key one in our cities, towns and villages. The journalists, almost without fail, ask the outgoing heads the same question: “What are you looking forward to in retirement?” Christine Potts (St Michael's Primary, Bodenham) will “spend her retirement visiting extended family, including relatives in Australia, and seeing more of her one-year-old grandson.” Jenny Chapman (Rogate Primary, West Sussex) intends to indulge her hobbies of “Compiling scrapbooks, making jewellery, singing and walking” as well as working on teacher training courses at the University of Chichester.” And Jill Martin (Allonby Primary School, Cumbria) plans to spend her retirement travelling and wants to visit all the cathedrals in Britain. But, some have even grander plans than visiting cathedrals. After 20 years at the helm (you'll see in a second that's a terrible pun, sorry!) of Erith School, one of Bexley's largest, Toby Hufford has commissioned a yacht and plans to sail the Atlantic Ocean. Mr Hufford said he had always wanted to be the captain of a ship and he even compares the school to a large passenger liner: “At the end of a term the pupils disembark and there is another voyage the following term,” he said. His yacht will be ready in November, when he will, literally, sail off into the sunset. Of course, there is a downside to all these stories and it's the knowledge that, behind the heartfelt thanks and tearful goodbyes there is the very real fear that there will not be any applicants to step into their shoes. Experts predict that, with many heads due to hit the retirement age in the near future, there will not be enough deputy heads willing to step up to the plate. As Sharon Schofield, acting deputy headteacher at Marsden Primary School, Nelson, Lancashire told the Lancashire Telegraph: “The job is stressful and it is very hard work. People see the holidays and think it is an easy job. But it is more than a job. It's a vocation. There is a huge shortage of heads because it is such a hard job. It is more business led with finance and business planning to be considered as well as the education side.” But the summer newspapers also tell us that there has been an interesting development in headteacher recruitment. The governors at Ridgewell Primary School in Essex used a lonely hearts-style advert to try to find a replacement for Andy Richbell, who had been in the post for five years. The advert read: "Popular, attractive, small-but-bubbly village school (138 years old) seeks new headteacher, for fun, friendship and learning for life." Perhaps surprisingly, a number of people responded and a successor has been recruited. Sarah Howard, chairman of governors, said: "For a headteacher's job, you are lucky to get one or two replies, but we had seven responses and we are very pleased with that." So enjoy the rest of your summer. The papers are full of heartfelt thanks for jobs well done and it's the time of year when we see the start of new and beautiful relationships that are full of optimism for the future. Make the most of it while you can. I hate to worry you, but it might not last. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=170 Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:39:02 GMT 20090814163902 Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:39:02 GMT 20090814163902 Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:39:02 GMT 200908141643902 Don't know about you, but I love Daily Telegraph readers. They're always able to come up with a solution to tricky problems. If only our ministers could do the same. Faced with the problem of improving behaviour of pupils in schools, the Secretary of State for education, Ed Balls, devised what he thought was a cunning plan. His plan was that all parents will be forced to sign updated Home School Agreements (HSAs) that include the provision for fines of up to £1,000, which come into effect when their offspring repeatedly breach the terms of these agreements. It's a solution that has obvious appeal. Balls has seen his budget slashed, so needs all the income he can get. It also gives teeth to the HSAs, which many parents may not have given a monkeys about otherwise. There are flaws of course. A friend of mine (responsible job, educated to degree level and a caring parent) saw his teenage daughter walk out of school at 14 and refuse to go back. She declared she was going to live with her boyfriend and walked out of the family home. He was powerless to stop her. Would a £1,000 fine have made any difference to their situation? It's doubtful. Which is why I'm so grateful to Telegraph reader Doxon of Dick Green for his insightful comment: “Birch the brats in front of the school... and, for consistent offenders, flog their parents too (including the absentee ones). Sack all incompetent teachers. Hang Balls and Brown. End of problem.” Now why didn't anyone else think of that? