Memorandum submitted by Mathematics in Education and Industry (MEI)

 

 

 

Summary

 

1. The issues being considered by the Select Committee have considerable implications for mathematics education. As an independent curriculum development body for Mathematics, MEI is concerned that examination grades have assumed a greater importance than the understanding and knowledge which examinations should measure.

 

2. It is right that schools should be accountable to society. However, accountability measures based solely on examination results have a distorting effect on the education which students receive.

 

 

Accountability

 

3. Schools spend public money. They also provide a public service, educating young people and enabling them to be informed citizens. On both counts, it is right that they should be accountable to society. It is important that students achieve their potential in examinations but if public accountability for schools is seen purely in terms of test results, this sends a powerful signal that all that matters is getting students through tests and, consequently, inhibits the provision of a broad and balanced education supported by a suitable curriculum. We all want young people to be able to make wise choices and to understand how their education is connected to the world beyond school.

 

 

Parental choice

 

4. When choosing a school for their child, parents need to know which schools are best able to meet their child's needs. They need to know about the quality of teaching and learning, pastoral care, school ethos and extra curricular opportunities. Information from testing cannot be used as a proxy for all of these and so can only give parents incomplete information. Moreover, although there is a great deal of information published about examination results and value added measures, this is not always well understood.

 

 

Inspection and targets

 

5. The current inspection system relies heavily on the use of performance data and schools' self-evaluation; inspectors use these sources in coming to provisional views about schools. Ofsted recognises that "...data are only numbers on a page, or a spreadsheet on a screen. They only measure what has been tested. And people often only test what they feel they can measure. The challenge for schools, and for inspectors, is to understand the data available and get behind the figures to explore the strengths and weaknesses they indicate." (Using data, improving schools, Ofsted 2008).

 

6. Schools which have been judged as good, or better, by Ofsted have been included in the National Challenge because fewer than 30% of students achieved five GCSEs at grade A* to C (including mathematics and English). This takes no account of the intake of such schools nor of whether such results are typical or an anomaly. Although this scheme may be intended as a means of providing additional support to schools, the perception that National Challenge schools are "failing" is widespread.

 

7. The reliance on assessment data for public accountability measures and information to parents puts pressure on schools to ensure that their students pass tests. The effect of a school being "named and shamed" on student and teacher morale can be considerable. Schools that slip down the league tables face public censure followed by reduced student numbers as parents opt for other schools.

 

8. Anxiety about the possibility of missing targets leads to teaching to the test rather than on teaching for understanding. This can be reinforced by consultants who instruct teachers to concentrate on those aspects of the curriculum which will gain the most marks. The constant fear of failure results in lack of willingness to try innovative approaches to teaching and learning and encourages the adoption of courses which will most easily enable schools to meet their targets.

 

 

Concluding remarks

 

9. The vast majority of schools and teachers want to do their best for their children. MEI welcomes this enquiry into schools' accountability and looks forward to a system which encourages schools to concentrate on enabling students to fulfil their potential while providing appropriate monitoring and support.

 

February 2009