The Ulster Teachers’ Union (UTU), the local union providing professional support for local teachers, currently has a membership of approximately 6,500 spread throughout the nursery, primary, secondary (including grammar) and special sectors of the education service. The UTU is primarily focussed on issues that affect teachers in  Northern Ireland but is also part of the British and Irish Group of Teacher Unions and an active member of Education International, the world-wide grouping of teacher unions.

 CONSULTATION POINT 1

 Do you agree that, in order to improve the literacy and numeracy levels of our young people, we can and should create a post-primary system without any element of selection?

 1.1      The UTU has campaigned vigorously for an end to the iniquitous system of academic selection that has created educational apartheid in Northern Ireland and led to a substantial level of underachievement for far too many of our young people. It firmly supports an end to academic selection at the earliest opportunity as a first step to providing equality for all.

 1.2      Any form of selection by testing leads to a distortion of the curriculum as has been so clearly evidenced in Years 6 & 7 leading up to the current Transfer Test. Teachers have welcomed the Revised Curriculum but it will be impossible to implement it fully if academic selection remains.

 1.3      UTU therefore remains committed to a system where pupils and their parents, guided by the pupil profile and the professional advice of teachers, are permitted to choose an educational pathway suited to the needs of the individual pupil.

 1.4       UTU has very real concerns about the link between social and economic disadvantage and underachievement. The current selective system does nothing to address this problem, and indeed exacerbates it, since only those who can afford to can access additional assistance in the form of coaching for the transfer test. 

 1.5      Pupils who do not achieve a high grade in the current transfer test feel the effects of such perceived failure acutely. Teachers in secondary schools are very often engaged in attempting to re-motivate pupils who have suffered a loss of self-esteem as a result of academic selection. Indeed, many of these young people still bear the scars of transfer well into their adult lives.

 1.6       Northern Ireland has increasingly become a multi-ethnic community and children for whom English is not a first language may well be seriously disadvantaged by the current selective system. UTU also concurs with the concerns raised in the consultation document regarding Traveller children and agrees that targeted action over and above removing selection will be needed.

 CONSULTATION POINT 2

 Do you agree with the aims and objectives of the proposed strategy?

 2.1      The UTU agrees with the proposed high priority focus on supporting teachers in all of their work, and particularly with respect to literacy and numeracy. In order to do this it must be acknowledged that teachers will require adequate preparation and planning time, along with time for professional reflection. It is essential that the Curran recommendations regarding 10% planning, preparation and assessment time be revisited and implemented forthwith in order to facilitate this aspiration.

 2.2      The UTU agrees that a good basis should be laid for literacy and numeracy in the early years. That is why it is essential that trained teachers continue to provide the central role in providing education both at nursery and foundation stage. The UTU has been concerned that in recent years there has been a move to dilute the level of education provided for young children by the substitution of good nursery provision by privatised day care facilities. While the UTU acknowledges that these facilities provide a service it cannot be comparable to a proper education facility with fully trained teachers who can identify learning difficulties and provide appropriate responses at an early stage.

 2.3      Better co-ordination of cross-curricular literacy and numeracy is a laudable target but again the UTU would emphasise that in order to do this effectively teachers will need to have time dedicated to this function.

 2.4      If English and Maths teachers are to promote literacy and numeracy then the delivery mechanism for this will have to be clearly defined, and once again appropriate time and training provided.

 2.5      Teachers at foundation level have always used phonics as part of their teaching approaches to a greater or lesser degree. It is important but such a “bottom-up” approach must occur in the context of a rich literacy environment. Neither understanding nor learning can develop from a “bottom-up” approach. Phonics work must go hand-in-hand with a “top-down” approach (whole book/ whole language approach).

 What is required are good training programmes for foundation teachers in the testing for and development of phonology. Recognition must be given to the individuality of children ranging from those with receptive and expressive language delay to those with very well developed phonological awareness, knowledge of letters and the relationship between sounds and letters in words.

 Guidance is required as to appropriate sources that can be purchased and used with the range of abilities which present in schools and when appropriate the support of speech and language therapists/ technicians provided. Teachers must be afforded the ability to use their professional judgement with confidence to respond to the needs of the children in their classrooms using the range of methods they feel most appropriate and at the most appropriate time for the individual.

 2.6      The gap between high and low achieving pupils is as a result of a myriad of complex reasons, including the present segregated secondary education system. The UTU believes that while it is useful for teachers to focus on addressing the gap through planning and pedagogy, they will not be fully successful in raising standards until all the issues impacting on underachievement are resolved.