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=164 Fri, 24 Jul 2009 17:07:53 GMT 20090724170753 Fri, 24 Jul 2009 17:07:53 GMT 20090724170753 Sat, 25 Jul 2009 17:33:57 GMT 200907251753357 Normally, I'd be against this kind of thing. It's a bit like parents taking their children out of school for a holiday. The learning suffers, there's a bit of catching up to do, it's generally a bit disruptive. But then, school holidays are the most expensive time to go away, and sometimes parents have work commitments that make school holidays an impractical time for a break. Then, there's the credit crunch. The City traders were the first to let us down, followed by the bankers, followed by politicians with their expenses. So, really, school leaders should be setting a better example as redundancies and cuts in expenditure start to bite. But I'm afraid you haven't been setting a good example, have you? Some 20 state school heads – at tax-payers' expense – said 'yes' to a junket costing in the region of £40,000 earlier this month. Schools taking part were expected to foot the £1,100 delegates fee, plus more than £700 for flights, although heads could choose to pay for themselves. The event was organised by iNet – an international network that allows schools from around the world to meet and share idea. It is run by Government-backed charity the Specialist Schools and Academies Trust (SSAT). The idea is that heads from different countries get together to discuss 'global citizenship'. It seems a lot of money, doesn't it? And a bit of a fluffy subject, if we're being honest. Plus, we all know that there's all kinds of videoconferencing that could have done the job adequately, if not quite as well. Mark Wallace, campaign director of the Taxpayers' Alliance, voiced the concerns of many when he said: "For parents in Britain frustrated at the state of our schools, this trip will rub salt in the wounds. At any time it would be inappropriate for the education budget to be spent on five-star hotels on desert islands, but in the middle of a recession it is particularly inappropriate.” It's not the first time either, remember Arizona and Marbella? And like I said, normally, I'd be against this kind of thing too. But come on... Mauritius? The Indian Ocean? A five-star hotel? Golf course, watersports, spa, white sand, clear blue sea? Who in their right mind is going to turn that down? I wouldn't. I'd be out of the office like a shot. This is the kind of trip that bankers, politicians, doctors, sometimes even journalists, get invited to with reasonable frequency. Why shouldn't school leaders have the opportunity to enjoy perks like this? Yes, perhaps the timing isn't great – but surely it's more that it's lazy journalism, an easy story for the press to sink their teeth into. I don't begrudge them, I'm just jealous. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=142 Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:26:29 GMT 20090616102629 Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:26:29 GMT 20090616102629 Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:28:13 GMT 2009061610102813 The creativity 'tsar' has had some interesting things to say recently. Sadly, it wasn't about why he shares a job title with Ivan the Terrible, but it was still very readable. Instead, the California-based guru was more concerned with analysing the failings of the British education system. In an interview with the Independent, Sir (pronounced 'tsar'?) Ken Robinson pointed out that education secretaries were: "almost all of them looking for one or two significant initiatives that will deliver prompt results - and then move on to another ministry. They almost all resolutely refuse to listen to the people who do the work in the classroom." I'm sure that most school leaders would find little to disagree with in that statement. A 'one-size-fits-all-quick-fix' is practically the Holy Grail for Government ministers. But can the same criticism also be applied to gurus? What, for example, do you make of this next pronouncement by Sir Ken? "The core truth is that children only learn if they're enjoying it and see relevance in what they're doing." It's certainly a popular idea. Like many others, Sir Ken feels that British education is still essentially the model inherited from the 19th century and it needs radical change. However, the 'enjoyment' aspect is something that tends to be rubbished by those who don't work in education. Or at least it is by the ones I've spoken to. Like them, I can remember studying for spelling tests and the way it sank in was through repetition – the writing down of words over and over again until they'd wormed their way into my head. I don't remember it being much fun, but it did work. Likewise, with Latin declensions, it was a case of speaking them out loud in class repeatedly until they were ingrained. This might be heretical, but somehow the idea seems to have come about that learning things doesn't need to involve hard work. There's the very attractive notion that there's a short-cut and it involves having fun. Yet what people tell me is: “School isn't meant to be fun – you're there to learn.” These are the same people who tend to associate more fun in the classroom with less self-discipline and laziness. It's a sop to the slacker, they say. They also worry that we're going to create a generation that can't focus on work unless they find it enjoyable and what will the nation's employers have to say about that? So, are they the voices of doom? Does your school's experience prove that pupils do learn more effectively when teachers follow Sir Ken's guidelines – or are the Tsar's 'new clothes' worthy of mention? Perhaps someone should say something, just in case. