APPENDIX 4
Memorandum from Marika Sherwood, Black
and Asian Studies Association (OAR 06)
I wish to submit the following questions based on
Mr Woodhead's Annual Report.
On Page 41, #112, the report states that "Almost
all schools meet the requirements of National Curriculum history".
Given that the National Curriculum states that "Pupils should
be taught . . . about the social, cultural, religious and ethnic
diversity of the societies studied, in Britain and the wider world",
are we to understand that the Chief Inspector is satisfied that
this is being done? If so, how does he make this assessment, as
on 27 February 1996 Mr Woodhead informed the Black and Asian Studies
Association that "no specific assessment is made of inspectors'
knowledge of and interest in the diversity and richness of other
cultures and pupils' own cultural traditions". Are we to
understand that since 1996 new OFSTED inspectors are required
to have such knowledge and that all those already working for
OFSTED have attended in-service training courses on the history
of Black (in the widest possible sense) peoples in Britain since
Roman times?
The Chief Inspector also states in the same
paragraph that "pupils lack a context for their work and
are unable to make relevant connections . . . some (schools) do
not give sufficient emphasis to non-European history". In
view of the fact that the National Curriculum suggests absolutely
no links between the compulsory units of study and the options
for world history, does the Chief Inspector envisage such changes,
which could easily link, for example, "Britain 1500-1750"
and the study of "West African empires", or "Islamic
civilisations 7th to 16th centuries"? Such linkages would,
inter alia, provide a "context for pupils' work".
Marika Sherwood
Secretary, Black and Asian Studies Association
February 2000
|