 2.7      While there is a need for teachers to monitor standards and progress, the UTU would caution against the introduction of onerous accountability measures at system level. A pupil’s standard of achievement cannot raised by measuring it - it can, however, be raised by teachers who have time to teach. Bureaucratic exercises to gather data should be carefully examined to see if they add any real value to the process of teaching and learning since teachers’ time may be better spent in other activity.

  2.8      The UTU welcomes the focus on improved linkages between school and home and the provision of information to parents. The UTU would suggest that information packages be developed centrally but with the school being able to customise the information to suit their individual circumstances.

 2.9      The UTU believes that the whole area of professional development of teachers is one that needs serious consideration and increased funding. The UTU believes that while school-based in-service training plays a part, there is merit in regular external training also. The UTU would also caution on the over-emphasis of assessment measures in the final statement on “clarity of focus”.

 2.10  The UTU is broadly supportive of the aims stated in the consultation document with the following comments for the bullet points indicated below:

 3.   The UTU has concerns about the use of the term “consistent” and seeks clarification of what exactly this means in real terms.

4.   It must be acknowledged that the teacher is the prime professional in all cases.

5.   At secondary level exam syllabi often dictate what is taught and this may be to the exclusion of a focus on literacy. In addition the inclusion of pupils with special needs and ethnic minority children may impact on the class teacher’s approach to the teaching of literacy and numeracy. Adequate support services must be provided for these children.

6.  The data collected should not be used against schools and there certainly should be no suggestion of league tables or other such comparisons.

7.   Standards of literacy and numeracy for entrants to teacher training should be high.

8.   The UTU believes there needs to be clarity on how improved communication and planning can be facilitated.

9.   There should be full consultation with the teacher unions on how schools that “are not achieving their full potential” will be identified.

 2.11  The UTU believes that it would have been very useful to have had sight of the SEN Review in parallel with the literacy and numeracy document. In Wave 1 there is little reference made to Special Needs pupils nor is the increase in the range of special needs highlighted.

 2.12  The UTU is disappointed that there is no mention in the aims of “the joy of learning” or the fun element in literacy and numeracy. The UTU believes that it is essential to encourage creativity.

 CONSULTATION POINT 3

 Do you agree with the approach for Wave One?

 3.1      The UTU applauds the first sentence of this section of the document that “The starting point for this strategy is the recognition that improvements in literacy and numeracy are delivered not through policy statements or inspection reports but through the work of the teacher in the classroom.” The UTU reiterates that in order for the teacher to be able to carry out this work effectively he or she will require adequate planning and preparation time built into the working day on a statutory basis.

 3.2      The UTU believes that the new terminology of “Waves” does not provide clarity of understanding. Is it really necessary to have another new piece of educational jargon? Is this yet another example of importing educational ideas from England and Wales? The UTU has noted the mention of “Waves” in the Rose Report, Department for Education and Skills, 2006.

 3.3      The reference to planning for literacy and numeracy creates some confusion. It is unclear how one can reconcile a programme that is matched to the overall requirements of each class with the needs of its individual pupils. The needs of individual pupils are currently dealt with through differentiation.

 3.4      The UTU is unclear as to how, in the early stages of development, the programme of phonics can be “time-bound” as suggested. Children progress at different rates and teachers must necessarily use a range of approaches to suit individual needs within a class.

 3.5      The UTU believes that mathematical concepts should be relevant to everyday life and would endorse the statements in relation to numeracy contained in this section.

 3.6      The reference to identification of “particularly gifted” pupils requires further definition and teachers would welcome training in strategies to meet the challenge of gifted pupils. There is the possibility that gifted pupils may underachieve in an effort not to be different from their peers and this is an issue that must be examined if every child is to reach its full potential. Additional funding and/or resources will certainly be necessary to address this problem.

 3.7      The UTU is disappointed that the issue of class size has not been mentioned in the Wave One strategy. The UTU strongly believes that a reduction in class sizes, particularly at primary level, would have a huge impact on the success of the literacy and numeracy strategy and urges the Minister to implement a phased reduction in class size as is currently happening in Scotland.

 CONSULTATION POINT 4

 Do you agree with the approach for Wave 2?

