Dear Gillian Keegan,
If you want to revive subject English and have enough teachers in classrooms to teach it, here are a few things that you might do.Large sections of the English subject community have been saying most of these things for a very long time but your predecessors don’t seem to have been terribly interested. We are now at a point where interest in studying the subject further is at an all-time low, along with teacher recruitment and retention, so there is real urgency about addressing the issues.
These seven actions could make a significant difference.
1. Tackle the problem of the two GCSE English examinations. These are putting students off further study in the subject, which is in turn leading to lower numbers taking up A Level courses. This has the knock-on effect of fewer undergraduates and, so, ultimately fewer teachers. The subject has to be enjoyable and inspiring if anyone is going to want to study it further when a choice is offered.
This includes:
- Reintroducing opportunities to study texts in English from around the globe, to broaden the scope of study and allow for more texts that are appropriate and interesting for students at this level. There needs to be a recognition of the need for students to see their own cultures and identities represented in at least some of the texts that they read.
- Taking out the requirement for the study of a whole 19th century novel for all students – a major hurdle and not one that is necessary for every student regardless of whether they are likely to continue to specialise in literary studies.
- Extending the range of non-fiction texts studied for GCSE English Language, bringing back opportunities for analysis and discussion of the multi-modal aspects of print, online and other media texts.
- Re-introducing a proper language component, where students are introduced to this aspect of the discipline of English and what it might offer them if they were to do English Language A Level.
- Opening up forms of assessment to include at least some element of coursework, portfolio, or teacher assessment, and to make part of that the assessment of oracy, so vital to English as a subject and to young people’s future lives. Spoken language has been downgraded – though assessed, it no longer contributes to the final GCSE English Language grade. The current 100% exam system not only condemns 30% of students to inevitable ‘failure’ but is also perceived as a difficult hurdle by the majority of students. The nature of the examining has shrunk the educational offer and even those who achieve high grades are switched off by the unpalatable nature of the experience. The absence of coursework (or equivalent) means important opportunities to develop independent critical thinking skills, to write at length, to draft and re-draft, to exercise choice, and so on, are lost – with significant implications for all students, not only those going on to further study in the subject.
- Rationalising and re-thinking the relationship between English Language and English Literature, to recognise their distinctiveness at the same time as acknowledging their overlaps. Currently the relationship is unhelpfully muddled and unjustifiably challenging. For instance, some specific requirements such as a 19th century text in English Language have led to all students having to write about either unseen 19th century fiction or non-fiction in examination conditions.
2. Recognise that a subject like English is not bound by a very clearly defined body of required ‘knowledge’ and that teachers, within the parameters of the National Curriculum, should be given the flexibility to make choices, both in terms of content and pedagogy. The current Ofsted regime has sought to impose particular pedagogies and ideologies across all subjects, disregarding differences between them. These have been eroding the distinctive nature of English as a subject, where ‘knowing’ is complex, multi-faceted, contingent, impacted by affective factors and where the boundaries of the subject are permeable, incorporating elements of creative arts, Humanities, PHSE, language learning and more. English teachers with graduate qualifications in the subject go into teaching to share their joy in the subject they studied in Higher Education, not to teach something far less interesting and enjoyable that is devoid of those pleasures and unrecognisable as the subject they chose.
3. Recognise that STEM and English/Humanities are not in competition with each other but should be partners in a whole ecosystem of knowledge, education and training. The promotion of STEM should not be at the expense of Humanities subjects, thereby devaluing their worth. Interestingly, voices from STEM organisations are themselves highly supportive of Humanities education, recognising that all scientific and technical expertise is enriched and extended by the skills and understandings acquired in a sound, broad cultural education. If girls need encouragement to take Science subjects then that’s fine, but let’s also see them being supported to take Arts subjects if they so wish, and how about a bit more encouragement for boys to do English, traditionally viewed as a female preserve?
4. Ensure that government ministers, spokespeople and government bodies stop sharing misinformation about the employment opportunities for graduates of Humanities and English, as if it is only STEM subjects that will lead to fulfilling, financially rewarding and valuable work. There is a lazy perpetuation of crude myths about the economy and what is needed, the needs of employers and the opportunities available to graduates in the job market. This is impacting adversely on these subjects at A Level and into Higher Education. It’s vital to recognise that a well-functioning society depends on the quality of its intellectual work and expertise across a full spectrum of disciplines. The UK has always been known for the quality of its offer in Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences and attracts talent from abroad, and the vital revenue from overseas students on that basis, as well as allowing us to export the fruits of these abroad. There should be full recognition of the part played in our economy of the Creative Industries as a whole. (See evidence, for instance, from the Creative Industries Policy and Evidence Centrehttps://pec.ac.uk/news/national-statistics-on-the-creative-industries)
5. Radically re-think the role of Ofsted and its impact on the curriculum, pedagogy and the experience of English as a subject for students. This clearly is not confined to English but English, along with some others, is a subject that depends for its vitality on risk-taking, experimentation, variety, dialogue of multiple kinds, drawing into the curricular conversation students’ own responses, life experiences, interests and enthusiasms. Fixed curricular plans, sequenced schemes for learning that are inflexible and confected for Ofsted, as proof of a logic that excludes the logic of student response, is likely to create static and unresponsive schemes that distort the nature of the subject. Ofsted’s role should be to support successful, exciting, considered teaching of many different kinds, not to limit, control, set narrow guidelines or expect long lists of required features, as is currently the case. (For evidence of this see their guidance for English inspectors). As part of this overhaul, there should also be a serious questioning of whether any inspector who does not have a specialist qualification in a particular subject should have the right to inspect it at secondary level.
6. Make rapid and large-scale alterations to the recent changes instituted in Initial Teacher Training for English, which have hugely damaged recruitment for English and will continue to have a disastrous impact if left as they are. Many highly respected courses, with steady cohorts of students over decades, have been decimated by a combination of disincentives to English graduates (failure to approve successful institutions in areas of the country with limited ITT provision, muddled and constantly changing rules on bursaries, poor pay, poor working conditions) and hurdles put in the way of providers. Well-established providers with a strong track record have been struggling for approval, or failed to gain it, while unproven, untried and tested new providers have, seemingly for ideological reasons, been given approval and funding. (EMC’s own thriving PGCE English course, with an exceptional retention rate among its alumni, has had to close next year, due to lack of applicants).
7. Make available high quality subject knowledge development and sustained CPD for all non-specialist English teachers at secondary level. This should not just be short-term, limited training in pedagogy but sustained development of these teachers’ knowledge of the subject discipline e.g. time off in lieu to undertake a part-time funded MA in English Literature or in English Language.
There are other things that might support the subject and the ‘life cycle’ of the English teacher in the longer term, of course but there is plenty to be getting on with in addressing the seven issues above. The stakes are high. A failure to tackle these fundamental causes of the teacher supply crisis, and a complacent acceptance of the current situation, will risk not only profound damage to children’s education now, but also much longer lasting damage into the future, in its impact on the whole ecosystem of the subject discipline and the very nature of the subject itself.
