Easter weekend was a very interesting time on the student voice front. At its Annual Conference, NASUWT said they were considering striking because student voice is being taken too far.
Here’s our statement on the subject:
‘Successful organisations always consider ‘culture fit’ when making any appointment. With schools, it is natural to do this is by involving young people in teacher appointments, with the appropriate support.
The attack on student voice we’ve seen by NASUWT and sections of the press is un-measured and misconceived. Education cannot return to the days of simple knowledge transfer between teacher and student. This traditional approach to learning will not equip young people to face the modern world.
Student voice, when approached in a considered and clear way, is the best way to help young people to be active, questioning and informed citizens. This is exactly what Britain needs in 2010’
Here are six misconceptions that the NASUWT, and the press, are making about student voice:
| Misconception |
The truth |
| Poor examples of student voice mean that the whole idea of student voice is a bad one |
Just because student voice has had negative, and isolated, consequences in some schools, it doesn’t mean that the whole concept isn’t a good idea. |
| Poor practice in student voice is widespread |
Thousands of schools across the country benefit from involving young people in important school decisions |
| Young people are to blame for bad examples of student voice |
They aren’t, the process needs to be managed better by teachers (in a clear and considered way) |
| Young people on interview panels select who gets the job |
Young people are having a say on who gets the job, from their perspective in the school. |
| Student voice is Government – imposed |
Student voice has not been imposed externally, but grown organically. |
| Better student voice equals worse teacher voice |
Schools that have effective student voice also have empowered, effective and vocal teachers |
And here’s those misconceptions explained:
1. Poor examples of student voice mean that the whole idea of student voice is a bad one
‘the way many schools use student voice is “demeaning, embarrassing and humiliating” to teachers’
Chris Keates, General Secretary, NASUWT
NASUWT are right to be concerned about inappropriate practice with student voice. We’re concerned too, just like we’re concerned about anything that is inappropriate.
But those schools that have developed poor practice should be encouraged to approach student voice in a more considered and planned way, rather than not do it at all.
Just because student voice has had negative consequences in some schools, it doesn’t mean that the whole idea is a bad one.
2. Poor practice in student voice is widespread
NASUWT – the largest UK-wide teachers’ union – could only find around 200 examples of poor practice with student voice.
We’re in touch with thousands of schools across the country who benefit from involving young people in important school decisions. This is happening day in day out, and young people, schools and teachers are reaping the benefits. Better behaviour, more engagement with learning, improved school environment, the list goes on…
Interestingly, a number of involvers’ teacher friends even sent positive case studies to NASUWT when they contacted their members looking for bad examples. They received a stock reply saying ‘thank you for your case of the abuse of student voice’. We’d like to ask NASUWT – how many teachers replied citing positive examples of student voice? And what happened to them?
Even some of the so-called ‘poor’ case studies are really clutching at straws. Take a look at this example in the Daily Mail yesterday:
From http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1263769/Now-teachers-ordered-smile-pupils.html
The aggrieved candidate for this job pointed out that the interview was conducted ‘very formally’. She also mentions two very reasonable questions that were asked by the young panel – one about her subject, and one about disruption.
This is hardly an example of poor practice, if the young panel were interested in that subject being taught well, and without any interruptions from badly behaved members of the class. How can we object to that? And did the candidate feel aggrieved because she didn’t get the job?
3. Young people are to blame for bad examples of student voice
Young people are not evil!
If they say something inappropriate in a lesson observation, that’s because that lesson observation hasn’t been planned properly. If they ask something inappropriate in a teacher interview, that’s because nobody has gone through the questions with them beforehand.
If they give inappropriate feedback in an interview, that’s because they’ve not been trained on how to construct feedback in a diplomatic way. Just like for adults.
Hardly rocket science!
4. That young people on interview panels select who gets the job
Young people are not the ones deciding who gets the job. They are having a say on it, and offering an opinion from a different perspective. The school staff and Governors of the school still have the final say, are still legally responsible, and are influenced by young people’s views to an extent that they choose.
The decision making process needs to be made clear to the candidate (which has given rise to some of the problems we’ve seen highlighted in the press).
Student voice, when used in this way, takes advantage of the educational opportunity that being on an interview panel presents. It links well with work-related learning, and careers advice – why not use that opportunity?
5. Student voice is Government – imposed
‘a Government scheme called Student voice’
Melanie Phillips, Daily Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1263612/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-How-richly-ironic-teachers-ludicrous-obsession-pupil-power-putting-work.html
Student voice has not been forced on schools by this, or any, Government.
Student voice has come from schools because they know it’s a good idea. It has taken root in schools because many teachers realise the need to prepare their students for adult life in more sophisticated ways. It has not been imposed externally, but grown organically.
Schools that see the benefits of involving young people in their education every single day, with the appropriate support. It’s also supported with a range of academic research – here’s a few links:
Geoff Whitty’s research: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/DCSF-RR001.pdf
Carnegie YP research: http://cypi.carnegieuktrust.org.uk/cypi/publications
GTCE research: http://www.gtce.org.uk/documents/publicationpdfs/pupil_part_anthology1109.pdf
The Labour government has supported to schools, as part of the Children’s Plan, with this – but encourages them to do so in a way that works for them.
It’s also far more than just teacher appointments, and lesson observations – but young people being involved in most aspects of the work of the school!
6. Better student voice equals worse teacher voice
‘Student Voice scheme is not being abused. It is itself an abuse of education by drastically confusing the respective roles of teacher and pupil. This grotesque approach has not descended out of a clear blue sky. More profoundly and devastatingly, for several decades the entire education establishment has gone along with the benighted belief that pupils should usurp the authority of teachers in the classroom itself’ Melanie Phillips, Daily Mail
Wow. Go Melanie.
Both teachers and young people want to go to/work in a stimulating and effective institution. Student voice helps those two groups to work together to do just that.
Schools that have effective student voice also have empowered, effective and vocal teachers. The two are not mutually exclusive. Student voice is not about ‘pupil power’, but about a school’s ethos and culture, and young people benefit when they are part of it.
________
We’ll be writing to the NASUWT to suggest a more measured approach this week.
