Browsing the archives for the Education category.

We need to recruit and retain more teachers. Here’s how.

by Calvin Robinson on January 31, 2016.

Originally published on

We are in the early stages of a recruitment crisis in education. Headteachers, unions and the government predicted as much a few years ago, and we’re now at the stage where teaching positions aren’t being filled, teachers are job-sharing, and schools are bussing pupils to sister schools for lessons. There aren’t enough people entering the profession, and there are record numbers of people leaving it. It’s time for schools to start thinking outside of the box and stop relying on the Government to solve the problem for them.

This week, the Daily Telegraph reported that schools are providing healthcare, free gym memberships and golden handshakes as a bonus to try and entice more applicants. At the same time, six teaching unions are fighting to increase the annual pay rise above one per cent. The Government has made great strides in this area already, allowing schools to set their own policies on how they recruit and retain staff, and allowing schools to pay good staff more.

These approaches are all well and good, but they’re not addressing the primary issue of why people are not entering or staying in the profession. Schools will never be able to compete with the private sector as far as pay is concerned – and that’s not the major barrier for entry for a lot of teachers. Schools need to become more pro-active in other ways, if they want to recruit more great teachers.

There’s plenty of room for innovation in education.  It’s a sector held back by a vocal minority’s fear of change, as with most union heavy-influenced professions. More schools could partner directly with universities and graduate schemes such as School Direct and Teach First, to encourage trainee teachers to join their schools.

Education as a whole needs far better links with industry, too. Schools should be reaching out to companies to create philanthropic enterprise projects – getting employees to spend an hour a week in a school, sharing their expertise through extra-curricular activities, or even simply sharing their real-world expectations. This would be a real bonus: a majority of our teachers have no industry experience of their own, so they should be encouraged to seek out those who do, to share expectations of what students will experience once they enter the world of employment. But by strengthening links between industry and education, we bring a much wider range of skills and expertise into the school environment.

​Of course, enticing people into the teaching profession is only half of the job at hand. The larger problem is keeping them, and that has very little to do with pay (no one becomes a teacher for the money), and more to do with bad management and ever increasing teacher workloads. I have written previously for Conservative Teachers about how poorly trained middle-leaders are harming our schools; that and the workload issue are a more difficult challenge for schools to face. But it’s necessary that they do.

Planning, marking, data entry, extra-curricular activities, break, lunch and after-school duties, long working hours and work during weekends and holidays are just a few of the many responsibilities that pile on a teacher’s workload – all of which could be downsized or managed by the school. If you speak to any teacher, you’re most likely to hear the same story these days, they love the job – the actual teaching – but it’s all the extra responsibilities on top of it that get in the way and cause them to work in a constant state of tiredness.

You can only maintain that lifestyle for so long, before you either break down or leave for better pastures. It’s an unhealthy lifestyle. Schools need to stop throwing buzz words around, like “we encourage our teachers to maintain a work/life balance” and put some actual policies and procedures into place to make this possible. There’s simply too much to do in this profession, and not enough time to do it all, not properly anyhow.

Something has to give and at the moment, it seems, that’s usually the job. The scary fact is that nearly two thirds of teachers are considering leaving within the next two years. Where will that leave us, if a majority of our teachers quit? With an increased workload for the remainder – that’s where. We have a limited time to address this issue. Schools, headteachers and teachers’ unions need to put their heads together and come up with some sensible solutions about how to adjust the actual role of a teacher into something more efficient and manageable. That in itself will make the job more appealing.

No Comments

Poorly trained middle-leaders are harming our schools

by Calvin Robinson on December 10, 2015.

Originally published on

Workload is one of the ever hot topics in education. Teachers are – often rightly –  voicing their dissatisfaction with the ever increasing amount of work piled on their plates, which is affecting their ability to get on and teach effectively. Nicky Morgan has expressed an interest in this topic and is looking at ways of alleviating some of the pressures passed on to teachers from senior management. However, I’m not sure the problem stops there. We should take a better look at our middle management structures, to adjust what could potentially be a bottleneck in the system.