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=127 Thu, 28 May 2009 14:34:10 GMT 20090528143410 Thu, 28 May 2009 14:34:10 GMT 20090528143410 Mon, 01 Jun 2009 10:52:06 GMT 2009060110105206 If, like me, you've sat through two days of Annual Conference and a day at the House of Commons in the space of a week, you soon start to realise what makes a good speech. And I'd say that the most polished performance over this period came from Ed Balls in Brighton. That's not to say it was the best speech (more later), but given all his media training, extensive experience in making speeches and his team of civil servant writers, not to mention the undoubted hours practising and then watching it back, it was certainly polished. Especially since I was reading his script as he spoke and he was pretty much word for word without the aid of any papers or cue cards. Like many expert speakers, he started his speech with an ice-breaker. This is always handy, especially if you know your message may not be that well-received. Ed Balls kicked off (excuse the pun) with an anecdote about his sons. The sub-text here being, “I'm a parent, a family man, I know children, I'm a real person not just a faceless politician.” He told delegates: “As I was leaving the house at 8.30 this morning, my children asked me where I was going on a Saturday morning. When I told them I was going to Brighton, they looked crestfallen. They said, 'Why are you going to the seaside without us?' When I told them it was because I was spending the day with a roomful of head teachers, they suddenly looked less unhappy to be missing out.” Cue laughter. Well, rueful smiles. With the ice showing the faintest signs of thawing, he moved on to establishing his credentials when it comes to education. He'd already mentioned that he was the “third-longest serving Secretary of State since 1997,” a proud boast. Then it was a case of proving his 'cred'. He started a series of paragraphs that can be summed up as: “Last year, I visited a school in Bolton with Alan Johnson.... In December, I talked to NAHT members... Just last week, I visited a primary school in Preston...” You get the picture. He then entered a two-part section. Part one: stress similarities, not difference. Part two: suck up. “I was asked if it was wise to come to the conference. For me that was never a question. Because the same moral purpose that took you into teaching, drove you to become head teachers and brought you here, when you could have stayed at home for a well-deserved break, also brought me into politics and underpins our Children's Plan. We share the same priorities....” Similarities established, he took an almighty in-breath. “It's no surprise to me that Ofsted says that we now have the best generation of head teachers we've ever had… I believe we have the best head teachers in the world working in our schools… and I share the frustrations of head teachers over league tables…” And in the best political tradition, he closed his speech with a series of statements that sounded good on first hearing, but didn't actually mean that much. A cynic could easily put all kinds of interpretation on them. “The current assessment system is not set in stone.” [But we'll decide what gets changed, not you] “I know you have real concerns.”[Obviously, you're wrong, but I do know you're concerned] “I know that you want nothing less than the best for the children in your schools”[You're all so bloody worthy] Then there was the carefully hidden sucker punch: “I have to say that I don't believe a boycott is the right or responsible approach. I urge you to work with us.” Attack duly launched, he hastily retreated back on the defensive and volunteered to answer questions until the cows came home. Or at least until an aide said he 'really, really had to go'. As we all know by now, his highly polished speech didn't have the desired effect. The vote was 94% in favour of a ballot. It seems that polish can only get you so far. Especially when you learn that he's given pretty much the same speech to other teaching unions. We're not so special after all. Incidentally – the most popular speaker of the weekend was undoubtedly Les Turner. This year, he took to the stage without props (he's been known to use a tin of beans) and with barely a mention of white dog poo (see last year's conference). This year we had a speech in praise of Ofsted. Well, possibly 'praise' isn't the right word. “If Ofsted was an embarrassing medical condition, it would be piles – because they're at the bottom of all our bleeding problems… If they were an item of clothing they would be Y-fronts – because they're supposed to give support but do so without style or credibility…” And so on. Polish is all very well, but comic rants against pantomime villains will bring the house down every time. