Friday 19 June 2015

The Greatest Evils!

Art Pedagogy- Measurement ,Speculation and Subjectivation.

‘Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else and root out every thing else’. Location 31.

So speaks the character of Thomas Gradgrind ‘a man of realities’ in Charles Dickens Hard Times.

Pedagogy today is enmeshed in seeming realities and an institutionalised addiction to the need for measurement and a drive to produce evidence.  Educators are caught in a tension between the banking culture modes of thinking on education and those who are deemed as progressive. The ‘independent learner’ is no longer the prize- ultimate purported goal- of many a system. In reality it has actually become the passive ‘dependent learner’. The introduction of the new National Curriculum as John Steers says (2014)

‘[W]here neoconservative ideology is being imposed on the education system without any attempt to seek consensus or proper dialogue with the teaching
profession. p.7’

Foucault(1977) might put it thus that the reactionary pedagogical approaches are in keeping with the way he describes the value set of the military that it:
‘…measures in quantitative terms and hierarchizes in terms the value, the abilities, the level, the nature of individuals. It introduces through this ‘value giving’ measure the constraint of conformity that must be achieved’ p.184

According to the reactionary, child centred learning is now outmoded and in the mind of those who believe in the banking system ­ of education it never worked. Children do not contain solutions embedded in them -selves nor does proscription lead to understanding.
The normalisation of the idea of  a child captured as ‘data portrait’, their futures mapped out in flight- paths and patterns is now accepted truth and seemingly unchallenged by those who have the responsibility of gatekeepers. A whole industry –in plain sight- has sprouted; in methodologies, evidence driven approaches and also software to ‘enable’ teachers and pupils achieve their shared goals. How do these images, with their pseudo scientific console of bright lights and colours, reminiscent of Fritz Langer’s  dystopian Metropolis or a kitsch rendering of a control panel that might have been seen on the set of  Flash Gordon- actually inform those who interface with it.  
How ironic is it then that it is the use of the visual elements of line, colour, tone and pattern are used to distil this data. The language of the pictographs, charts and diagrams and various other devices are used to reinforce ideas of moving forward and measuring progress? How sinister is the appearance of private companies taking public money to create these mechanisms of measurement and prediction. What do these patterns actually indicate and what do they reveal about the spaces in society in which we conduct our pedagogies?
Teachers are compelled to assess against a backdrop  pattern of probabilities often to use Foucault’s term ‘subjectivised’ and purported as fact or truth. Truths that up until now were based on tests taken at the age of just ten years old that determine the child’s place in life.  Now not content with that regime, pupils will now be tested from the age of four years old during the EYFS so their educational pathways and the way they will be treated in the classroom. How they will be assigned to various streams will be established at this early stage of their development and will follow them throughout their school experience. Teachers feeling obliged to bend assessments to a learning curve. To create ‘Facts’ as Dickens’ character would have put it.
Per capita payments drive the decision making and strategy in schools in the UK especially with the introduction of pupil premium, compulsory post 16 education and despite the protestations of certain strata of management Schools have become exam production factories to feed the economic needs of the neo liberal agenda. Where is the child in all of this? Where is the teacher?
Do we want our schools to become/ remain a place where we produce unquestioning ’drones’ to administer and maintain a status quo?  Should children be unquestioning consumers of facts and unconscious of their power and potential to innovate, freedom to create, to change and improve the society which they will inherit?
As Noam Chomsky states in a lecture which can be found in the archives of YouTube when describing teachers who want to inspire and challenge their students:
‘You have to tread a narrow line. There are plenty of people who don’t want students to think. They are afraid of the crisis of democracy. You know if people started thinking you get all these problems I was quoting at the beginning. They won’t have humility enough to submit to a civil rule.
You know or they’ll start trying to press their demands in the political arena. They’ll…have ideas of their own believing what they’re told and privilege and power typically doesn’t want that’ 0:40-1:22

Within the national notion of education- creativity seems to be valued only in terms quantifiable and measurable outcomes. Unless it is useful in its aesthetic it is held with the same regard and affection towards a rhizome or weed trying to push through the black tar-macadam of the playground. Beautiful to look at but ultimately doomed -chanced upon by the ‘overseer’ (as Freire might state it) tasked with maintaining that space of practice. Enclosed, at best surviving in the margins, hidden in its own concrete framed flower bed, alien from the purely functional aesthetic.
As this flyer from a college in South East London (I have removed the name of the college) illustrates, the arts must be commoditized and sold to prospective learners in language like this: 
‘……. (The Creative Industries) are the most exciting – and fastest growing – sector of the British economy. If people tell you there aren’t jobs in the Creative Industries – they’re wrong! Did you know that the creative sector makes more than £8m an hour, and employs nearly 1.7m people? And 35.5% of the UK’s creative businesses are based in London.’

