EMA Online Newsletter July 2009 NALDIC Briefing Paper on Dedicated Provision for EAL learners new to English ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In recent months, EAL specialist colleagues from across the country have reported an increasing demand to place newly arrived EAL learners with little or no English into dedicated provision. Indeed only a third of respondents to a recent EAL survey sponsored by the TDA felt that more provision took place within the classroom than outside it. This sort of dedicated provision takes place within schools as part of appropriate personalisation of the curriculum as well as away from schools , for example in regional centres similar in organisation to the Language Centres developed in the 1970s and 1980s. These Language Centres were established in many LEAs and were set up with money made available by the Home Office. English was taught in a decontextualised way and did not prepare pupils for the curriculum content of mainstream classrooms. Moreover, pupils were socially and linguistically isolated from their English-speaking peers and many pupils experienced a range of problems when they eventually entered mainstream primary and secondary schools. This paper aims to support and guide teachers and managers making dedicated provision for EAL learners new to English. It highlights the NALDIC principles for curriculum programmes for EAL beginners and also provides a framework for: a) considering the equalities implications for students and for teachers in making such provision (see Calderdale Report 1986) b) evaluating provision to ensure that where dedicated provision for EAL learners new to English is being considered, or even where it has already been implemented, that a full equality impact assessment is carried out. The briefing can be found at http://www.naldic.org.uk/docs/resources/documents/NALDICBriefingondedicatedprovisionforEA LlearnersDraft210609.pdf NALDIC welcomes feedback from members and others on the draft statement. Underachievement -----------------------Many readers will have noted an increase in the attention paid in the press to the issue of underachievement amongst ‘white working class’ pupils. Feedback from colleagues in schools has been that the high profile given to this legitimate concern over the past few years has made their work in schools all the more difficult. For example, it is not uncommon for colleagues to report that their work directed at supporting bilingual learners to acquire English as an additional language and to combat underachievement relating to specific minority ethnic groups has been undermined by comments that ‘It’s not these pupils we need to worry about, it’s white working class boys’ or similar. Readers may have been particularly concerned by the Comment piece in a recent TES (05.06.09) headlined ‘Stop the extra cash for ethnic minority pupils’. In this article, investigative journalist Fran Abrams, positions EMAG funding as a barrier to 'better race relations' and argues for its
abolition on the grounds that it fuels a notion 'that white pupils are falling behind because their teachers don't care enough'. As David Gillborn has noted elsewhere, media commentators frequently ‘present ill-founded prejudices as if they were brave facts, working against political correctness’. This article and many others like it perpetuate a number of myths and half truths that it may be useful to counter. 'White working class pupils are ‘the most disadvantaged group’ of pupils and nothing is done to help them' It is true that White British pupils in receipt of free school meals, and most especially boys, perform less well in examinations at the end of statutory schooling than most other groups. This is a benefit of the increasingly sophisticated methods of analyzing pupil attainment by variables. It is clearly unacceptable that only 30% of White British boys whose families are in receipt of Free School Meals attained 5 A*-C (DCSF, 2008) compared to over 60% of non FSM White British boys. However there are a number of less well known points that need to be made about these figures. Firstly, FSM is a proxy for economic disadvantage and is not in any way equivalent to ‘working class’. In fact White British pupils in receipt of FSM made up only 10% of White British pupils sitting GCSE examinations in 2008 (DCSF, 2009 ) The 90% of White British pupils who were not in receipt of FSM ensured that White British pupils as a whole remain one of the top performing ethnic groups in schools at GCSE. The only groups who consistently achieve more highly than White British pupils as a whole are Chinese and Indian heritage pupils. So far from being the most disadvantaged pupils, the vast majority of White British pupils achieve well at GCSE. The latest full analysis of attainment statistics across key stages (DCSF, 2007) includes the following headlines: All the minority ethnic groups within the Black category and pupils of Mixed White and Black Caribbean heritage are consistently below the national average across Key Stages 1, 2 and 4. Bangladeshi and Pakistani pupils perform below the national average across all Key Stages Pupils with English as a First Language perform better than pupils with a language other than English as their First Language in each stage of education The lower performance of pupils learning EAL is despite the contribution made to the overall figures of high achieving bilingual pupils from Indian and Chinese ethnic backgrounds. A second misleading assertion is that that there are no initiatives to support White British pupils who are socially and economically disadvantaged. FSM eligibility is a significant factor in funding to schools and there are also a number of programmes which are aimed particularly at schools in areas of generally high economic disadvantage. There are also targeted programmes aimed at helping these pupils. 'Ethnic and linguistic minority pupils and their teachers are to blame for white underachievement' In many of the comments there is an implicit, and more frequently now, explicit assumption that lower achievement of White British pupils in receipt of FSM is the ‘fault’ of pupils from minority ethnic and linguistic backgrounds or ‘PC’ teachers. Evidence presented for this belief includes ‘common sense’ notions that pupils learning EAL ‘take up teacher’s time because they don’t understand English’ and that recognition of cultural and linguistic diversity is only of benefit to pupils from minority ethnic backgrounds and systematically excludes White British pupils. As David Gillborn has noted ‘this discourse of white victimology is incredibly dangerous. It presents white people as victims of race equality measures. The idea that white and minoritised youth could both excel in the same school system is just not considered. So talk of race equality shifts from being about social justice and is now recast as a kind of competitive threat to white