Many middle leaders have been promoted to the role because they are fantastic teachers. This is a problem in and of itself. Being a great teacher does not necessarily make one a good manager. The majority of middle managers in schools have progressed through the traditional route of School > University > PGCE and of course back in to school, meaning they have no ‘real world’ experience to guide them in this more senior role.  Too often, teachers profess that working in a school feels like being back in school, due to the way that staff are treated. This is because our middle managers usually have no industry experience, little to no management training and are sometimes promoted above their level of competence.

This becomes a problem when we’re asking for more top-down support, whether it be in behaviour management systems or simply staff morale. Your school could employ the best ‘super head’ in the country, but if his/her messages, policies and enthusiasm are getting halted at a bottle neck of over-worked under-trained middle management, it’ll do no one any good. What was once a brilliant asset can instantly become a hindrance to the school, through no fault of their own.

There are a few ways we could improve this situation. Of course we could provide better management training to those promoted to middle management roles, and/or encourage all teachers to take some time in industry, to further expand their subject knowledge and real-world business skills. But another solution would be to simply create more admin roles in schools. If all schools had more administrative employees along the lines of office managers or civil servants, they could focus on monitoring targets and filling in spreadsheets, while the good teachers are left to do just that, teach. After all, isn’t that why we got into this job in the first place? To facilitate learning, not to tick boxes.

1 Comment

Brent Council are denying parents the choice they deserve

by Calvin Robinson on November 22, 2015.

Originally published on

With the demand for good secondary school places in Brent ever increasing, and a sufficient number of Free Schools failing to open in the area, is it a case of the Labour-lead Brent Council dangerously hampering the borough? I decided to conduct some research into the issue by using the Freedom of Information Act to request details of meetings by the Brent Council Teacher’s Panel.

Below are the minutes from the last meeting of the Teachers’ Joint Consultative Committee (7 July 2015); specifically these are items raised by the ‘Teachers’ Panel’:

The council’s attitude and possible actions regarding new academies and free

The Teachers’ Panel referred to the Kilburn Grange School due to be opened in 2015
and asked to receive information on the number of places that would be allocated for
Brent students. They also heard that Gateway School was not proceeding and that
while Gladstone School had submitted plans to the DFE and the council’s planning
department, there was discussion of the number of forms of entry. The earliest it would
open would be September 2016 possibly on a temporary site.
The Teachers’ Panel highlighted the action being taken around the country against the
government policies on Free Schools and Academies and that parents were becoming
increasingly aware that the justification for the introduction of the policies was not
related to increasing parental choice. They called on the council to do the minimum
required to comply with legislation but to join teachers’ unions in pointing out the
shortcomings of the policy and make parents aware of the council’s position. The Chair
asked it to be recorded that discussion on this was taking place within the Labour

As you can see, Brent Council’s Teacher’s Panel has “called on the council to do the minimum required to comply with legislation but to join teachers’ unions in pointing out the shortcomings of the policy and make parents aware of the council’s position”. Surely the council’s position should be to increase the number of good school places available to children in the borough? Brent has such a high demand for good school places, it’s irresponsible of the Labour-run Brent Council to oppose the idea of Free Schools simply to oppose a Conservative government’s policy. The issue is too important for them to be playing party politics.

If we look back to the Michaela Community School situation, it’s a well known but little reported fact that Brent Council made the process as difficult as possible for them. Even after the application to open a Free School in Brent was accepted by the Department for Education, Brent Council placed roadblocks in the paths of Michaela’s board of trustees at every turn, to the point that it was questioned whether the school would actually be able to open. When a bid was placed on the old Brent Town Hall, for example, it was rejected in place of an offer from the French Lycée International School. While the Lycée may be a brilliant project, it won’t offer the secondary school places that are needed in Brent, and the deal on the table happened to be significantly less than what DfE/Michaela were offering. On the one hand Brent Council are claiming budget cuts as one of the main reasons for the majority of their bad decisions as of late, while on the other hand they’re biting their nose off to spite their face by accepting an offer for a French curriculum primary school offering much less value than that of an English curriculum secondary school in an area where demand for good school places outweighs supply.