 4.1      The UTU feels that it is impossible to comment fully on this section of the consultation document in the absence of the Report on the Special Educational Needs (SEN) and Inclusion Review. The current SEN Code of Practice identifies specific stages – it is unclear how this “wave” would interact with those stages.

 4.2      The UTU notes the reference to provision of a structured programme for individual pupils within Wave 2. This will entail additional preparation and planning and the UTU reiterates its call for provision of guaranteed planning and preparation time of at least 10% of the timetable in order comply with this requirement.

 4.3      It is suggested that the structured programme is delivered either by the teacher or by “the classroom assistant working under the supervision of the teacher”. The UTU believes that this will be possible only if sufficient resources are available to provide enough classroom assistance. It must also be borne in mind that if there are a large number of pupils in any one class on individual structured programmes this may present great difficulties.  If classroom assistance is available, the teacher may then become responsible for overseeing the work of several adults as well as continuing to teach the remaining pupils in the class. If there is no classroom assistance then it may be very difficult to maintain a large number of different individual programmes. Class size is a real issue.

 CONSULTATION POINT 5

 Do you agree with the approach for Wave 3?

 5.1      The UTU would like to emphasise once again the need for smaller classes in order to implement this “wave” of the proposed strategy.

 5.2      As previously stated, it is difficult to make full comment given the unavailability of the SEN and Inclusion Review findings.

 5.3      The UTU has concerns regarding the conditions attached to seeking advice and assistance. How will ESA/ELBs judge whether schools have taken all reasonable steps and who decides what is reasonable? Teachers need to be assured that professional guidance is on hand should they require it and schools will need to be able to access such guidance without undue delay, with the minimum of bureaucracy and without it being a charge to the school.

 5.4       The UTU would like to flag up the current difficulties experienced by many schools in accessing the support of Educational Psychologists. Some employing authorities currently operate a quota system for having children tested. If there is a true commitment to the provision of a system that will improve outcomes for all pupils then it is important to recognise that needs must be met, regardless of cost.

 CONSULTATION POINT 6

 Do you agree with the proposed support measures to facilitate professional learning and help ensure effective implementation of the strategy?

 6.1      The UTU believes that currently the professional development of teachers is not accorded the level of importance that it deserves. It welcomes the reference to ensuring that priority is given to the provision of professional support and development opportunities in the area of literacy and numeracy. The UTU would  suggest, however, that this needs to be included in an expanded programme of development opportunities for teachers covering the full range of personal and school-focussed topics.

 6.2      The UTU notes that the strategy should ensure support to those “with management or coordinating roles in schools”. This is in line with another of the recommendations of the Curran Report which referred to the provision of dedicated time to those with leadership responsibilities.

 6.3      While it is important that teachers and student teachers can understand and interpret data on pupil performance the UTU would caution against overemphasising comparisons between classes and schools. Statistics is a complex topic and unless an individual is fully competent in understanding the limits of usefulness of  statistical data then mistakes may be made in its interpretation.

 6.4      The UTU is disappointed that there is no reference in this section to the Teacher Competencies developed by the GTC (NI). This body has been tasked with advising on appropriate professional development from Initial Teacher Training onwards and yet its role has been ignored in this strategy.

 6.5      The School Library service has a vital role to play in a successful literacy strategy and the UTU welcomes the suggestion that it arrange for authors to visit schools. Schools would have to be assured that there would be no financial implications for school budgets in this respect.

 6.6      The UTU wishes to flag up its concerns regarding the use of “evidence” to “challenge” schools. Schools and teachers require support, not challenge, if they are to be successful. The UTU wishes to highlight the situation in Finland, which performed particularly well in OECD research studies, where the emphasis is on support by local authorities and where the inspection process was abolished in the mid-1990s.

 CONSULTATION POINT 7

 Do you agree with the proposed targets? If not please give reasons below.

 7.1      While the UTU recognises that target setting may provide some impetus for raising standards nevertheless it believes that it should not be seen as the only method of improving opportunities for young people – it is a much more complex problem than that.

 7.2      Measurement of improvement is only possible if there is a baseline measurement and there is no reference to such measurement suggested within the strategy.

 7.3      Target setting assumes that the population for whom the targets are set remains constant. Given the recent history of Northern Ireland in terms of inward migration of workers from all over Europe, for whom English is not a first language, it seems improbable that we can accurately predict what the picture may be in 5 years, much less in 12 years. The numbers of migrant workers have also tended to fluctuate depending on economic conditions, and there can be a vast turnover in numbers of ethnic minority pupils in any school over a period of time.

