1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

DfE Consultation on disapplication of NC ICT in Sep 2012

Discussion in 'Computing and ICT' started by magic surf bus, Jan 19, 2012.

  1. magic surf bus

    magic surf bus Star commenter

  2. magic surf bus

    magic surf bus Star commenter

  3. I wonder how many turkeys will be voting for Christmas in this "consulation". If this isn't used as an excuse by financially-pressed Heads to get rid of ICT / make ICT "cross-curricula", I'll eat my weak-old chuddies.
    Got to get back to typing up my CV. I've always wanted to visit, live and work in Thailand ....
     
  4. Captain Obvious

    Captain Obvious New commenter

    I've chipped in my measured opinion. Better to say something than nothing at all.
     
  5. A very important document. Fill it in, everybody.
    An opportunity to remind DFE that, yes isn't Computing great, but not all can be "goats", some will be "sheep"
    a) there is still a place for taught "digital literacy" & multimedia courses
    b) these lowly "office skills" courses can lead to students getting a white collar job, rather than a manual one
    Don't be a turkey and vote for Christmas...
     
  6. robot1

    robot1 New commenter

    In the vast majority of cases, cross-curricular fails. At best it's a tick box exercise where departments 'do an audit' At worst its forgotten about completely. I do concede there may be one or two exceptions to this in the entire country. So some heads will drop ICT and hope for the best with a cross-curricular approach.
    I hope there is something in the Ofsted criteria where a school would get low marks if they were not doing I.T and digital literacy properly. This may make heads think twice about dropping it. If Ofsted ignore this like they have done in the past than than ICT as a department is indeed finished. How many schools where ICT was only an option at KS4 and were not covering the compulsory KS4 POS were punished? I don't know of any.
    So I guess our jobs are hanging by a thread. Yes there may be a need for a teacher to teach as small group GCSE computing (it's a niche subject and always will be!). But that will not support an entire department with a head of department and a number of teachers.

     
  7. On the downside, this is such a sad development for ICT in schools. A lot of hard working teachers will know very soon that they had better switch to Computing, or better still Maths, if they want to stay in education. I know of two schools in this area where ICT has moved to an option rather than all schools doing it and two where GCSE ICT has been scrapped and an option of OCR Computing put in its place, all from this coming September. Heads will not want to get rid of ICT as such, but they have difficult financial choices to make, and well, let's face it, it's become a sh 1tty subject in recent years and ICT can be made to appear as if it can be delivered across subjects - anyone who has been around a few years knows that this is a waste of time of course, but that isn't the point.
    On the upside, I'm retiring in September.
    TFFT.
     
  8. tjra

    tjra Occasional commenter

    There really are a lot of Drama-Llamas on these forums. The report doesn't say anywhere that it recommends ditching ICT or that it be taught cross-curricular. It says that from 2012-2014 schools are encouraged to be more creative with their application of ICT. This is a BLESSING and those of you who want to make ICT engaging and interesting should be jumping for joy. Those who are ringing the bell at the death of ICT seem to be those who are guilty for making it boring: if you want it to be a discrete, respectable, recognised subject then bloody make it so!
     
  9. At the risk of repeating myself, Heads are (and will increasingly be) using this as an opportunity to go down the cross-curricula route as well as getting rid of ICT now and introducing Computing, with ICT being slotted into subjects to give pupils their entitlement / ensure everything looks ticketyboo for ofstead. ICT teachers' jobs will therefore be lost. It isn't scare-mongering. It is already happening. I'm happy for you that everything is as sweet as a nut at your school.
     
  10. Well said, rattle!!!
     
  11. I'm sure you're right.
    But there must be some current examples of good practice in Cross Curricular ICT, but which schools are they, and what are they doing?
    Just interested.....
    PS: I have been asking this question widely for years, surely this year I will get a decent answer.....
     
  12. Having been on the receiving end I can confirm that there is some inspiring ICT plus lessons that leave a lot to be desired. The challenge of truly worthwhile CC ICT will be to stitch it together across a range of subjects, some of ehich might have less than enthusiastic ICT ambassadors in their departments. It is also going to be hard to audit for effectiveness beyond the tick box level.

    I am sure there is and will be some outstanding practice, but I haven't noticed much of it yet.
     