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=122 Wed, 06 May 2009 11:44:40 GMT 20090506114440 Wed, 06 May 2009 11:44:40 GMT 20090506114440 Wed, 06 May 2009 14:13:21 GMT 200905061421321 When I wrote in my last blog that: “Even the most placid people can get wound up if you press the right buttons,” I didn't really have myself in mind. Then I read the Daily Mail. “Fury at GCSE in 'Vicki Pollard' parenting for teenage girls” was the headline. The opening paragraphs stated: “Teenage girls will be offered a GCSE-level qualification in being a young parent. Those who are 'considering becoming pregnant' or are so already will learn about caring for newborn babies, breastfeeding, family finances and how to deal with toddler tantrums. “Family campaigners have condemned the move as 'irresponsible' in a country which already has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe. They warn that the qualification will send out the message that having a baby while still at school is an 'achievement'.” The story was carefully written to elicit a “Promoting a course in young parenting is utterly irresponsible and suggests teenage pregnancy as a form of 'alternative career path'. I'm appalled!” response. Which it duly did from many, many readers. Others went to town on 'benefits scroungers' and 'Britain's going to the dogs' rants... “Schools should go the whole hog and teach about claiming benefits and housing. It's sure a whole lot easier than teaching Maths and English,” said one reader. I was appalled too – but not by the course. I was appalled, firstly by the Mail, which leaves no stone unturned in its bid to provoke moral outrage at every turn. And secondly, by its readers, who seized upon the story as more evidence that their world view is the only correct one – namely that the education system is a joke. As are young people. As are school leaders. But let's just hold the jerking knee at bay for a few seconds. From a quick look around the Nationwide Community Learning Partnership (NCLP) website (whose course is to be accredited by Edexcel after several years with the NCFE ), its courses seem to offer hugely sensible advice. For example, on what to check for on a packet of condoms – eg, expiry date, kitemark and size – not flavour. This is because: “Condoms sold 'for pleasure' in public toilets, with funky colours with bumps and soft spikes, flavours and amazing claims are not usually approved, so may not protect against pregnancy or infections.” Where else are youngsters going to get this kind of information? They won't get it from reading Nuts. Or from their mates. Or from their parents if they're Mail-reading hysterics who think that education is the first step on the road to ruin. It's practically the same argument the Taliban makes for not educating girls – 'it would corrupt them'. So best to wrap all children up in cotton wool and lock them in a cupboard til they're 30 then, eh? The whole point of a school education should be to prepare students for life as an adult. So let's give them some life skills. As one rare voice of dissent on the Daily Mail website noted: “Our kids need help with a whole host of life skills around relationships, safety, finances and health – and if this course helps to shape a better prepared young mother then isn't that better than nothing? Chances are that faced with quality information about the reality of motherhood, it may in fact act as a form of contraception.” I couldn't agree more. And I think we should be encouraging courses like this, not strangling them at birth. But what do you think? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=116 Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:21:08 GMT 20090416122108 Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:21:08 GMT 20090416122108 Wed, 06 May 2009 14:07:12 GMT 200905061420712 Even the most placid people can get wound up if you press the right buttons. And when you go to the TES Community pages and look under 'headteacher' there are quite a few topics exercising people's emotions. Workplace bullying has fired up a few, there are others wondering if a non-practising Catholics can ever become heads of a Catholic school, while another is worried that a verbal offer of a deputy head position is not binding. Although with the latter, you can't help wondering if the head has found out that his TES pseudonym is 'lazybum' and is now having second thoughts as a result. Possibly the most eye-catching post, though, is the one that asks for advice on a late admission: “A parent has requested a place for her year 6 child immediately after Easter!!!” says the headteacher. It continues: “They are relocating from another part of the country. Hey and guess what? The child is working below level 3. I don't suppose anyone knows of a cunning plan to avoid admitting before Sats???” It shouldn't be a shocking thing to read. After all, the NAHT has been campaigning long and hard about SATs and all their iniquities. If anything, it highlights exactly why they have to go. You might hope that the poster would be scolded by their fellow school leaders for even asking such a question. And there is some criticism: “I really don't believe that you would put a school's SATs results before a child's educational need. It's a disgusting attitude and should be roundly condemned by all,” says one forum member. But others are more sympathetic to the situation – albeit coming across as quite bitter and possibly a little bigoted. “This happened in my small school two years ago. I had to admit four pupils in April, all 'Travellers'. Three were in Year 6 and one was in Year 2. Needless to say, none were working at age appropriate levels and we didn't achieve our targets. It looks bad on any data and it doesn't 'tell the story'.” Of course, some take a purely pragmatic approach to avoid the stress that SATs have led to. “You need to be clever with how you present your data - present it without the transient children, without the gypsy, roma and travelling children and PIVAT your SEN to show measurable progress.” Sensible advice perhaps. But should it have come to this? This one thread sums up a very sorry state of affairs. Both the Council of the NAHT and the Executive of the NUT are putting identical resolutions to their conferences this year calling for a boycott of the 2010 KS1 and KS2 National Curriculum tests. Both organisations are in agreement that “any continuation of the statutory tests as a requirement beyond 2009 would be unacceptable for the future of children's education”. They're not wrong. