Press Releases

Ineffective teachers cost kids GCSE grades

Email this to a friend Print Delicious Digg Facebook Reddit

05 May 2008

Poor secondary school teachers can mean the difference between a pass and a fail, according to a report published today by the Institute for Public Policy Research (ippr).

New research shows for the first time how ineffective teaching can mean the difference between a C and D grade at GCSE.

ippr argues that in the last ten years teachers’ pay has improved and the number of people choosing teaching as a career has increased. But teaching is still not attracting the very best graduates and poor performing teachers are not being dealt with effectively.

ippr makes a raft of recommendations to improve teaching in England. These include harnessing the expertise of retiring head teachers and older non-teaching professionals, and introducing more rigorous selection procedures for candidates applying for teacher training.

In preparing the report, ippr used data it commissioned from the Centre for Market and Public Organisation (CMPO). The research showed that having an ‘excellent teacher’ compared to a ‘bad’ one can mean an increase of more than one GCSE grade per pupil per subject. And having a ’good teacher’ relative to a ‘bad teacher’ can mean an extra 0.6 of a GCSE grade.

In the UK teachers are drawn from the top 30 per cent of graduates, compared with Finland, who draw on the top ten per cent, and South Korea, the top 5 per cent.

Only one in 100 candidates fails Initial Teacher Training (ITT) and only one in four teachers has their performance regularly monitored in the classroom. Teachers who are removed for poor performance are currently not required to undergo any form of retraining before taking up a new post in a different school.

ippr’s report recommends:

Introducing a Teach Later scheme for older professionals, encouraging recruitment of those in non-teaching sectors who are nearing retirement but are keen to continue working.
Expanding the Government’s Teach Next scheme, recruiting those with professional experience into teaching.
Introducing a higher tier of managers, selected from head teachers due to retire in the next five to ten years, to improve the advice and support given to head teachers, and keep expertise in the system.#
Introducing a bursar for each school, to assist in day-to-day management, freeing up more of the head teacher’s time for issues such as staff management and inspirational leadership.
Introducing a nationally-set written exam for ITT applicants, testing cognitive skills, literacy and numeracy.
Using psychometric testing alongside exams to assess each candidate’s personality and suitability for teaching.
Extending the duration of ITT from one to two years. A further year should be required to attain Qualified Teacher Status (QTS), with a subsequent option to study part-time at Masters level.
Improving performance management, with all teachers required to observe four lessons by colleagues per term and take part in six-monthly appraisals.
Strengthening links between pay and skills and development.
Strengthening ‘Capability Reviews’ for poor performing teachers, with teachers who fail reviews required to under go retraining before returning to teaching.
Improving professional development, with each teacher entitled to 20 days’ development a year – up from the current five.

Julia Margo, ippr associate director and the report’s lead author, said:

“Teaching is rightly now seen as a profession that people aspire to work in. But there are still a large number of ineffective teachers and they make the difference between children passing and failing. Improving the recruitment and professional development of teachers would enable schools to improve or replace poor performing teachers.

“There is also a concern that many older teachers are due to retire in the next decade. The proposed scheme to introduce a new management tier would address this and keep expertise in the system.”

The Government has already signalled its intention to boost investment in teacher training and development through the rollout of the Masters qualification in teaching, which could be wrapped up in these reforms. ippr’s analysis shows that investment in teacher training needs to be prioritised in future education investment.

Notes to editors

Those Who Can? By Julia Margo, Meghan Benton, Kay Withers and Sonia Sodha with Sarah Tough is published Monday 5th May 2008. The Executive Summary is available to download.

In March 2005, 30 per cent of both primary and secondary teachers were aged 50 or over and therefore will reach retirement age by 2015 (ATL et al 2007).

ippr’s proposal for a new management tier providing a mentoring and support role to head teachers is modelled on the Canadian system of Superintendents. Superintendents in Canada are appointed by local School Boards. Head teachers in their jurisdiction are accountable to them and are appraised by them. In England, each local authority should employ one Canadian-style Superintendent to be in charge of up to 20 schools. Our recommendation is for a universal, integrated system of support-and-challenge aiming to offset problems before they emerge (in contrast to the Executive Head Teachers scheme). Superintendents would remove responsibility for head teacher appraisal from governing bodies, who often find that function difficult to carry out. We would recommend piloting such a scheme in at least three local areas over the next two years, with a view to introducing the scheme by 2015, depending on the outcome of the pilots.

In England, the responsibilities for funding teacher training sit with the Training and Development Agency for Schools. The TDA has set strict standards for teacher training institutes, including a requirement that at least 24 weeks of practical experience be offered (this equates to two-thirds the total course time on one-year programmes).

Responsibility for selection procedures are devolved to training providers, but all entrants must have a degree and basic literacy and numeracy skills.

Of the 38,273 trainees undertaking ITT during 2005/6, 87 per cent achieved Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) and 81 per cent were employed as a teacher within six months. For those taking the 'assessment only' route, i.e. teachers who have been teaching for some time but do not have QTS, the figures are even higher: 96 per cent of primary school teachers and 100 per cent of secondary school teachers achieve QTS.

In the UK, performance management is annual rather than constantly evaluated as in other countries. Only 25 per cent of teachers report that they are regularly observed in classroom practice. The best education systems in the world are characterised by high levels of lesson observation and ongoing performance management.

We have estimated that delivering these reforms would cost in the region of £481 million each year. This total breaks down as follows:

To move from a one-year-based ITT course (including a mix of provider-based training and in-school development) to a two-year based ITT course would cost roughly double the current amount, at £850 million a year, requiring an extra investment of approximately £425 million a year. This is based on the Government having spent £258.8 million on ITT and £165.9 million on training bursaries in 2006/07, funded through the Teacher Development Agency – totalling £424.7 million.
Quadrupling teacher entitlement to Continuing Professional Development from five days to 20 days a year would cost roughly four times the current amount, at £75 million a year. This requires extra investment of approximately £56 million a year. This is based on the Government having spent £18.7 million on CPD in 2006/07, again funded through the TDA.

The Treasury forecasts that education investment is to continue rising at around £4-5bn a year, from £81.9bn a year in 2008/09 to £86.1bn in 2009/10 and £91.5bn in 2010-11.

Contact:

Gill Amas, Senior Media Officer, 07753 719289/020 7339 0007.