Michaela Free School: allocation of pupil places for September 2015

The Teachers’ Panel made enquiries of the number of places at Michaela School in Wembley Park and heard that there had been 321 applications for 120 places of 4FE.

In the end, Michaela went for a private property deal and as a result were the first Free School to successfully open in Brent, and are doing a fantastic job of educating hundreds of Brent children, with demand at nearly 3 times the current intake. But many Free School projects have failed to get off the ground in Brent and it’s becoming obvious why.

It has been speculated for a while now that Labour councils are getting in the way of a good secondary education. But with Free School applicants not be able to speak publicly about the issue, for obvious reasons, there hasn’t been much evidence to focus on until now. This Brent Council Teacher’s Panel report was obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request – it may well be that more councils are operating under similar pretences.

Have you witnessed similar opposition to Free Schools in your own borough? Get in touch if you’d like to share your experiences.

No Comments

Are schools de-skilling our children?

by Calvin Robinson on June 29, 2015.

Near the start of my teacher training programme I wrote a blog post expressing my discontent with the UK education system. I’ve now finished my training and find not an awful lot has changed. If anything, I am more worried and frustrated than ever about the state of education in our country.

Today the Telegraph published a piece about a study, claiming that UK school leavers ‘the worst in Europe for essential skills’. This comes as no surprise to myself, having visited a large number of schools around the UK this past 12 months, I’ve seen a lot of worrying things. My primary concern is the fact that students aren’t being taught. Literally. Students are being spoon-fed just enough information to get them through exams and coursework, to make sure schools sit comfortably on league tables. The focus has shifted from learning to data-pruning, everything is results driven. Our children are hungry to learn what they need to know in order to survive in the real world, but instead we’re shoving tubes down their throats and force-feeding them exam flavoured corn until our results are the smooth foie gras that makes the school’s menu look presentable to outsiders.

There are of course exceptions to this rule. Out of the dozens of schools I’ve spent time in over the past few months, there were three in particular that caught my attention. One of which managed to hold onto their traditional grammar school values and are actually developing pupils into learned individuals and all-round great people – rather than just numbers on a spreadsheet. The other two schools that I have been impressed by were in fact new Free Schools. One of which worked their pupils incredibly hard, with a zero-tolerance regime and the other of which had an emphasis on iteration – improving work continuously to the point of mastery. All of these schools had a strong focus on learning. Their education was the primary focus of these schools and shows. Pupils at these schools have attitudes of actually wanting to learn and that is a reflection of the headteachers and the teaching staff, who were all uniformly consistent in their approaches.

I honestly think that if parents saw what is happening in the majority of our state schools at the moment, there’d be national outrage.

No Comments

Inefficiencies in the Education System

by Calvin Robinson on November 8, 2014.

It’s been a good few years since I updated this blog on a regular occasion, but it was always a great outlet, so I might start doing so again. For those that don’t know, I’ve moved slightly away from the tech/gaming industries and have taken a new role as a Computer Science Teacher in a secondary school. It’s great, it really is, I love the school and the kids are brilliant. They’re what make the job worthwhile, but there are so many issues with the state of Education in this country, that I just have to put some of it down in words, or I fear for my own sanity.

I mean, we all know the Education system isn’t perfect, and that’s actually one of the reasons I became a teacher. I love my subject and want to inspire the next generation to feel the same way about it as I do, but also, I am a big believer of providing solutions to problems and changing these from the inside. If you don’t like something, don’t just sit around and moan about it, actively do something about it, if you can. I’m not happy with the way our children are learning Computing, and with the new National Curriculum coming into play, this seemed like the perfect opportunity for me to actually do something about it.

Criticise the government all you like, we all do, but the new National Curriculum is actually fantastic. It’s specific enough to provide guidance and broad enough to provide the freedom for schools to teach as they see fit, which is exactly how it should be. It’s the way schools are embracing it (or choosing not to) that’s the problem.

The National Curriculum itself basically states that all school children should learn programming, in some form or another. Not just to provide them with the baseline knowledge necessary for a career in Computing, but also to encourage lateral thinking, and that all important ‘problem-solving’ that has long been missing from the curriculum.

