Scrap SATS

The Guardian held a poll with the question, "Should SATS be scrapped?" and the final result was

Yes 92.4%
No 7.6%

Writing on the Education forum discussion board John Simkin said:

"When testing and league tables were introduced by the Tories, Labour opposed them. Once in power, Labour have extended their use. It is clear from the interviews with ministers that they have no understanding of what education is all about. Education ministers in Wales and Scotland were quick to remove SATs once they got independence from London."

Remember the petition on the Downing Street website

Action on pay and workload

An ounce of experience is worth a ton of theory and the experience of the strike convinced thousands of teachers they are part of a strong union which will fight for them.

the NUT Executive meeting on May 22nd voted by 28 to 9 NOT to go ahead with a ballot for national action THIS term - but may still agree a ballot for action NEXT term when it meets again on June 19th. However, if agreed, the ballot timetables mean further action would be delayed until November. Meanwhile there is a lobby of parliament on 9th June which the NUT will use to support Early day Motion 742

It is up to us to make sure teachers are not demoralised and demotivated. We can use this time to build the networks of reps (and the National Shop Stewards Network) to make future action on pay or workload more effective.

EARLY DAY MOTION 742 TEACHERS’ PAY SETTLEMENT

That this House applauds the work done by public sector workers; in particular recognises the vital role that teachers play in the lives of millions of young people; believes that those working in the public sector should receive a real terms pay increase; further believes that the retail price index, which is currently 4 per cent. should be used as a reference point for setting public sector pay rather than the consumer price index; recognises that the teachers' pay settlement of 2.45 per cent this year will in effect mean a pay reduction; and calls on the Government not to return to the days of boom and bust in teachers' and public sector pay with the consequential problems that this causes in relation to recruitment and retention and the maintenance of morale.

Hardship fund update

Hardship fund.

If you were unable to strike for any reason or you are one of the
thousands of members of other unions who supported the NUT strike
then you can help by donating to the hardship fund.

See your rep, email wstalearn(at)yahoo.co.uk or ring the helpline for details

If on the other hand you had difficulty joining the strike
because of financial hardship inform your rep who can pass on the
information to Phil. The purpose of the hardship fund is to
lighten the burden on teachers who want to join us and come to the
rally in Worthing Pavilion Theatre at 10 am on April 24th...

Claims to the hardship fund should be submitted by the end of July. Donations will always be welcomed :)

TUC on TV

The TUC now has its own online TV

Click here to find out more

Students speak out against Academy

This is an article/editorial written by two students of Midhurst Grammar School re: the proposed academy for the Rother Valley. They are currently sitting exams and took time out of their busy revision schedule to pen their thoughts, as they are very keen to make sure the young people's views get press coverage as well.

So many have presented their own views on an academy that it’s easy to forget the people who know the school best and who will be most affected; us students.

Our first issue is that Academies were never developed for wealthy, rural areas like Midhurst. Do we really want to be Guinea Pigs to a financially motivated scheme that is barely five years old? Where’s the consultation of students? Consideration of teachers? Contrary to how we’ve been interpreted, an acceptance of the inevitability of a two tier system does not equate to support of an academy. We now learn though that contrary to what they have said to us previously, that these ideas of an academy have gone back to even as early as May 2007. Most of the teachers we’ve approached have seemed reluctant to quote one way or another, honesty is not considered as important as the security of their job. This should not be the case.

Where is the ULT money coming from? Is it a non-sustainable fund? They say that neither they nor their affiliates profit, but how can that be so when they are funding such huge projects? Students feel questions have been fielded with promotional comments rather than answered.

We want to know what our friends and siblings will be learning under this business run regime. The curriculum is being presented in such a vague way; we can’t be expected to put our faith in this progressive, un-regulated set of subjects. Will we be taught creationism over Darwinism by this Christian society?

Not to mention the utterly unfounded claims that are being pushed left right and centre by politically motivated councillors. How can the low pass rates of academies even compete with results of 66% 5 A*- C for GCSEs? They say that the education of the youth in the Rother valley is key in the academy plans, but Robert Back is quoted in saying that the plan is money motivated in order to get a new building. We do not want our education to be placed in the hands of people who think like that.

