Freedom, what freedom?

I recognise quite a lot of what was in the English and Maths curriculum materials issued by the Department for Education last week. They bore an uncanny resemblance to the documents that accompanied David Blunkett's national literacy and numeracy strategies in the late 90s. The expectations on spelling, grammar and punctuation were all there, as was a focus on mental arithmetic and times tables. So, the nonsense in the Tory press about this being the first time since the 1950s that schools had such expectations suggested that they were being even lazier than usual in accepting the line being spun by Michael Gove's spinners.

So far as I can see, all that is really new is that children, bizarrely in a decimal age, will have to learn their 12 times tables in case Britain abandons decimal currency in sympathy with a Greek return to the Drachma.

Equally, today's focus on synthetic phonics is not new either. Phonics were a part of the literacy strategy too, but the specific focus on synthetic phonics gained traction with Sir Jim Rose's report in 2005. This, too, was for a Labour government, for the benefit of confused Tory columnists. However, we didn't, it is true have the phonics screening check which seems to having some bizarre requirements.

So, I welcome quite a lot of this renewed rigour in the primary curriculum. I also think that most primary schools have been doing quite a lot of this, at least since the late 90s.

But I can't for the life of me see how it fits in with the philosophy of a government that insists it will set schools free. Is it any wonder that several members of the curriculum review have quit in the confusion?

Boycotts, testing, targets and cuts

The publication of today's national primary school test results - the last taken under the Labour government - show both the limitations of the NUT/NAHT test boycott and the importance of externally validated national testing. The improvements since 1995 when the tests began have been remarkable, and this year's Maths results are the best ever. When we took the decision to make Key Stage 4 the expected rather than the average standard (ahead of the 1997 election) we faced a lot of criticism then from those same unions that felt a boycott somehow benefited students this year: they said we were being too ambitious. But using targets, particularly floor targets, combined with the literacy and numeracy hours in the late 90s allowed a big change in results. The fact that this is now a standard that can be achieved by 4 in 5 eleven year-olds vindicates that ambition. Over 100,000 more pupils each year make the grade. The schools minister Nick Gibb is right to argue that even more should reach this standard.

But he and his colleagues must be careful in what they are cutting. If Gibb wishes to strengthen the quality of teaching in primary English and Maths, he needs to find ways to incentivise schools to do so. Simply providing a cash premium on its own for poorer pupils without such incentivisation will make little difference, especially if it removes money from programmes directed at the 3Rs and improved in-service professional development. The majority of pupils and teachers defied the unions, enabling today's results to be published. But it is important that the coalition balances its welcome commitments to strong accountability and a pupil premium with the sort of floor targets and agreed ambitions that have also played such an important part in the improvements of recent years.

Teaching the 3Rs

The fetish with localism will clearly be fully realised in next week's schools white paper, as the National Strategies are abandoned in literacy and numeracy. In truth, what matters most is that pupils are taught the basics properly, including phonics, and not that they are taught through the strategies which had not been as effectively delivered in recent years as they were when they first started.

But there should still be a role for government in kitemarking quality, whether provided by other schools, local authorities or private providers. Schools should be able to choose from quality providers. Otherwise the danger is that there will be a return to the haphazard teaching of the 3Rs that occurred before the strategies. And ministers must be very clear that the primacy of the basics is not being compromised, and that every pupil will still have an entitlement to learn to read (using phonics), to write clearly, and to learn arithmetic skills.

English pupils in the top ten in Maths

News that English 10 and 14 year-olds are doing better in Maths and remain in the global top ten for Science will come as a bitter disappointment to those who would want us to believe that educational standards have dived compared with other countries as a result of Labour's educational reforms.

Today's TIMMS survey shows that

* No European country outperformed England in any of the four assessments [in Maths or Science] nor did the United States, or countries often perceived as high performers such as
Australia, Sweden and New Zealand.
• England’s performance over time has continued to improve in mathematics at age ten and, for the first time in the study, performance in mathematics at age 14 also significantly improved. For science, the previous high performance was maintained in both age groups.
• Although 14-year-olds’ enjoyment of mathematics had fallen since 1999 in England, there was a significant rise in the percentage of 14-year-olds valuing mathematics highly, i.e. recognising that it can be useful to them.
• Compared with the international average, headteachers and mathematics and science teachers in England are more likely to say that their schools (at both age ranges) are well-resourced.
• England’s science pupils at age 14 are more likely to spend their lesson time doing practical science activities than many of their international counterparts.

As John Dunford says, the results are a tribute to the teachers and students. But let's not forget too that this is the generation of 14 year-olds who were educated through Labour's numeracy strategy from the start of primary school.

Reading behind the international surveys (2)

Coming a week after the PIRLS reading survey, today's PISA results appear to confirm a trend. It is not, as the more excitable right-wing commentators suggest, that our students have dipped significantly in their performance because of central government policies - in fact on reading and science, only seven countries score significantly higher than England (though, our maths performance is rather less good); rather, it is that some other countries that have introduced strong reforms are improving faster. As I argued around PIRLS, the intensity of the strategies around literacy and numeracy (and this is as true at Key Stage 3 - age 14 - as it has been at Key Stage 2 - age 11) was lost between 2001-2005. In primary schools, the focus is being re-energised; in secondaries, the requirement that English and Maths results are included in the five good GCSEs recorded in the league tables is starting to have a similar effect (it is noticeable that far more pupils get a GCSE C+ in English than Maths (See Excel Table 7)). But the lesson of these international surveys is not that we should abandon testing, leave teachers alone or give up. Have a look at the dismal performance of Wales - against which 16 countries do significantly better on reading - to see what that approach brings. It is instead that - as the 2000 and 2001 surveys showed - when government has a clear overall strategy, schools are clear about their priorities and public accountability is strong - then pupils will achieve not just at the average level of their international counterparts, but significantly above average.

Getting the 3Rs right

The latest primary school test results, showing one point improvements in all subjects are not only good news for the government, but evidence that some top down pressure is needed to achieve improvements. Labour has finally met its ambitious targets set in the first term. The literacy and numeracy strategies went through a fallow period when ministers downgraded their status within an all-singing, all-dancing National Primary Strategy in Labour's second term. There was little sense that learning to read, write and add up should be the first challenge of primary teachers, and the momentum of Labour's early years and the shock of national testing was lost. Both Ruth Kelly and Alan Johnson, with Andrew Adonis as the minister in the driving seat, deserve credit for recognising the need to change gear. Today's results are the first evidence that their new sense of mission is working. With phonics now central to the teaching of reading and a renewed emphasis on basic maths, there should be more good news to come.

Ed's educational goals

News that the new children's and schools secretary Ed Balls wants every university to help run an academy is good for the future of an increasingly successful programme. And by removing the requirement that they must find a partner to contribute £2m sponsorship, he has not only made this goal more achievable, he has also shot the Tory fox. The only difference between their policy on academies and the government was on this issue: in reality, there was always a lot more flexibility than people assumed. The truth is that there are plenty of potential sponsors for academies - and having a £2m endowment is good for any inner city school - but there is no point in letting the sponsorship stand in the way of such partnerships.

Ed Balls has pledged to consult on a number of other educational issues. On primary maths, he is putting into practice a commitment made by Gordon Brown in his Mansion House speech. It will be important that there is as much emphasis on finding why some schools with similar intakes do much better than their peers as there is on reinventing the numeracy strategy. On school discipline, the measures introduced in Tony Blair's last schools bill have only just become law: the challenge here is spreading consistent good practice to all schools. Alan Steer's excellent report should be the government's starting point. It has wide support in schools.