However, the majority of schools in the United Kingdom have only been teaching ICT for the past two decades or more, so while they may be fantastic at teaching kids how to use specific software packages, they have no idea how to teach children to actually develop software of their own. There’s a real shortage of Computing experts moving to teaching, and the number of Computer Science teachers is disturbingly low. That’s problem number one, we don’t have the teachers.

In schools where we do find the teachers though, we find a lack of support for the department. Computer Science is brand new, really, and schools still see Computing departments as ‘ICT’, which has always been a place to throw ‘naughty’ or challenging students. When there are children that other departments don’t necessarily know what to do with, they’ve always sent them over to ICT, to “go play on the computers”. Computer Science isn’t just playing around on computers though, as the name suggests, it’s a science and should be treated as such.

I’ve visited a number of schools up and down the country, during my training, and they’re all saying the same thing. There isn’t the support, there aren’t resources available, and when there are, there isn’t the budget to obtain them. Computing isn’t taken seriously and our children are missing out because of it. The school I’m working in has two full time qualified teachers in the department, for a school of 1,300 children. Two. Then there’s myself – a trainee – and two additional teachers who are also members of other departments. The annual ‘budget’ for the department is around one month’s wage, for a person on an average salary. What is anyone supposed to do with that? A lack of funding, that’s problem number two.

Policies. Schools are full of policies. This is the main cause of schools’ inefficiencies. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a fan of bureaucracy, I’ve seen what happens in countries with none, bureaucracy is what made Britain Great, when used correctly, it’s what makes things efficient. However, when used incorrectly, it can slow things down to a crawl. The public sector has never been great with policies, as I’m sure anyone who works for the NHS will attend to, they tend to make things more difficult than they need to be. School is no different. It’s not just a case of too many policies, either. It’s a case of no policies where there should be clear policies, and too many policies where there shouldn’t be any. As a Computer Science Teacher, for example, I cannot install any software on any of the computers in the school. I can’t open any software that hasn’t been approved by IT Support. You might think that makes sense, from a security standpoint, and for most teachers I’d agree – only limited people should have administrative access to school computers. But Computer Science teachers are certainly in that small circle of people who should have access. It just means we cannot use any resources to teach the children other than a) what’s already installed on the computers or b) what the IT Support team deem acceptable for installing. The problem here, is that a lot of the software I’d like to use, to teach our students Computer Science, are deemed ‘insecure’ by the IT Support team. Again, I can understand why most students in a school shouldn’t have access to a Hex Editor, for example, but when teaching Hexidecimal to Computer Science students, an exception should be made, surely. Whenever new tools you’d like to use are declined because “It’s against the school’s security policy” you start to get a little frustrated. For me personally, I find it extra frustrating, because I’ve asked to see our school’s security policy from numerous people on numerous occasions, and I’m still waiting. I don’t think there is one. It’s hard to plan lesson activities around a policy that doesn’t exist. So that’s problem number three, ridiculous policies that hinder the learning of our students.

When I joined the school in September, the biggest surprise to me was the way Computing lessons were taught. Students were literally copying from textbooks, into their exercise books and then doing the test questions at the end of each chapter. What?! How is this learning? This is not a reflection directly on the teaching or the teachers. They were doing what they could, with the resources available to them. When a department doesn’t get support, internally or externally, this is what happens. When I came in full of excitement, enthusiasm and fresh ideas of how we can and should be teaching Computing, then those ideas are constantly being shot down, it’s easy to understand why the status-quo is how it is.

On the subject of resources, the computers in most of the schools I’ve visited aren’t fit for purpose. This is one area I will criticise the government, rather than the schools themselves. It’s all good saying “okay, now you need to start teaching Computing properly”, but then not provide any additional financial support. There should be additional funding available for schools to update their incredibly outdated computer systems. The PCs in our school make me want to pull my afro out, on a daily basis. They’re certainly not helping inspire our students to spend more time on them, that’s for sure.

