Union unease on literacy and numeracy plans

Are Leighton Andrews' education reforms needed urgently?
Or are they moving too fast for teachers to keep up?
(Pic : twinkl.co.uk)

In the last week or so, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) warned of possible industrial action over the introduction of Education Minister Leighton Andrews' (Lab, Rhondda) National Literacy and Numeracy Framework.

I've covered the plans in some detail before, but to summarise the proposals include :

• Monitoring (by teachers) of literacy and numeracy skills across the curriculum (English & Welsh medium).
• Improve opportunities to teach key skills in lessons by providing teachers with more lesson ideas.
• The phased introduction of national tests in literacy and numeracy for under-14s by May 2014.

The NUT claim there hasn't been enough consultation between unions, teachers and the Welsh Government over the proposals.

Also, teachers already use things like reading, writing and maths tests as part of lessons. The aim of this new framework is to ensure there's consistency across Wales, and make it easier for the Welsh Government and parents to monitor and judge performances.

One thing you can say about Leighton Andrews is that he's proactive at pressing through reforms (like this for example) – perhaps to the point of steamrollering. Considering the relative stagnation in school performances, you can perhaps understand why he's doing it.

The NUT have a point. Any new top-down "framework" like this is going to come with significant levels of paperwork and guidelines. Teachers will have to work through and adhere to them, perhaps tying them up when they should be working on....teaching. As a whole, they also get unfair criticism and are judged on matters beyond their control. Exam results, for instance, ultimately come down to individual performances on the day.

I left school just over 10 years ago, and even then it was obvious that the levels of paperwork and administration teachers were burdened with were absolutely ludicrous. Most teachers had reinforced shelves to house all of this guidelines guff on.

As well as an effective curriculum, one of the most important factors determining educational outcomes is having teachers who care about their subjects and give a damn about doing good by their pupils. Teachers like that can be worth their weight in gold.

Their commitment to the job through all that stuff was admirable, and will forever be appreciated by me and many others. Though I imagine the paperwork situation's even worse now.

I'm all in favour of giving teachers and schools much more sway in how they teach their subjects, with as little over management from authorities as possible. It should be the Welsh Government's job to ensure consistency and standards, sometimes new legislation - nothing more. The Assembly should question and debate those standards, perhaps things like the curriculum too. While LEAs should ensure schools are well funded.

When any of them get too bogged down in telling public service workers how to do their job, you risk creating a slightly paranoid culture whereby those workers constantly think they're being judged. You end up with teaching by numbers to improve statistics, not for knowledge.

That bigger picture of being (perceivably) overburdened with directives and guidelines is worthy of complaint. However, this specific issue is different.

The reforms, as outlined, describe what people could consider part of a teacher's job description.

The NUT are, effectively, complaining about one of the main roles of teaching – making sure pupils leave school with the ability to read, write and do basic sums while assessing those skills. I don't think there is any room for "consensus" on this issue. It has to be tackled head on and urgently. Leighton Andrews, for all his brusqueness, is probably in the right on this.

Since the 70s, trade unions and uncaring employers (public or private) have increasingly become two sides of the same coin. They seem to be in a passive-aggressive ideological relationship with each other, rather than caring too much about services or workers themselves. We have what was once described as an "aristocracy of labour".

Union barons have very funny ideas about what socialism entails. Meanwhile, teaching unions are towards the top of the "order of precedence", with disproportionately more influence compared to "less glamorous" unions covering manual/non-professional trades. Probably because they can cause a lot of disruption by taking industrial action, and know such a threat isn't to be taken lightly.

I just want well-run public services, and don't like something as fundamental as education being used as a bargaining chip to tub thump against any (useful) change to the status quo. I also would like to see teachers able to take more control over their own roles with less interference – from unions and governments alike.

I suppose that makes me some sort of anarcho-syndicalist or pigeon-holed into another one of these silly left wing "sects".

It's reasonable that those on the front lines are properly consulted about things like this. However, threats of industrial action on a whim regarding something as critical as literacy and numeracy do teachers – and more importantly, pupils – a disservice.