When I first began to draft this proposal Mr. Michael Gove was still the Secretary of state for education. His ability to believe in his views on the progressive education as all that was wrong with education was something to be perhaps envied in the strength of conviction and their conviction but as far back as 1946. Russell (2008) puts it:
‘Most of the greatest evils man has inflicted upon man have come through people feeling quite certain about something which was in fact false. To know the truth is more difficult than most men suppose, and to act with ruthless determination in the belief that the truth is the monopoly of their party is to invite disaster’ p.157

I want to further explore the idea of the ‘subjectivation’ of data/data management systems and physical patterns they produce. Represent and interrogate the veracity of them in dialogues in collaboration with a colleague. To see if in fact they do serve a function or contain any unseen truths.
Reference List
Chomsky, N. Most Teaching is Training for Stupidity and Conformity:On Education  //www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsEgCQyE9qE
Dickens, C. (2012) Hard Times. Harper Collins. Kindle Edition.
Foucault M. (1977) Discipline and Punish the Birth of the Prison.Penguin. London.
Russell B. (2008)  Unpopular Essays Ideas That Harmed Mankind  Routledge Classics. Oxon Kindle Edition.

Steers, J.(2014) International Journal of Art and Design Education Reforming the School Curriculum and Assessment in England to Match the Best in the World– A Cautionary Tale  NSEAD/John Wylie

Wednesday 10 June 2015

Exploring Teacher Workload - an initial drawing exercise


  • I felt that an exploration into patterns regarding teacher workload would be an interesting exercise. I am currently looking at the relationship that big data has with teacher assessment and student achievement. I am exploring this within my subject area of Art & Design at present. Although there is nothing particularly surprising about the what the DfE survey throws up it is, nonetheless, good to see how our working week is broken down. 

    'The 2013 Teachers’ Workload Diary Survey provides independently collected data on hours and working patterns of teachers in maintained primary and secondary schools, special schools and academy schools in England. This is the twelfth survey; previous surveys were carried out in 1994, 1996, 2000 and then annually between 2003 and 2010. The 2013 survey was commissioned by the Department for Education (DfE).

    • A sample of 1,004 teachers was achieved - lower than in previous surveys. 

      On average, all school teachers report working over 50 hours per week, with primary and secondary school headteachers reporting more than 60 hours. 

      Teachers of all types work around 12 hours a week outside what might be regarded as their normal working week. Heads spent around half of this time on school and staff management while classroom teachers spent at least three quarters of it on planning, preparation and assessment (PPA). Time spent on PPA was as common for classroom teachers in primary, secondary and academy schools as teaching at around a third of their total workload. 

      Certain types of activities dominated workload for different types of teacher. The majority of a secondary school headteacher workload is made up of activities that relate to school and staff management (61%). 

      Other activities were performed to a lesser extent. Non-teaching pupil or parent contact made up 10% - 14% of a classroom teacher’s workload and slightly more than that for headteachers in secondary schools (16%). On average less than 10% of workload was spent on general administrative duties. Headteachers in secondary school spent 11% of their time on individual or professional development, while it was a much smaller proportion of classroom teacher working time (5% or less). 

      The most common reasons given to explain the increase in unnecessary and bureaucratic tasks were preparation for an Ofsted inspection (16% of deputy heads and classroom teachers, and 17% heads) and an increase in forms and paperwork (15% of deputy heads and classroom teachers).

      Teachers were asked to give examples of what they thought were unnecessary and bureaucratic tasks in a number of different areas. Across all areas two common themes emerged, which were duplication and the level of detail required in certain circumstances. In particular duplication was referred to in terms of paper work, marking and recording pupil progress and data analysis, reporting and evidence gathering. The level of detail was considered by teachers to be unnecessary with regard to planning and preparation and marking and progress recording.' 

      Taken from the DfE Workload Survey February 2014 



    Through looking at Florence Nightingale's 'coxcombs' of mortality rates in the Crimean war I felt that the visualisation of such data was a good way of understanding the figures and percentages being collated, particularly because some of the numbers used in the collation of data were large. 



    Taking the information presented on page 25 of the Teacher Workload document (Figure 10 - Average hours worked by full-time teachers, on grouped activities and in total) I started to draw out the information as a coxcomb chart (or polar area diagram) and broke it into 7 sections: 

    Teaching 
    Non-teaching pupil/parent contact
    Planning, preparation and assessment
    School/staff management, General administrative support
    Individual/professional
    Other working activities 

    The resultant charts looked like this (please note that these are only sketches that will be refined at a later date):


    Headteacher: 63.3 weekly working hours



    Primary classroom teacher: 59.3 weekly working hours



    Secondary classroom teacher (non-academy): 55.7 weekly working hours



    A maximum of 7.6 hours difference between these 3 job roles over the course of a week and an average of 11 or 12 hour days. It is interesting to look at the difference in breakdown of responsibilities between a headteacher and a classroom teacher:



    I then decided to look at the average salaries of classroom teachers and headteachers. This is where the similarities ended. I am not criticising headteacher salaries, nor teacher ones, but the difference is large. Headteachers are obviously responsible for a large body of staff as well as all of the students. This responsibility deserves a high pay in my opinion. Whether or not a headteacher is effective and accountable is another matter altogether. A classroom teacher is also well paid in my opinion although the increase in pressure through accountability measures, passive aggressive governance, a politicised inspectorate, a narrowing band of perceived academic attainment, a regular reduction in funding and a stagnant pay scale does not help ones performance. 

