Micro-mismanagement
Anastasia De Waal, 24 July 2009
The Children, Schools and Families Select Committee released its findings yesterday on the role of ministers in the 2008 Sats fiasco, which saw hundreds of thousands of Key Stage 3 pupils waiting months for their test results.
The Committee’s report recommended that the government reform its relationship with the agencies that deliver its policies, after ministerial observers on the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) board contributed to the 2008 debacle by implementing precarious testing arrangements.
The report, headed by Labour MP Barry Shearman, went on to recommend that observers from the Department of Children Schools and Families (DCSF) not be placed on the board of the new regulator, Ofqual. Yet transferring the regulatory responsibilities of the QCA to a new quango merely paints over the cracks of a system that is clearly in need of a genuine overhaul.
The immediate problem with this limited reform is that the government is not indicating any intention to cease meddling in ‘independent’ agencies as recommended by the report. Case in point a DCSF statement yesterday acknowledged that whilst Ofqual should be independent, “DCSF and DBIS [Department of Business, Innovation and Skills] officials should attend the Ofqual committee … as observers and be able to advise the committee, when requested, about the government’s views”. Ed Balls and his ministers are clearly unwilling to acknowledge the role that their intervention played in the Key Stage 3 Sats fiasco. The beleaguered sacked chief of the QCA, Dr Ken Boston, although culpable, has been a handy scapegoat for the Department.
Beyond that, the real concern is that the burden of testing on school pupils remains, although the removal of testing at Key Stage 3 was a welcome move applauded by many. The 2008 debacle is a prime example of how government interference in the delivery of education policy – when ministers micro-manage and do not leave the professionals to their areas of expertise – can result in failure. It is unlikely that this latest lesson will be transferred to further testing reforms, in terms of an increase in freedom for teachers to choose appropriate systems of learning and a reduction in the pattern of ‘teaching to the test’.
Meanwhile, if the DCSF continues to interfere in the work of Ofqual – which appears likely, despite the select committee report – mere tinkering with the detail is simply a change of balls when the fruitless game of micro-mismanagement urgently needs replacing.
By Jed Cinnamon
KS3 Science SATs were really very good for pupils and the quality of teaching. You must remember that many science teachers are not degree educated in at leat two of the three sciences and this does affect the quality of teaching to higher attaining pupils.
Unfortunately most senior teachers and headteachers are likely to have social science or drama qualifications as these subjects involve less behaviour difficulties in class – they are unlikely to understand how much more difficult science is to teach at secondary level with experimental hazards and politicised behaiour policies causing many to stop doing experiments at all. Hence the importance of the KS3 tests which used as past papers are excellent teaching resources.
All that will occur now in state schools is that previous SATs exams will be re-used as Year 9 Exams. Unfortunately there will be a mix of methods schools will now use to report KS3 levels, ranging from (i) norm referencing, (ii) the level of the highest question answered correctly or (iii) only teacher assessment. School teachers will have their workload increased as a consequence as well.
The incompetence of civil servants in the top-down management of schools is only matched by their incompetence in managing contracts and assessing bids, and the damage this time will be quite severe.