people. And this, effectively, warns all of us in education to make sure that white kids remain well taken care of’. NALDIC has argued, and continues to do so, that supporting the achievement of pupils learning English as an additional language requires time, support and funding which is equivalent to that provided to students to study any other subject in preparation for fruitful futures and working lives. Research suggests that a lack of a considered approach is not helpful to pupils who are becoming bilingual. However there is no evidence that ‘ad-hoc’ integration, assessment and curriculum arrangements for learners acquiring EAL is harmful to other learners. In addition, it should be recognized that integration into our society involves an understanding that our society is (and will remain) linguistically and culturally diverse. Education within a multilingual and multicultural environment is thus an ideal preparation for British and global society. Cutting EMAG funding is not the answer. Promoting educational opportunity and social inclusion for all our children may well be. As Frank Monaghan recently wrote in response to the TES article, 'When it comes to disadvantage, these children are all in the same boat. Taking one oar away will not help them get anywhere further or faster'. For further information see DCSF (2009) DCSF: Attainment by Pupil Characteristics, in England 2007/08 Available online at http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000822/index.shtml DCSF (2007) National Curriculum Assessment, GCSE and Equivalent Attainment and Post- 16 Attainment by Pupil Characteristics, in England 2006/07 Available online at http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000759/SFR38-2007.pdf Gillborn, D (2009) Whatever happened to institutional racism? How the 'White working class' were made into the new race victims Available online at http://www.naln.ac.uk/en/conference/keynote-presentations/professor-david-gillborn.cfm Editor’s note: - We are very grateful to NALDIC for this contribution to the debate on achievement. EMA Online, whilst having a specialist concern about black and ethnic minority achievement is committed to good achievement by all pupils regardless of colour, ethnicity, class, gender or disability. Any debate about the relative achievement of different groups of pupils in our society risks being used by some people with entrenched positions based on prejudice and so it is important that those working with black and ethnic minority pupils are well informed of all the issues, know about the potential misuse of statistics and retain an objective commitment to good progress by every child in every school. White working class conference -------------------------------------Karamat Iqbal from Birmingham whose contribution on white working class achievement that led indirectly to the preceding contribution has alerted us to a conference to be held at the National Exhibition Centre near Birmingham on the 21st September 2009 which will address the challenge of how to address perceived underachievement. Details are available at http://www2.bgfl.org/bgfl2/convention/conference/conference.cfm?id=286 OFSTED inspections of schools from September 2009 --------------------------------------------------------------During the past academic year OFSTED have been trying out versions of a new evaluation schedule for the inspection of all schools in England. Details have, up to now, been kept under wraps but large number of schools have been evaluated under the new scheme and the latest, almost final, version has now been released into the public domain. You can download it at http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/Ofsted-home/Forms-and-guidance/Browse-allby/Other/General/Evaluation-schedule-of-judgements-for-schools-inspected-under-section-five-
of-the-Education-Act-2005-from-September-2009/(language)/eng-GB If that seems a lot of gobbledygook to type in just put the number 090098 into the search box on the home page of the OFSTED web site at http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/ There has been much press comment about the more rigorous evaluation of attainment and overall outcomes but there are many details that have special implications of everyone concerned with the progress of black and ethnic minority pupils in our schools. A key thread throughout the new evaluation schedule is the ‘Every Child Matters’ agenda. Taken to an extreme conclusion this would imply that if there were one child in a school whose needs were not met and who did not make progress, then the school cannot therefore be effective. One might argue that a hospital cannot be other than inadequate if (say) diabetic patients were not helped much even if the treatment for everyone else was marvellous. Within the new schedule there a number of areas where judgements must be made as inadequate if particular groups of children ‘miss out’. The following commentary is the interpretation of the draft framework made by your editor. Outcomes Attainment, progress and achievement: Attainment is about standards and is judged against national (not local authority) statistics. If there are ‘sizeable groups’ of pupils in a school who perform poorly then attainment will be judged low regardless. Progress is linked with pupils learning so statistical data such as contextualised value added figures inform the judgement. However if particular groups of pupils make too little progress then the judgement will be inadequate. There