Skip to main content

We don't want outstanding schools.

Just as I dislike British Rail's use of "standard class" rather than SNCF's more honest "seconde classe",I have always been reluctant to buy into the DfE's misuse of the word outstanding. Teachers and schools now commonly mistakenly employ the word when talking about "outstanding" lessons, "outstanding" teachers and "outstanding" schools.

Just in case anyone has forgotten, here are some definitions of the word outstanding:

  • Standing out among others of its kind; prominent (American Heritage Dictionary). 
  • Superior to others of its kind; distinguished (American Heritage Dictionary) 
  • Superior; excellent; distinguished (Collins) 
  • Prominent, remarkable, or striking (Collins) 
  • Exceptionally good (Oxford) 

You will note that the word not only denotes excellence, but almost always superiority and difference. Logically, only a minority of schools can be "outstanding" and I am sure this is not want the DfE or anyone wants.

You might argue that I am nit-picking here, but my fundamental misgiving is the fact that the DfE have created a language of their own about schooling which teachers and commentators have uncritically accepted and taken on board. Why should we go along with this?

Let's take this a little further: teachers will know that when you get into the documentation about lessons and schools, there is reference to being above "average". To be "good" (in DfE speak) you have to be "above average". So, if every school were good, they would not be good since they would not be above average. You see my point - a point which many teachers have spotted.

Then there's the word "satisfactory" which has come to mean inadequate, or at the school level, "requires improvement". Managers and teachers will commonly talk about a satisfactory lesson, knowing very well that this means the lesson was really unsatisfactory.

It's all about striving to raise standards, of course. The only way to improve is to set the bar high and aim for the very best. But it's a bit of a con, isn't it? What's more it aims to put a convenient labels on every aspect of school. It's as if teachers were being constantly graded and judged like students. It's fundamentally humiliating.

We do not want outstanding schools and teachers. In fact, we cannot have them since this would mean that the majority were inferior. We just want them all to be excellent.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the natural order hypothesis?

The natural order hypothesis states that all learners acquire the grammatical structures of a language in roughly the same order. This applies to both first and second language acquisition. This order is not dependent on the ease with which a particular language feature can be taught; in English, some features, such as third-person "-s" ("he runs") are easy to teach in a classroom setting, but are not typically fully acquired until the later stages of language acquisition. The hypothesis was based on morpheme studies by Heidi Dulay and Marina Burt, which found that certain morphemes were predictably learned before others during the course of second language acquisition. The hypothesis was picked up by Stephen Krashen who incorporated it in his very well known input model of second language learning. Furthermore, according to the natural order hypothesis, the order of acquisition remains the same regardless of the teacher's explicit instruction; in other words,

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

La retraite à 60 ans

Suite à mon post récent sur les acquis sociaux..... L'âge légal de la retraite est une chose. Je voudrais bien savoir à quel âge les gens prennent leur retraite en pratique - l'âge réel de la retraite, si vous voulez. J'ai entendu prétendre qu'il y a peu de différence à cet égard entre la France et le Royaume-Uni. Manifestation à Marseille en 2008 pour le maintien de la retraite à 60 ans © AFP/Michel Gangne Six Français sur dix sont d’accord avec le PS qui défend la retraite à 60 ans (BVA) Cécile Quéguiner Plus de la moitié des Français jugent que le gouvernement a " tort de vouloir aller vite dans la réforme " et estiment que le PS a " raison de défendre l’âge légal de départ en retraite à 60 ans ". Résultat d’un sondage BVA/Absoluce pour Les Échos et France Info , paru ce matin. Une majorité de Français (58%) estiment que la position du Parti socialiste , qui défend le maintien de l’âge légal de départ à la retraite à 60 ans,