  13. robot1

    robot1 New commenter


    I think you are mistaken. This is what is does say:
    "The Expert Panel for the National Curriculum review has already recommended in its report 19 that ICT should be reclassified as part of the Basic School Curriculum, meaning that it would remain compulsory for schools to teach but that there would not be a statutory Programme of Study or Attainment Targets; and also that requirements should be established so that use of ICT becomes part of all National Curriculum subjects. "
    So the programme of study goes and other subjects have ICT embedded within them. If that isn't a green light to drop ICT and make it cross-curricular, I don't know what is. I am not saying all heads will drop ICT, but given the option some/many will.
    So according to you anyone with the ability to read the above quote and come to the same conclusion as me is not only a 'drama lama' but are also 'guilty of making the subject boring'.
    Please think before you post! It is possible for a teacher to be both good and have a different view to you.
     
  14. Captain Obvious

    Captain Obvious New commenter

    My basic feeling was:
    • Cross-curricular would not be helpful due to non-specialists not teaching the required skills
    • There needs to be variety of topics
    • Programming should be included, but needs to appeal to all
    • We can't lose sight of the general usefulness of Office software, particularly within a CS context (e.g. Project-based learning - planning/evaluating/documentation)
    • An ICT career is not for everyone, so general Office software skills still need to be relevant to multiple post-education contexts
    • Some form of assessment criteria is necessary to make the subject maintain itself and its importance to students and senior management (the grade chasers)
     
  15. Khashoggi

    Khashoggi New commenter

    There is an issue with the Expert Panel report in so much that the government will not be adopting it in its current format - this is one of the reasons why the new curriculum has been delayed. In an ideal world basic ICT skills would be delivered cross curricular, but as most of us have seen in the vast majority of cases this has not worked.
    If/when ICT (or IT) becomes part of the basic curriculum (and is therefore still compulsory) the only way to ensure that a cross curricular model will work is to embed ICT use into the PoS for all other subjects (including GCSE Specs). If it isn't, then you will end up with a very patchy coverage within your school depending on who your teacher is.
    There is still the question of ensuring that all teachers are actually fulfilling their obligations and teaching what is required of them, or whether they even have the skills to deliver the content. Who would want to be responsible for mapping, monitoring and potentially moderating work carried out by tens of separate teachers? It's bad enough doing it within your own faculty, let alone across the whole of the school.

     
  16. JaquesJaquesLiverot

    JaquesJaquesLiverot Established commenter

    But if ICT is removed from the National Curriculum, and levels are going, what is there to actually monitor? It's not quite the same as monitoring the cross-curricular delivery of a National Curriculum subject, because, presumably, there wouldn't be any compulsory content or reporting.
     
  17. Captain Obvious

    Captain Obvious New commenter

    And I think for those schools who go cross-curricular and end up with poorly implemented ICT with a lack of accountability for it Ofsted will have a field day. With schools coming under increasing pressure to be Good (or constantly improving), they can't assume everything will be fine under a cross-curricular model.
     
  18. The issue of monitoring / reporting continues to puzzle me. If NC Levels are going, then how will we measure progress in KS3? I cannot imagine that Ofsted will accept a system where different schools are using different masures. The NAACE draft proposal puts off the issue of assessment, saying it will be added to the final submission, but when is this due?
     
  19. "Who would want to be responsible for mapping, monitoring and potentially
    moderating work carried out by tens of separate teachers?"
    This was always the problem when cross-curricula was in vogue. I've never heard of any school or college that was able to do this. It's another one of those administrators-who-don't-teach wet dreams and a nightmare for the practical ones amongst us who are left to implement aforesaid wet dreams.
    "If NC Levels are going, then how will we measure progress in KS3?"
    NC levels were always a joke. They are so vague. You simply cannot measure progress between dissimilar units and one schools assessment could be completely different to another schools. NC levels were 10 years of rubbish.
    Assessment needs to be skills-based, unit by unit. There simply isn't the time in the working week to assess transferable skills of pupils in a way that it would be consistent across schools from Newcastle to Plymouth.
    What I really want from any new system is an acknowledgement that teachers only have a few hours a week at most to do all of whatever they devise. They can dream up whatever they want, but if there isn't the time to do it, then it will get bypassed.
     
  20. On "measuring" KS3 progress, I've never got this. When I go to LEA meetings, the advisors waffle on about measuring transferable skills, setting up little grids to measure each competance for each child, adding them up and then taking a view. Really? We get about 16 double lessons a year with each child in four blocks. We don't have the time to start trying to measure progress in the way that we are being asked. And besides, one school's definition of what e.g. contributes to a team' is going to differ from another school. Much more time is needed if this is what they want, and I mean whole days regularly out of school for moderation in areas and across the country. If we concentrated on anything other than skills in the time we are given each year, pupils would make less progress now that they are doing. My view is to make it a Functional KS3 program that measures skills for whatever packages the teachers at each school want to teach, and then assess skills relevant to each package. Stop try to measure airey fairy concepts when you are not prepared to give teachers the time to do it!
     

Share This Page