Civitas Blog

Whilst principles of inclusion and differentiation have been long infiltrating the school system via the National Curriculum, recent policy changes are heightening this culture of what is essentially political correctness. The latest move to marry child welfare services with schools' services, together with a reemphasis on inclusion and most recently, the new personalised learning mantra, are all contributing to the pursuit of what should be the secondary goal – pupil self-esteem. Many teachers’ unions are voicing concerns about the metamorphosis of teaching as knowledge transmission to teaching as social work.

The offending trend is centred around the personalised target principle, whereby each pupil is set individualised learning targets for each subject. These targets are set according to the stage of learning the child is currently at. The target system is tainted by a multitude of practical problems. Firstly, where the average class size is 30 pupils it is extremely difficult for teachers to come up with meaningful targets for each pupil, for each subject. Secondly, such an individualising system is both difficult to manage, as pupils work under one roof on different tasks, as well as antithetical to a unified learning environment. Practicalities aside, the target system also entails a multitude of pedagogical problems. The target principle means that children are praised and rewarded according to their own personal record of achievement. The basis of this principle lies in the culture of positive reinforcement where criticism, however constructive, is a dirty word. For example, let’s say there are two 7 year olds, John and Jeremy. John is at the top of the class, and able to write a coherently structured story in joined-up handwriting. His Literacy target is to move onto using more complex words in his composition. Jeremy is nearer the bottom of the class (although huge effort would have been made to conceal this from him). He has just started to form letters correctly and write on the line. Jeremy’s target is to construct recognisable sentences, containing a verb and a subject. As both pupils achieve their targets, they are equally rewarded in an endeavour to dispel any feelings of failure.

The point is, that the target system not only endorses this very different learning pace it also celebrates it as the buzzword ‘differentiation’. Yet, despite its theoretically democratic purpose, differentiation can be regarded as negatively labelling, and thus predetermining, a child’s learning capacity. The result is low expectations, and ensuing low achievement. Moreover there is great contradiction within the education system, as ultimately it does not allow for differential learning rates. At the end of every Key Stage (from 7 years old to 18), children must take standardised tests – to determine whether they are at the level they should be. Therefore whilst Jeremy is now successfully writing coherent sentences – a personal success - he will fail to reach the nationally expected Literacy level in the Standardised Attainment Tests (SATs).
Thus the very self-esteem building approach is actually a disservice to children’s self-confidence. Sooner or later, either within the examination system, or upon entering the adult world, children will discover that we live in a meritocracy, not an egalitarian utopia. Crucially, the bottom line and inevitable outcome of the ‘all must have prizes approach’ is further decline in standards. Children are simply not being challenged. There is a fundamental distinction between rewarding effort, and letting children rest in what educational jargon refers to as a ‘comfort zone’ by not criticising constructively. Children are tougher than they are being given credit for, their self-confidence less fragile than the DfES would have us believe. Furthermore, children respond very well to challenge, and very badly to boredom. Thus it is no wonder that a third of the secondary school population are illiterate and innumerate.

As we know so very well the correlation between low self-esteem and poor educational attainment, this misguided stab at political correctness must be scrapped. Whatever happened to being cruel to be kind?

Anastasia de Waal