    A male headteacher and classroom teacher still receives a higher wage than their female counterparts, which is quite frankly ridiculous. A male headteacher makes an average of £74,400 whilst a female headteacher makes £70,600 and a male classroom teacher earns an average of £35,000 while his female counterpart makes £33,700 (this difference can be seen through the darker band at the outer edge of the next chart):

    Source: TES 2010

    The fact that the profession does work so many hours per week, in a highly pressurised and politicised environment where emotions are intense and interactions are highly demanding for long periods of continuous time, has been the main causation of strike action in recent years. Action I agree with. The NUT, and other Unions, have carried out surveys regarding workload and have found some quite remarkable statistics. This vocational profession sees many members of staff working beyond their expected 1265 hours and there is a considerable swell of opinion that a lot of time is taken up with administrative procedures that often repeat themselves in various formats and at different times of year. It often gets in the way of teaching classes, marking & feedback and preparing lessons. It is the intensity and pressure that is causing the problem not necessarily the hours spent working. Teacher morale is low and in an NUT teacher workload survey of 16379 teachers, from 2014 it found that 90% had considered giving up teaching due to current workload levels. 87% claim to know one or more colleagues who have given up the profession due to workload. 96% state that workload has had a detrimental affect on personal/family life. 86% of leavers (other than those retiring) cite workload as the principle reason for leaving the profession. This chart is outlined below. 


    Finally I wanted to develop these sketches into more a refined study of the data explored so I combined all of these issues - that I feel are interconnected. This is a drawing taking into account large amounts of information from large samples of teachers. It becomes a complex field of information but then again, we are working in a complex field of data information, global pressures and politics. 



    I am moving onto to more personal drawings of how my classes have performed against their predicted grades set 5 and 7 years before their exams take place and before the tumultuous teenage years begin to have an affect on character, personality, interests and experiences. We need to remember that we are not working with statistics,
    - see my previous blog http://www.theunlessonmanifesto.blogspot.co.uk/2014/07/spot-statistical-anomaly.html -
    we are working with young people and we cannot make their progress nor our predictions a wholly mechanical thing. In the words of Charlie Chaplin in The Great Dictator (1940):

    '... We have developed speed, but we have shut ourselves in. Machinery that gives abundance has left us in want. Our knowledge has made us cynical. Our cleverness, hard and unkind. We think too much and feel too little. More than machinery we need humanity.....The misery that is now upon us is but the passing of greed - the bitterness of men who fear the way of human progress. The hate of men will pass, and dictators die, and the power they took from the people will return to the people. And so long as men die, liberty will never perish.....Don’t give yourselves to these unnatural men - machine men with machine minds and machine hearts! You are not machines! You are not cattle! You are men! You have the love of humanity in your hearts!.....You, the people, have the power to make this life free and beautiful, to make this life a wonderful adventure...


    ...Then - in the name of democracy - let us use that power - let us all unite. Let us fight for a new world - a decent world that will give men a chance to work - that will give youth a future and old age a security. By the promise of these things, brutes have risen to power. But they lie! They do not fulfil that promise. They never will!'

Monday 8 June 2015

My Number is 1209

I came across the following prose in a student sketchbook as I was moderating their Art coursework. I thought it was beautiful.


'When I was born I was given a number for my weight, time of birth, parents income, how long I was expected to live, how much I was going to make. My life was very numerical. Today I am 16 years old. Another number. I go to school and my candidate number is 1209. I have an IQ of something like 120. My report card says I am an average 2/5 pupil. I am clearly identified by numerical data. In a year I will be going to university. The only way I can go is to score UMS and UCAS points because the higher these numbers the more 'desirable' I become. 

However, again I am 16 and there are numbers I want to lower rather than raise. My weight. My shoe size. My waist. The amount of wrinkles I may have, to look younger. As you can get from this my life is about juggling numbers. My relationship with numbers may get stronger. In 10 years time I will have a job. I will have a bank number and a National Insurance number. In 10 years I will no longer have a name. I will be 10-468-9. They may have barcodes for us. Dehumanise us. Strip us away from who we are. For now, I am [Name]. 

You don't have to identify me by numbers. You can still use words. Tall. Funny. Likeable. Creative. Things that make me less objectified because for now I refuse to use my new name. 1209.'