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 education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

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

    Dismiss Notice


Discussion in 'Primary' started by padavid10, Feb 6, 2012.

  1. padavid10

    padavid10 New commenter

    Just a pondering really. I found my old Year 9 maths book the other day and, on flicking through it, found very little marking and certainly nothing beyond ticks for right answers. I'm a fairly capable mathematician and took it through to a-level even without this detailed feedback.
    I'm wondering what studies have been done in to the impact of detailed teacher marking? Does anyone have any links to facts or is this simply something that teachers spend many hours doing without a true necessity? Would simply glancing at books to get a feel for understanding of the class and a well done at the bottom get just as much progress as detailed marking?
    I'm aware this may have some issues regarding self-esteem and drive of pupils but want to know if there have been full studies in to the impact.
  2. nick909

    nick909 Star commenter

    Would be highly interested too. Marking in my primary school books mainly involved the excitement of wondering whether my worked would merely be ticked or have the much sought after embellishment of a "Good", "Very Good" or "Excellent". Or, on the other hand, the dreaded "See me"! Given that I've managed perfectly well to post-grad level without constant written feedback (although, ironically, I can't move for the stuff nowadays!)
    I'd be interested too see if a study had been carried out where teachers only had to do minimal marking yet allowed a cursory look through the books to determine future planning, meaning the time saved could be used more resourcefully in planning great lessons and having the energy to skip around throughout a lesson to address any issues.
  3. Not sure that took place in my school at all!! However, we might perceive that it didn't hold us back but could it have excelled us further? And what about the other children who didn't go on to become graduates? Could a higher level of feedback (which I believe leads to greater engagement of children with their own learning) led to them taking a different path in life? Unanswerable I know but an interesting discussion!
  4. padavid10

    padavid10 New commenter

    It is of course an interesting argument the 'think how well I could have done' one but I'm wondering how measurable many of the changes over the last 30 years to education have been. I can fairly safely say that they've lead to an increased stress and pressure on teachers but are children measurably cleverer for them? The one thing our job should be about is teaching children, so are the stress causers for teachers (marking, planning, observations, OFSTED, SATs) actually making children smarter? Is there a measurable increase in the number of children leaving school literate and numerate now than there was before the days of the National Curriculum and OFSTED?
    If not for a measuarable difference for children then why do we do it? I could well be looking at the world through rose coloured, anecdotal glasses but I seemed to have a lot more time for enjoyment in school than the children I teach today.
  5. nick909

    nick909 Star commenter

    I think it can be pretty well argued that standards haven't risen since Ofsted's inception, which given that this is their very raison d'etre would indicate what my students would probably call an 'epic fail'.
  6. padavid10

    padavid10 New commenter

    So why do we as a society continue to buy in to things that make life harder but not better?
  7. I think all of this stuff has accumulated... huge marking expectation, huge planning expectation, no relying on working through the maths text book, constant target setting, learning objectives, success criteria, random drop in observations, uncle Tom Cobley etc...
    AND .. Having constant changes to curriculum means we all spend ages reinventing the wheel... All of that effort spent getting to grips with the strategies has been wasted.
    Strangely there are still people teaching! Bit like boiling a frog by starting with cold water and heating it up gradually I suppose.

    But in the 70s - we all learned to read and write... in classes of 36. With the ocassional "very good" and a gold star. And our teachers managed to cope without a photocopier...how did they do it?! I'm sure literacy rates can't have changed that much... sadly they are probably worse.
    I am incredibly frustrated by how much paper I waste daily. And I p/c the minimum and use in school texts as much as I can get away with. My HT doesn't want us to even do ready made reading comprehensions. They have to be related to topic. I don't mind... but it can take ages... and usually means yet more photocopying.
    As for marking? arrgh... Last yr I had 35 in my class nuff said.

Share This Page