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=113 Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:35:08 GMT 20090407153508 Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:35:08 GMT 20090407153508 Wed, 06 May 2009 14:07:35 GMT 200905061420735 Jim Knight, the schools minister, has been studying the various nuggets of wisdom that have been uttered by the Chinese philosopher Confucius, who lived 551-479 BC. Mr Knight visited Beijing recently and came back enthused and full of bright ideas. "I want to develop Confucius Classrooms [a hub of schools sharing China-related teaching resources] and further develop Mandarin in comprehensives,” he announced, adding that: “there should be an opportunity for everyone to learn Mandarin at a local school." Part of the reason for his visit was to find out why children from Chinese backgrounds outperform every other ethnic group in Britain. There's clearly something in this – in parts of Australia, for example, schools get extra funding for every ethnic minority child – unless they're Chinese – in which case they are deemed not to need the cash. But what could it be? Family cohesion, extra discipline or having a cultural ethos that's much more in tune with learning, perhaps? The Government may be on to something. And, yes, closer inspection reveals that the Government is indeed building an entire education policy around the sayings of Confucius… Policy one: Confucius says: “Our greatest glory is not in never failing, but in getting up every time we do.” That's right, every time we mess it up, we're going to forget it ever happened and do it all over again. Policy two: Confucius says: “They must often change those who would be constant in happiness or wisdom.” Are those blinking school leaders complaining again? Let's give them some new initiatives, that'll keep them quiet for a bit. Policy three: Confucius says: “I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand.” Memo to civil servants: cancel that trip to the inner-city school. Make it a phone call instead. Policy four: Confucius says: “Be not ashamed of mistakes and thus make them crimes.” Oh, come on now, let's just forget the whole SATs/ETS thing, shall we? Policy five: Confucius says: “He who learns, but does not think, is lost. He who thinks, but does not learn, is in great danger.” Ooh, this one makes my head hurt. Maybe I should have listened more at school… What do you think about the plans for the wider teaching of Mandarin and Chinese philosophies? Is it the latest in a string of half-baked cure-alls, or an inspired suggestion that will allow our students to prosper in a world in which China is a dominant force? Let us know. http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=104 Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:04:16 GMT 20090318150416 Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:04:16 GMT 20090318150416 Wed, 18 Mar 2009 15:07:19 GMT 200903181530719 This may be controversial. But I don't think Sail Suleman has done anything wrong. In fact, I think he should be applauded. Who is he? Well, you might not recognise his name, but you will remember the headlines. “Imagine you are a 7/7 terrorist, pupils of 11 are told” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1150747/Imagine-7-7-terrorist-pupils-11-told-government-promoted-exercise.html) “Pupils told: think as bombers” (http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6008953) “Teaching pack about 7/7 bombers withdrawn” http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/feb/20/bombers-pack-withdrawn Don't be put off by the fact he's become female in this last one. He looks distinctly male in the photo used by the Halifax Evening Courier. (http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/news/Storm-on-77-Bombs-question.5003713.jp) Mr Suleman is the hate-crime co-ordinator at Calderdale Council in West Yorkshire. Why do I think he should be applauded? Because there is bigotry; there is a lack of understanding; and there is hatred. It's only by exploring these issues – for example, by looking at what led to the tragedy of the 7 July bombings of 2005 – that you can hope to stop people seeing things in extreme terms. He's tried to do this and he's been vilified for it. All the emphasis has been on these packs trying to understand what motivated the bombers – the presumption being that it would lead to more suicide bombings. For one thing, life isn't that simple. And in any case, surely the opposite is true, that it would actually lead to more understanding of different cultures and a greater awareness of the tragic consequences terrorism leads to? Part of the problem is that newspapers thrive on getting people wound up. Any situation like this where they can stir people