So far, all we can see that is remotely better about this academy is the newer building, which may well be made available to us anyway, without losing control of
the school, through the Building Schools for the Future scheme. It will likely be in place for us within 3 years or so, which surely is a realistic time scale for the new academy to be built anyway? In the meantime, why not amalgamate the existing schools in the perfectly fine Midhurst grammar school site? With a new multi million pound sports hall and four very spacious buildings at our disposal, surely this is the
ideal solution for all, not more endless upheaval and disruption at such a crucial time in our academic careers.

In the last meeting, we had the chance to hear the words of the principal of Swindon Academy, who spoke to us about how similar a situation she was in and how it is good for her now. But she is very much mistaken by this judgement. She is from an inner city school, in heavy competition from others very close to her, rather than the very spacious catchment area of the Rother valley. She spoke about sending students on foreign trips and on expeditions. Excellent, we agree, but Midhurst Grammar already has many foreign trips running anyway. Examples include the school orchestra touring Germany, appropriate subject trips like Swanage Bay for Geography, and a fantastic school history of sixth form trips such as Paris and World
Challenge. She was speaking about finally being able to choose courses that are very good for special educational needs. We already cater to people who fit this description, with students attending courses at Chichester College and being supported by specialist staff. Yet another example of the consultation offering things in an attempt to persuade us we’ll be profiting, and avoiding the truth that these are things we already have.

Why then are the “independent” consultancy agency talking of their close relationship with ULT and dangling advertisement for the Academy in front of us? A company, whom we are told are completely unbiased, is running one sided meetings, giving more time to promotion for the academy than the very strong community feeling at the moment against the proposals. Are we meant not to question what is laid before us? The consultancy has worked for ULT on many other occasions to secure them an academy deal; this was always bound to raise questions on the validity of the so called consultation process running at the moment?

They talk of designing a very clever building, to incorporate the gradual build up in the three tier system currently used. I would urge you to look at the other academies owned by ULT on their website; most will probably feel they would not fit in one bit in Midhurst.

Overall, we wish to ask the question: Why have the students been asked their views only ten days before the end of the consultation? Many of us have very strong views about the matter which seem to have been overlooked by ULT and the consultants as we are young. Do we not matter? Or do they know how we feel and want it kept quiet?

This article was written by Ella Lewis with the assistance of Alistair Gibson (both current students at MGS). They are both members of the Facebook group opposed to the academy whose membership now stands at 215, most of whom are current and ex students in the Rother Valley.

Midhurst or Easebourne – Democracy in whose hands?

From NAME Click here for their blog

NAME (No Academy in Midhurst and Easebourne) have expressed concern over who would exert the most influence in decisions about the siting of the proposed academy for Easebourne or Midhurst were it to go ahead. NAME spokesman Simon Boxley said this week,

“The issue of the site of the new school is tied up with the academy question. Do we really think that central government would have any interest in whether to go for Easebourne or Midhurst if this were a decision on a local authority school? Of course not. Partnership for Schools would be involved, but it would be a matter for local planners, councillors and communities. If we have an academy, it’s a different matter. The Expression of Interest for our academy is clear: the choice of site has to be acceptable to the Department for Children, Schools and Families, and subject to discussions with the sponsor as well as Partnership for Schools and the local authority.”

NAME fears that this is yet another feature of the academy process which will take democratic influence further from the community and place it in the hands of Westminster politicians and unelected bodies. Simon Boxley added:

“There is a real danger here that politicians in Westminster won’t understand the significance of re-siting the proposed academy in Easebourne. From the sponsor’s and the government’s perspective it looks very tempting: the area can be completely cleared to make way for new high-prestige academy-style architecture in a way the old Grammar School site can’t. But this entirely misses the point. We’ve said all along, our schools should stay a part of our communities. That means the choice of the site of the school should be ours, just as it should be our choice what kind of school we get. Erecting a shiny academy in Easebourne would be like dropping a spaceship in our midst, and just add to the sense of disconnection between the academy and the community it’s meant to serve. The only way to ensure that we have our say is to insist – no academy for Midhurst OR Easebourne.”

If the Academy were to be approved, a Partnership for Schools representative would make ‘recommendations’ regarding the site this summer, and the decision could be made as early as this autumn. By that stage the academy would be open and it would be too late for the community to say “what about us”? If we’re lucky we might get another ‘consultation’!

