I’ve had an epiphany.

It was painless.

After the last episode of Chinese Teachers and it was very predictable (bear with me I promise I will get to the “epiphany”) … the crux of the programme is that the Chinese teaching style won. The most worrying comment within the whole programme was when, just before the results were announced the phrase this is the “moment of truth”, which could “change the course of history” was used. Education is riddled with people looking for the golden bullet to fix the issues … it isn’t as simple as that and I worry that people will watch the programme or even worse just read the headlines, rub their hands together and say “right, that’s it! We must change everything” and we’ll be throwing out the proverbial “baby with the bathwater”.

Teaching isn’t bad in the UK but we have so many quirks of our education system and the wider society that aren’t in other countries. The system of accountability (I know that we need some form of accountability … I too want to make sure my tax ££s are being spent well!) and the way outcomes are measured at the end of key stages is warped. Take for example the fact that GCSE outcomes are referenced against KS2 in essence schools outperform others at the detriment of other schools. Effectively there will only ever be X% of A* to C’s awarded (and this is controlled by Ofqual!) so you are competing with other schools to get across that line. It’s this whole “we want more schools better than average thing” that keeps coming back and haunting the government … it’s impossible! What gets to me is that this is inherently building in competition between schools to be better than each other. It shouldn’t be like that.

Oh flipping heck … I’ve done it again and gone off on a tangent!

So let’s get back to the programme. There were a couple of pertinent points:

• There was an admission that much time was lost to discipline problems. This was obvious but is even worse if you are a new teacher and is the single biggest issue a class teacher faces. I don’t have all the answers … apart from “time”. Give it time and it gets easier.
• The students were given their individual results and they were ranked against each other. I’m not sure how I feel about this. Most teachers will rank exam scores anyway, and students then talk to each other about “who beat who” and so it happens naturally but to go as far as saying “you are number 37”… hmmmm.
• In all three subjects the Chinese Teachers beat the “rest of year 9” results. Nuff said.

After this programme I read an article about ” the trial of chinese style maths lessons to be expanded ” from a couple of weeks ago … and I have sort of blogged in this post about my view on “Mastery” but it’s dawned on me why I’ve been kicking against the machinery and tickbox culture that we have in the UK of what defines “good teaching” and why this whole “Chinese teaching style” is a bone of contention for me. According to article, which was an interview with Nick Gibb: “Shanghai teachers use a whole-class, “mastery” approach, which involves teaching children of all ability every minute step of a calculation.” He then went onto say “We have a lot to learn from the approach they are taking in cities like Shanghai. We want to do more of that in years ahead” and comments like this, just get me annoyed; this whole looking elsewhere for the expertise – I wonder what frame of reference Mr Gibb is using that suggests this isn’t happening in the UK?. I know lots of teachers in secondary will do as I do, with the whole “here’s how to do it” thing and throughout the teacher explanation there will be lots of questions of students: “what do you think happens next?”, “why? How?” etc. The students are then set some form of “have a go” questions which allows me to deal with students who haven’t grasped it yet and then we’ll develop the idea/concept further building on more complex ideas within the same topic. In terms of getting them to practice these skills, I joke about “teaching by stealth” – I mean that the worksheets or activities are not just a list of questions for them to plough through – however there is a place for that too! The rationale is that our students need some form of stimulus … it’s such a fine balance to have and I know I don’t get it right all the time.

I do think we need a clear idea of what it means to teach “well”. What are we doing it for? Is it to impart knowledge, pass exams, and develop good citizens, all of the above? At the start of my NQT year when I was made to do some training (Let’s just say it rhymes with “heap”) and I genuinely came away thinking I was autistic and that I was missing something. I went round and round in circles in my head thinking there was something wrong with me and maybe my idea of what “it” meant to teach was way off what was wanted/expected. I just didn’t “get it”. I was in my NQT for f%$* sake … what I needed at that point was for my students to behave. To listen to me and to more importantly to get some “deliberate practice” of what was being taught. Maybe running around the room sticking post it notes on a learning continuum works in other subjects or even in maths for other people but it’s not my “thang”. Sorry. It’s just not me.

I’m not saying my lessons are exciting or boring (some of my students would disagree no doubt!) – in fact I’m not saying they’re of a specific style. I have a belief that students will begin to get a love of the subject through being able to achieve in the subject (whatever measure you choose to use of “achievement”). The one thing I have seen over the last few years at the coalface is a shift from a focus on the “softer skills” to a VERY slow acceptance that we need to teach students “a body of knowledge”. If we teach them “stuff” and teach them well they will have the skills required to solve problems and apply that knowledge but unless we teach them this stuff they won’t be able to use it. Doh!

The one thing I hope happens in my classroom that was lacking in the first couple of episodes of this series was mutual respect – some of the closing comments suggested that they were getting there. I want students to understand that my job is to teach them. I want to pass on a “legacy”. A legacy from thousands, nay millions of people who have lived before us who have developed the mathematical ideas and language we use today and who knows, some of them may go on to develop it further. Oh and if we happen to produce amazing exam results … that helps too! (I am being glib there by the way! of course my job is to get results, whilst the system we operate in values that as a measure!)

Blindly following the “next new thing” to be introduced into education isn’t going to happen for me. I am not closed to the idea of learning from others – whoever or wherever they may be and that is what my epiphany relates to ….. I just don’t see Shanghai teaching as that revolutionary in secondary (it may be a massive shift in primary).

I do however reserve the right to change my mind.