 7.4      Similarly, the UTU would suggest that there is no control over the intakes to any school of pupils in the Special Needs category. This will most certainly affect the statistical outcomes. Any improvement in outcomes may also be linked to the levels of specialist support or specific expertise available in a particular setting.

 7.5     Given the huge number of variables, and as stated previously, the difficulty in analysing data competently it seems an impossible task to accurately assess whether a school is achieving acceptable outcomes. There are also a large number of small schools in Northern Ireland and this decreases the chances of providing any significant results using statistical analysis.

 7.6       The UTU would question the use of GCSEs (or equivalent) as the only measures of success for a school. There are a range of other measures which could be used to assess how well a school is serving its community in terms of literacy and numeracy. There is a philosophical argument around what constitutes a “good” education and by focussing solely on academic measures the strategy is limiting itself. For instance, it may be more important that a young person acquires skills in public speaking and debating in order that they may become an active participant in community life.

 7.7      The UTU would suggest that the fact that inspectors have noted that there are continuing problems with the handling of performance data across schools flags up a more serious difficulty. Could it be that teachers as professionals place more store on teaching pupils than testing pupils? They also use their own measures of assessing what level pupils are at without the need for testing – often testing is merely a confirmation of what the teacher already has assessed from observation.

 7.8       The increased use of ICT and software in assessment will have to be accompanied by appropriate ongoing training for teachers and improved access to hardware for pupils. It seems strange that a strategy that is attempting to equalise opportunities for pupils would have an increased dependence on the use of ICT when it is highly likely that children from socially disadvantaged backgrounds are further disadvantaged by the use of computer testing.

 7.9      The UTU also believes that at present there are far too many shortcomings in the existing technology in schools, both in terms of hardware and technical support, for it to be relied upon for assessment purposes.

 7.10  The UTU has already stated its reservations regarding the thrust of the “Every School A Good School” School Improvement document. The UTU is particularly concerned about the introduction of what appears to be another level of inspectorial activity, this time to be carried out by the employing authority. The UTU urges the Minister to revisit this document and change the emphasis to one of support for schools and teachers rather than “challenge”, which implies a certain degree of hostility.

 7.11  The UTU is also concerned about the implied linkage in the strategy document between targets and Performance Review and Staff Development.

  CONSULTATION POINT 8

 Do you agree with the roles and responsibilities detailed in section 6?

 8.1      The document refers to past difficulties in ensuring that a development programme is well-established in classroom practice. The UTU would suggest that there are a number of identifiable factors that mitigate against the successful implementation of new initiatives, namely:

 (a)    a failure to consult or act on the concerns of teachers

(b)    a failure to provide sufficient time for teachers to plan and prepare

(c)    a failure to provide resources to fully support the planned strategy

(d)    a failure to convince teachers of the merits of the strategy

(e)    insufficient time allowed for a strategy to imbed itself in classroom practice before a replacement strategy is introduced

 8.2      The UTU is broadly in agreement with the role outlined for schools but would wish to express its deep concerns about the reference to PRSD reflecting the “progress of individual teachers in delivering progress”.

 8.3      The UTU would support the use of the Reading Recovery programme but would require details of the “subsidised funding” arrangements in order to assess if they are acceptable. The UTU would recommend that the Reading Recovery scheme is maintained, extended and fully centrally funded.

 8.4      The UTU is extremely concerned about the intention that ESA will monitor, evaluate and identify schools where “support interventions may be needed” using the “trend information”. This seems to underline the inspectorial role of ESA.

 8.5      The UTU would suggest that part of the role of Teacher Education organisations is to ensure that entrants to the profession have good levels of literacy and numeracy on admission to courses of initial teacher training.

 8.6      The UTU would suggest that the Department of Education, if it is to be target driven, must ensure that realistic and achievable targets are set for schools. If this is not the case then principals and teachers will be demoralised in the same way as pupils are currently demoralised when they fail to meet the standards set in the transfer test.

 8.7      The UTU notes that a Literacy and Numeracy Taskforce is to be established to assist in finalising the revised literacy and numeracy strategy, to ensure its effective implementation  and to report to the Department of Education annually. The UTU suggests that teacher unions, as the professional organisations representing teachers, along with the GTC (NI) which is responsible for the professional development of teachers, should have adequate representation on the Taskforce.

 Avril Hall-Callaghan, General Secretary, UTU                           26th November ‘08