Scrap SATS

There is a petition to scrap SATS on the Downing Street website

Click here

Guardian poll on SATS

Click here to vote in the Guardian Poll on SATS

Suddenly the politicians are waking up to what teachers have been telling them for decades: SATS are bad for education.

The controversial key stage tests come to an end this week. Let the Guardian know whether you think the government should drop the exams altogether.

86.4% Yes
13.6% No

Poll closes in 2 days

Unlike telephone polls, the results aren't fixed and it costs nothing :)

Early Education's Annual Conference

WSTA president Angela Ahern writes:

I attended Early Education's Annual Conference in Sheffield at the weekend. The theme was "Trusting children's thinking: reflecting on Dispositions for Learning". The keynote speakers were Professor Cathy Nutbrown : School of Education, University of Sheffield and Mick Waters : Director of Curriculum, QCA.
Cathy Nutbrown's talk was entitled "Respectful educators, capable learners". Cathy is an interesting and stimulating speaker, quoting Christian Schiller, Alec Clegg and Robin Tanner, amongst others. She expressed her view that education should be through the Arts, encouraging creativity and expression. Art - in terms of music, dancing, painting should be seen as a pedagogy. "Creative children need creative adults with wide eyes and open minds". Creative education in this sense is an "orienteering expedition, not a route march", with adults as "orienteering guides", providing tools and resources for the journey and opportunities to be a pioneer. Creative assessment is seen as a series of checkpoints on the learning journey.
Cathy quoted from an essay by Fulgham (1990) entitled "All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten", "live a balanced life - learn some and think some and draw and paint and sing and dance - every day -some". Put things back where you found them and clean up your own mess - have milk and cookies at 3.00pm followed by a nap - hold hands and watch out for traffic - what else do we need to know?

Mick Waters from QCA has been described as the "Mick Jagger of the education world", so the audience weren't too sure what to expect, and he did not disappoint. Mick had separately also decided to quote Fulgham, so had to find another poem to illustrate his point, which was essentially that it is vital that educators do not lose their playful joyful spirit! Mick advocated applying the principles of early years education in secondary schools. He commented that to some "education is seen as a cold shower - unpleasant and hateful but good for you". He made the point that the curriculum should fit the learners, not the other way around.
Mick had helpfully made a list of childhood essentials, "make, do and mend........
*a collection
*tending plants
*taking things to bits
*caring for creatures
*enjoying the weather
*an adventure
*being in a club
*making something to use at home or at school
He posed the question, "is there anything living in your classroom?"
For further information on Mick's view of the early years curriculum, see the QCA website.

The conference heard from Felicity Thomas and Stephanie Harding from Earlham Early Years Centre, Norfolk in the afternoon, who have developed their own way of planning and assessing young children through focusing on their dispositions for learning, such as curiosity, persistence, co-operation, being rich and flexible in communication and playfulness.

The conference closing address was given by Margaret Edgington, who is the Vice President of Early Education. She stressed that those of us who work in the early years need to be firm about what are our non-negotiables, such as a curriculum that encourages an orienteering approach rather than a route march through targets, and to stand by and defend these - to both the Government and Ofsted - where applicable. She urged us to trust our own thinking - we are the connoisseurs of young children's learning and we need to exert our spirit strongly!

Next years conference will be held in Swansea and is entitled "Childhood Regained".
Look forward to seeing you there!

taken from the early years news blog

Pay campaign continues

The National Executive today unanimously agreed:

1. to reaffirm its committment to the decision of annual conference to ballot members for discontinous action

2. to discuss timescales for a ballot and also of forms of strike and non strike action at its next meeting in 2 weeks time.

3. to seek a meeting with Govt to put forward our demands on pay and on workload.

4. to congratulate div and assoc secs for the work done so far and encourage them to work for the petition ( deadline May 23rd) and the lobby of Parliament on June 9th.

5. there will be a div secs briefing at NUT HQ on June 17th

Young teachers' get-together in Brighton

There is a get-together for young teachers in Brighton.
West Sussex teachers under 35 are welcome too.

It is on Friday 23rd May
7:00pm
Lord Nelson,
Trafalgar St,
Brighton.

Close by the railway station

Click here for a map
Click here for the leaflet: go with a friend