Comments on: Meet the new targets – same as the old targets?

By: oldandrew

oldandrew — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:23:11 +0000

I would suggest that a set of minimum acceptable standards could be set instead of targets. They should all be things that should be achieved by any reasonably competent organisation, but should be wide enough to catch both absolute and relative failure, and marked decline.

(I am assuming here that “coasting schools” are ones that are underachieving relative to their intake but not relative to national figures, as opposed to ones that simply aren’t improving. “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it” might seem complacent, but schools are already overwhelmed with “fixes” which turn out to make things worse.)

By: matthewtaylor

matthewtaylor — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 18:09:34 +0000

I agree Andrew. But the question is this how do you have targets that disclose under performance but don’t proliferate and constrain everyone in the system. It really is hard, believe me. Take for example the stats released this week about coasting schools. They aren’t failing but surely parents deserve to now that they are also failing to improve?

By: oldandrew

oldandrew — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:54:47 +0000

The problem with targets is that professionals are, at least in theory, trained to make complex judgements about what should be done.

Targets override this judgement. For teachers, they tell us to spend time and effort on certain children for certain tests. For the police, they tell them to pursue certain types of crime and certain criminals. In reality there are actually a large number of factors to be considered and chasing the target is often going to be counter-productive.

Ultimately, professionals do have to be trusted to make their own judgements if you want them to do a good job. Statistics might be useful for idenitfying failure, cases where people aren’t doing their jobs, but finding people who are already doing a good job and telling them that they should be ticking this or that box is always going to be destructive.

By: Marbury

Marbury — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 17:45:31 +0000

Graham: I can’t find any evidence that Gove or the Tories regard music as a “soft” subject. Perhaps you know of some? As far as I can tell, Gove’s objection is not to subjects like music or drama but to the growth of subjects like media studies that are less valuable or useful than subjects like maths and physics, but which increasing numbers of pupils are being encouraged to take because they are easier, and schools know it will get their grades up. Hence “soft”. I get the feeling a few people throwing mud at the Tories here haven’t watched Gove’s speech to the RSA. Have a look, it’s interesting and serious, even you might not agree with all of it, as I don’t.

By: Michael Story

Michael Story — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:15:18 +0000

Jamie-

There is a need for police to focus on serious crimes which are hidden from view and therefore unlikely to appear in satisfaction surveys, domestic violence and incestuous child abuse being two examples. Confidence targets are also very problematic when the public are poorly informed and perception of crime changes as a result of hysterical news coverage and rumours.
This is why the Conservatives’ proposal for locally elected police chiefs was quietly dropped. How safe would you feel going to Barking and Dagenham if the BNP had appointed the head of police?

Matthew-

I am interested that you find a proposal which might lead schools to spend more resources on the most able pupils to be ‘troubling.’ Why should this be? We already only spend tax revenues on higher education after having first selected the most able candidates. Why should our schools be any different?

Isn’t this what the gifted and talented funds were supposed to achieve, and isn’t it only sensible to recognise that the cost to society of the most able pupils being passed over in favour of their less academic but target-pleasing peers might be huge?

It could well cost the brighter ones their university access and therefore professional career opportunities, and since our economy is increasingly reliant on high level knowledge workers (whose innovations can provide employment for a multitude of less skilled people) it must be in our interest to ensure we educate as many of them as possible?