Summary Report from the Event

Over 110 teachers of English, History and Geography spent three days at Homerton College, Cambridge, hearing talks from eminent speakers and academics and discussing why they should teach their subjects, what they should teach and how they should teach it. This report summarises the conclusions the teachers presented at the last day of the Summer School and the ensuing plenary discussion with Michael Chisnall (Adviser to HMCI, Ofsted), Liz Francis (Director of Workforce Strategy, Training and Development Agency) and Simon Lebus (Group Chief Executive, Cambridge Assessment). It also includes a summary of the opening panel of Sixth Form students, of the panel discussion with the Rt Hon Michael Gove, MP, Secretary of State for Education, and includes just some of the comments written by delegates at the end of the course.

The main themes emerging from the Summer School were: 

1. Enthusiasm for the Summer School and a commitment from delegates to act on the inspiration of the event. The evaluations and teacher presentations confirmed that, yet again, teachers have been extremely enthusiastic about being given the chance to spend time refreshing their subject knowledge through contact with eminent speakers and like-minded colleagues. There has been “immense practical value in sharing good practice” in the workshops and the feeling has been that “teachers who have been inspired and reinvigorated [at the Summer School] are taking their enthusiasm back into the classroom to the benefit of their pupils.” This has been confirmed by some 85% of delegates choosing to increase the challenge of the work in their departments in the wake of the Summer School and to opt into the PTI Schools Programme membership scheme which is built on the notion of subject rigour.
2. More focus on subject training in Continuing Professional Development and Initial Teacher Training. The Geography delegates summarised it thus: “CPD focused on subject knowledge is essential for all teachers … and we would like to see more opportunities for all teachers, including trainees, to attend high quality lectures from academics in order to secure subject rigour and development”. The English delegates commented “The challenges are for ITT to attract the very best teachers and ensure that they become experts across the required breadth; for CPD to keep this expertise up to date and teachers deeply engaged with their subject”. Commenting that a wide-ranging review involving schools and Universities to consider training is part of the process of re-evaluating the curriculum, Liz Francis from the Training and Development Agency said “However, ITT does not have enough time by itself to cover every aspect of the training of a teacher; it must be seen as part of a continuous learning experience”. When asked how the Summer School might inform the Department for Education’s own provision of ITT and CPD, the Secretary of State for Education replied “You tell me. I’d love to know more... What can I do to help? Conversations about education should not be about finance and administration, but about what teaching will inspire the next generation”
3. Greater linkage between schools and universities. The English delegates felt that there was a need for more links between schools and universities to nurture greater subject expertise in the system. One delegate summarised it thus: “Universities are saying that students coming from our schools are not well enough prepared for Higher Education; but our perception is that the Universities are doing little to interact with the schools”. In response, Rowena Collins from Warwick University pointed to research days they are running and academic support for pupils and teachers at local schools. Kate Pretty from Cambridge University stated that there was indeed a problem with the curricular interface between schools and universities. She commented that although it wasn’t anybody’s fault, there was a danger of “lost generations of knowledge” coming from the vicious circle of students in Higher Education having been taken down a comparatively narrow curriculum at schools then not being willing to open up to non-mainstream topics at university, and thus leading to a further diminution of knowledge in future generations.
4. Accountability measures that celebrate the best of what teachers do. Reflecting on how rewarding they are finding new Key Stage 3 freedoms to enjoy a rich and challenging diet of literature, the English delegates asked “What systems would encourage brilliant subject-based CPD, challenging and rigorous courses for pupils, inspiring trips and visits, and deep thinking and coherence? Because the current system doesn’t.” Their view was that “the current specifications at GCSE and A Level offer a fragmented, often narrow and reductive experience.” Responding to this criticism, Simon Lebus from Cambridge Assessment stated that “It is stupid to try and put everyone through the same door. We need a freer framework with many different types of qualification and assessment, tailored to the demands of individual subjects.” Concerning school inspection, the Geography teachers felt that while they had been in the vanguard of embracing new technologies through the compulsory use of GIS, packages such as Google Earth and GPS, this was not adequately reflected in the school inspection regime. Summarising the general sentiment, the English delegates stated “We want to go beyond superficial analysis which allows schools to gloss over the surface and merely encourages teaching to the inspection requirements” In response, Michael Chisnall, adviser to HMCI, Ofsted, stated that “In the new framework there is intended to be a focus on the quality of learning and an emphasis on progress rather than on attainment…An inspector doing his job will ask the children themselves … what they have learnt in a lesson that they didn’t know before.”
5. Curriculum pressure on traditional but non-core subjects like History and Geography. There was a prevailing feeling amongst the History and Geography teachers present that traditional non-core subjects like theirs were being squeezed out of the curriculum due to the increased demand on schools to provide, for example, personal social and health education, citizenship, enterprise education and vocational courses at 14-19. Passionate about their subjects, these delegates felt that students in all schools should have an entitlement to the greater understanding of the world around us that study of these subjects brings. The panel of sixth-formers agreed, stating that they thought that students should take one, if not necessarily both, of these subjects beyond Key Stage 3. Responding to this sentiment, Liz Francis (TDA) said “even if I am personally persuaded of the particular importance of the Humanities (as I am), there are many other subjects with compelling claims on curriculum time. In the end we have to strike a balance between entitlement and choice”.