16-19 Accountability Consultation Response
ATM has worked with MA, NANAMIC, IMA (the CMAthTeach registration authority members) and NAMA to produce the attached response to the government consultation on post-16 accountability. There is a concern that the Tech Bacc which looks for continued study of mathematics and the extended project offers a richer curriculum experience than the proposed best 3 A levels measure for those following an academic curriculum. The latter could undermine participation in the study of mathematics, including AS mathematics, further mathematics at both AS and A level and the proposed core maths qualification.
Response from ATM/MA to the KS2 accountability consultation
ATM and MA, led by members of the Joint Primary Expert Group, have prepared a response to the KS2 accountability consultation. We raise concerns about the lack of criteria for the end of Key Stage expectations, given the removal of levels. We argue against the introduction of tests at the start of Key Stage 1 and league tables at the end of Key Stage 1. We also advise against the proposal of raw mark and decile reporting at the end of Key Stage 2.
GCSE content and Ofqual consultation on GCSE reform
ATM has responded to the recent DfE consultation on GCSE content and Ofqual consultation on GCSE reform, highlighting the potential issues for all learners. The proposed assessment objectives and weightings will make the papers far less accessible, while the move to terminal assessment and a minimum of 3.5 hours of exams will put enormous pressure on many students whose achievements won't be fully recognised. There is no clarity around the proportion of non-calculator assessment or the nature of tiering that will be used. ATM has suggested one route to each grade by requiring that studetns take a pair of adjacent papers where papers assess grades (in current parlence) EFG; DC, BA and A*. The second paper would only be marked if studets scored above a certain threshold (say 60%) on the first paper. ATM does not support the move to numerical grades. ATM has reiterated its proposal for a gatekeeper qualification at the standard of GCSE grade C that is set nationally and taken when ready at any time during the 14-19 phase. This would remove the need for tiering and grading and save an enormous amount of tax-payers money. it might also help to ensure students have a more worthwhile experience of mathematics which empowers them to continue their study of mathematics as appropriate to their needs and aspirations.
ATM response to PTI College of Teaching consultation
ATM welcomes the proposed College of Teaching and urges that subject association membership including Chartered Teacher status is recognised within the membership structure.
ATM response to SKE proposals
ATM has responded to the National College for Teaching and Leadership (NCTL) consultation on the future of subject knowledge enhancement (SKE) courses.
SKE courses enable graduates with an A-level in mathematics to develop their knowledge and understanding of mathematics before embarking on a course of initial teacher education (ITE). NCTL proposes to move provision away from face-to-face courses provided by higher education institutions.completed before the ITE course begins to courses that are on line and can be run in parallel with the ITE course from a much wider range of providers.
The evidence from a recent DfE evaluation is that SKE courses are highly effective in preparing people to become subject specialist teachers. ATM has urged reconsideration of the proposals.
Secondary school accountability
The DfE published a consultation paper on secondary school accountability on Thursday 7 February, alongside the revisions to GCSE reforms.
The consultation contained some significant developments to how the DfE proposes to change the way secondary schools in England are measured - in particular, proposals for wider accountability measures.
Reform of the National Curriculum in England
The Government launched a review of the National Curriculum in January 2011 with the aim of ensuring that the aspirations we set for our children match those in the highest-performing education jurisdictions, and giving teachers greater freedom over how to teach. The proposals represent the outcomes of that review. This consultation is being conducted under section 96 of the Education Act 2002.
The response deadline was 16 Apr 2013.
To the Secretary of State:
“We believe that the proposed new National Curriculum is not fit for children, teachers or for education in the 21st Century. To maintain successful learning and the well-being of our children and their teachers, we demand that the curriculum is re-formulated. In the interests of democracy we urge the DfE to show greater respect for a wider range of stakeholders and their existing knowledge and expertise during this process.” - Sue Cox (University of East Anglia). Supported by: Association for the Study of Primary Education and National Association for Primary Education