Then we get to grading. This is an interesting one. The government has removed the need to grade children at most stages of their school life, now. There’s no official grading of KS3 at all. No SATs, nothing. But it’s up to schools to decide how they’re going to monitor progress – as that still needs to be done, and rightly so. The problem here, is that the majority of schools are continuing to use the 5a-3c grading system. Why is this a problem? There’s no standardisation. There are no grade requirements on the National Curriculum, so schools are essential making them up. “Meeting this requirement is a 5c, meeting this one is a 5a” it’s completely arbitrary and pointless. It doesn’t monitor progress, and it’s actually more harmful to the students than good. When students start comparing themselves to each other and thinking of themselves in terms of “I’m only a level 3” that’s counter-productive to their education. The truth is, attainment isn’t linear and children are continuously developing, there is no such thing as a “level 3” child, and we should be rapidly moving away from that terminology. I much prefer the Early Years system of “have achieved expectations”, “have succeeded expectations” and “have yet to achieve”, as you can provide direct feedback of what’s needed to achieve the expectations, and what the students needs to work on next. They’re always working towards something, and they’re not consider to be at a static level. So problem 4 for me, is the completely arbitrary pigeon holes we put children in.

End-of-school qualifications such as GCSEs and A-Levels should of course be graded, to a national (or even international) standardisation, otherwise employers don’t have a baseline to compare applicants. There are a few problems with the qualifications themselves though. They’re outdated. I have no idea how bodies such as OCR and AQA work out the content and resulting pass-requirements for their courses, but they don’t seem in-line with industry expectations. There should be much more of a consultation between exam bodies and industry, because isn’t that the point of these qualifications? To ready students for their prospective careers.

The larger issue with qualifications though, is that they’re directly hindering the education of our students. Students aren’t learning. They’re not learning the subject matter, they’re not learning about the subject and we’re certainly not motivating them or inspiring them to love Computing. What they’re actually learning is exactly what’s required to pass their qualifications. Nothing more, nothing less. This is the biggest de-motivator of my new career choice, and it frankly makes me sick. I love my subject, I want to inspire a new generation to feel the way I feel about Computing. I don’t want to hand-hold them through a GCSE to make a department or school look good on a league table that I have no interest in. Problems 5 and 6 are that qualifications are out of date and actually detrimental to young people leaving school. How can we solve this?…

Industry. Schools need more direct communication with industries. The relationships between schools and industry should be tighter than anything. We’re shaping these children for careers in industries that we currently have no relationships with, it makes no sense. It’s the blind leading the blind.

This is one of the benefits of School Direct, Teach First and other similar schemes, because we’re bringing industry professionals into schools. I have massive respect for teachers who went into education the traditional route, but for the most part, they’ve spent their whole lives in education. They’ve never been a part of the wider world of industry and therefore don’t have the knowledge of the private sector that’s going to be important to most of these students when they leave school. We should be bringing in industry professionals for consultations, meetings, designing syllabuses and qualifications. They should be a part of every step of the education system, in some form or another. Otherwise, frankly, we’re wasting our time. I know that if I ever went back into industry, I would absolutely never hire anyone based on their qualifications alone. That’s not standard practise anyway, but I’m even more against the idea now that I know how our children are being taught, and that these qualifications actually mean absolutely nothing. Well, they mean something, they mean that the student can sit an exam or complete a piece of coursework in line with requirements. It doesn’t mean that they know their subject, sadly. There’s problem 7 for you, industry has no voice in education, and it actually has the largest role to play.

After my first term as a teacher, I can honestly say I’ve enjoyed it immensely, but it has also been the most frustrating time of my life. I see inefficiencies everywhere, and I want to change them all. I’ve come into this role completely naive, and I don’t mind saying a little arrogant. I want to make changes everywhere, to everything. It would be great to start in a new school, from scratch, where your opinion has an affect and you’re not forced to work around ancient traditions and practices.

The real reason I’m writing this blog post though, is because I’m procrastinating. I’m avoiding assigning arbitrary grade numbers to a million pieces of work, that don’t monitor any form of progress and in fact serve no purpose other than to place virtual constraints on and damage the self-esteem of a bunch of 12/13 year olds, while providing a department with a set of numbers to pass on to the higher-ups, who will then do the same. Sigh.

1 Comment
Newer Posts »