up – get them writing letters and responding to blogs (go on, you know you want to) is manna from heaven. Unfortunately, while it has the beneficial effect (for them) of boosting sales and readership figures, thus increasing their profits, there is a knock-on effect. The knock-on effect is on Government, which by nature is insecure. It continues only as long as it has the electorate behind it. Voters that are outraged about something that is within the Government's power to change are not going to be outraged for long. The Government will act quickly to assuage their fears. On most things anyway. So, you get knee-jerk reactions. School leaders should be used to them by now and this is the latest. There's no measured discussion, no attempt to investigate what the pupils and teachers using these packs think about them – just a decision taken on the hoof that this is one to kill off quickly to make it look like the Government is protecting us from danger. But is it really acting in our best long-term interests? On the same day as the 'bomber' headlines came another education-related one: “Schools 'failing to fire the imagination'” http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article5769235.ece This was a story about Robin Alexander's report on the Cambridge Primary Review. Let me give you a line or two from it: “In these severely utilitarian and philistine times, it has become necessary to argue the case for creativity and the imagination on the grounds of their contribution to the economy alone. The most conspicuous casualties are the arts, the humanities and those kinds of learning in all subjects which require time for talking, problem-solving and the extended exploration of ideas.” I fear we have just seen another “conspicuous casualty” during the past week. To solve problems does require the extended exploration of ideas. What it doesn't need is cheap headlines seeking to exploit people's grief, fear and prejudices. But what do you think? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=98 Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:42:23 GMT 20090226104223 Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:42:23 GMT 20090226104223 Wed, 06 May 2009 14:08:08 GMT 200905061420808 To parents and Daily Mail readers alike it's often quite a challenge to reconcile how you could ever educate young people about knife crime, sex, pornography and drugs without turning them into a machete-wielding, coke-addled pimp. And when the parents of the children in your care also happen to be Daily Mail readers, then as a school leader you really do have a battle on your hands. But clearly, not to educate children about dangers that might threaten them is irresponsible. In the case of Thomas Dudden and his primary school's 999 lesson, it saved the school from burning to the ground. But, if you do teach a 15 year old about cannabis and their knowledge of the drug was zero beforehand, and then they're inspired to try it – is that your fault? What about if they try cannabis after your lesson, then try cocaine, and before you know it they're a dealer pushing white powder at all the primary school kids in the area. What then? It's very possible that if you hadn't held that lesson; not given them that information, that it would never of occurred to them to try it. Their curiosity wouldn't have been stimulated at what might be a particularly vulnerable age for them. The same goes for sex education. One day it's sweet, innocent little Molly, the next it's Oh golly, Miss Molly. These are very, very emotive subjects for parents. Just look at the reaction to a Devon school teaching pole-fitness (note, not pole-dancing). What's the answer? Pretending that sex, drugs and violence don't exist is clearly nonsense. Schools, like parents, have a role to play in preparing young people for the outside world where dangers really do lurk. It's like saying we shouldn't teach cycling proficiency because a child might want then to cycle on roads, where there is the very real chance they could be killed in a crash. My answer would be to communicate to parents – well in advance – that this is what you're doing. If you are going to teach about same-sex relationships tell the parents first, so that they can broach subject with their child in a way they see fit (or they can take the opportunity to raise objections with you). They might feel, quite reasonably, that age X is too young for subject Y – you might even agree after talking it through with them. At the very least discuss it with governors. It's a fine line – the science behind inoculations is that they work by diluting something quite nasty giving you enough of the stuff to develop an immunity rather than the disease. But then you do always hear of someone developing something terrible from the flu jab. I would argue that if people are aware of the risks they can make their own decisions – however stupid. We can't wrap children in cotton wool and need to accept that some will make the wrong choices, even with all the facts at their fingertips. But what do you think? http://www.naht.org.uk/welcome/comment/blogs/steve-smethurst/?blogpost=91 Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:18:06 GMT 20090205161806 Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:18:06 GMT 20090205161806 Fri, 06 Feb 2009 10:02:24 GMT 2009020610100224