Today the long awaited Rose Review on the future of the education system was published in the UK. Unsuprisingly many of the suggestions within it had already been announced. Here are just a few;
- embed the use of the internet within the curriculum.
- additional training for teachers to "stay ahead" of pupils within ICT.
- focus on six broad areas of learning.
- Speaking and listening as important as writing.
What I find interesting about the first point is that it will not be possible in the current climate of filtering and big-brother type blocking by local authorities and regional broadband consortiums. Many of the great uses of ICT are blocked in schools - micro networking websites, brilliant for instantly contacting other schools, cannot be viewed; neither can video hosting sites (that host educational resources) and many of the new innovative websites are unavailable too.
If we are to offer more ICT embedded throughout all aspects of the curriculum, then firstly we need to see a big change in how we view pupils, and how we educate them to respond to inappropriate content (rather than blanket block it all and avoid the issue). This is a discussion I've had plenty of times with teachers because surely education regarding how to react to inappropriate content will help a pupil once they leave the education system, rather than hide it all away from them within school, pretend it doesn't exist, and then let them work out what to do themselves once they go into the "real world".
The second point listed above brings back memories of the governments official "NOF" training to bring teachers up to speed with use of technologies, back in the 1990s. Badly planned in many cases, it actually put a lot of teachers off using computers and held back progress for many years. Let's hope that this round of training will be led by teachers themselves who know what they are doing, and are sensitive to the needs of other teachers.
The third point listed brings us back full circle - I remember being a pupil at school when work was planned around topics that encompassed aspects of literacy, numeracy, geography and all other foundation subjects rather than teaching a discreet subject for a set time each day/week. It might have had it's place occasionally, but the "literacy hour" was a disjointed, inappropriate lesson wedged into a curriclum that had no cohesion. When it is correctly planned, the objectives of a literacy lesson can be achieved in other subject lessons just as well.
Finally, the fourth point was summed up on the radio by Jim Rose himself when he said, "If children cannot say it, they cannot write it". They need to learn how to speak properly before they can be expected to write it properly. It's obvious. Lots of opportunities now to use ICT to record and publish their discussions. Podcasts everywhere!!
So, will the Rose Review make a difference? Only time will tell, but at least someone has taken a good long look at the education system and been honest enough to say what does, and doesn't, work. If only he was able to comment on the testing regime that primary schools are forced to maintain.
The full report can be viewed here
