77% of teachers think that if testing and inspection
go ahead in primary schools as normal, the most disadvantaged
pupils will be unfairly penalised, according to a report from UCL
researchers. This figure rises to 84% among teachers working with
the most disadvantaged communities.
The series of briefing papers, published today by the
International Literacy Centre at the UCL Institute of Education,
highlight the disproportionate effect Covid-19 has had on primary
schools and pupils in the most deprived areas in England. The
findings also suggest the government’s strategy to help pupils
catch up on missed education, should not focus on testing and
formal inspections.
Over 1600 primary school teachers in England took
part in the research project which was conducted through the
Teacher Tapp app in May 2020. A follow-up survey of over 200
primary school teachers was then conducted in July 2020 with
in-depth interviews with teachers, head teachers and others
working in the education system.
The report authors recommend that both statutory
testing and Ofsted inspections should be expected and encouraged
to make locally-responsive plans that are in line with their
communities’ needs. They argue that schools have had such
different experiences that using national tests to judge them
will be unfair.
Co-author, Professor Gemma Moss (UCL Institute of
Education) said: “The effects of the Covid-19 pandemic have hit
schools working with our poorest communities hardest and current
government remedies will do more harm than good. Our report
suggests the way to build resilience in schools is by suspending
SATs and Ofsted inspection visits this academic year and by
taking time to listen to and learn from the local stories given
by those who have been affected the most in different
ways.
“Test results and league tables do not take into full
account the burden that poverty itself places on disadvantaged
communities and the schools that work with them.”
Only 6% of respondents in the most disadvantaged
areas felt reassured that families had the necessary resources to
support learning at home, compared to 46% of respondents in the
least disadvantaged areas. Supporting pupil health and welfare is
a bigger priority in disadvantaged communities, and also takes up
more of these schools’ time.
In a follow-up survey involving over 200 teachers in
England, responses showed there is a deep dissatisfaction with
the government’s response to the crisis. 79% of respondents
considered communications with schools to be handled either badly
or very badly. When asked how the government had done on
‘practicality of advice’, 80% responded ‘badly’ or ‘very badly’.
No respondents picked ‘very well’.
Co-author, Dr Alice Bradbury (UCL Institute of
Education) added: “Throughout this project we have seen a gulf
open up between government policy announcements and primary
schools’ experiences of the crisis on the ground. Our data show
that teachers, headteachers and system leaders have not felt
listened to by the Department for Education and our respondents
have expressed little confidence in decisions taken by government
or the ways in which these have been communicated.”
Professor Moss added: “Teachers’ priorities are often
at odds with government ‘headline’ policies and guidance such as
catch-up provision, the use of statutory testing to ascertain
gaps and the practicalities of using remote learning as an
alternative to face-to-face teaching.
“It doesn’t make sense for all schools to rebuild in
the same way given the diversity of schools’ experiences. As it
currently runs, the whole system is more vulnerable to the
effects of a pandemic than it should be and government plans must
change to prevent doing more harm than good.”
The report authors instead recommend that schools in
disadvantaged areas be supported financially to recover, and
given more discretion to spend additional funding on the issues
that matter most in their context.
This work is funded by an ESRC grant as part of UK
Research and Innovation’s rapid response to
COVID-19.