is a separate judgement on the learning and progress of pupils with learning difficulties and disabilities. Finally there is the overall and contentious judgement on achievement which combines both that of attainment and progress. While there is special consideration for some special schools where attainment will never be significant, for all others the implication is that for achievement to be good, then attainment must also be good. The only exception will be that average attainment is acceptable only if learning and progress are outstanding. This is the section of the schedule that has been criticised in some quarters because it is putting more emphasis on the achievement of certain standards or key indicators (e.g. five or more grades in GCSE at grade C or better including maths and English). It is argued that schools in less privileged areas will find it difficult to secure a judgment of good achievement Other judgments included in Outcomes concern pupils safety, behaviour, healthy lifestyles, contribution to the school and wider community, attendance, developing work place and other skills for future economic well being and pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development. In the sections on pupils’ safety, attendance and economic well being, judgements of inadequate will be triggered if there a significant minority of pupils causing concern. In making their overall judgement on outcomes, inspectors are instructed that it must be inadequate if any one contributory judgement on achievement, feeling safe, behaviour, healthy lifestyles, contributing to the community, economic well being, spiritual /moral / social and cultural development is inadequate. Of this list three could be inadequate if, for example, EAL or a recognised ethnic minority group of pupils gave cause for concern. Provision This part of the schedule covers teaching / assessment, the curriculum and care, guidance and support. In all of these areas a failure to take account of and support the needs of particular groups of pupils means that an inadequate judgement would be triggered. Leadership and management (L&M) The third part of the schedule covers L&M of teaching and learning, governance, engagement with parents / carers, effective partnerships, promoting equal opportunity and tackling discrimination, safeguarding, promotion of community cohesion and achieving value for money. Failing to take account of particular groups of parents, ignoring the performance or participation
of particular groups of pupils, failing to understand the religious, ethnic or socio economic factors of the context of the school or failing to realise outcomes for particular groups of pupils are issues that will again trigger inadequate judgements. The Early Years Foundation Stage and the Sixth Form. If either of these is appropriate there are additional sections in the school report and judgement schedule. The thread of inclusion runs through both sections. For the Early Years Foundation Stage there is emphasis on meeting the needs of every child with no group or individual being disadvantaged. In the sixth form schedule unacceptable variation in the progression of different groups of students or failing to promote equality and diversity will mean inadequate judgements. Overall effectiveness This overall judgement incorporates Outcomes and Capacity for Improvement. A school will be inadequate if any one of the following is graded inadequate: outcomes, capacity for sustained improvement, promoting equal opportunities and tackling discrimination, safeguarding and key aspects of provision Implications for pupils who are black, from ethnic minorities or use English as an additional language The new schedule is very clear about inspectors being alert to the way that particular groups of pupils receive appropriate educational provision and whether or not they make good progress. This is this a spotlight on pupils who may well be in minority numbers in a school. The focus is on every child and that it is the school which is responsible to ensure that every child succeeds. It will be a tall order but OFSTED is uncompromising in its embracing of the Every Child Matters agenda. Provisional versions of this revised schedule have been used in many inspections this academic year and some schools in authorities such as Leicestershire and Warwickshire have been involved. There are other important changes and senior managers will find they have much more contact with inspectors, visiting lessons for paired observations and sitting in on inspectors meetings. They will also help shape the issues for improvement that arise from the inspection. Another noticeable change will be the increased number of lessons that will be directly inspected. This will inevitably reduce the number of meetings during an inspection; more evidence must come from what is seen in classrooms and from the school self evaluation. It will be important for schools to ensure that their evidence and evaluation of all inclusion issues are visible and well summarised. Class room based research -------------------------------Ginny Burfield from Suffolk has provided us with information about the research study of a colleague, Frank Elliott, who was interested in the way that speakers of a foreign language might affect the learning of other novice pupils learning the same language. The context was a GCSE Spanish group and Frank Elliott concluded that the interaction can be positive. EAL pupils are of course in the reverse context but the finding in Suffolk may chime with the arguments put forward by Pauline Gibbons at the NALDIC conference. (See June 2009 EMA Online newsletter at http://www.emaonline.org.uk/index.cfm?p=resources,show_res&rid=498&item=pd ). The contribution from Frank Elliot has been uploaded onto the EMA Online web site at http://www.emaonline.org.uk/ema/index.cfm?p=resources,show_res&rid=497&item=pd It would be entirely appropriate for EMA Online to carry more of such examples of action research and we would encourage readers of the newsletter to use the web site to communicate with colleagues having similar professional interests.
World Language Books --------------------------The current discount code for any EMA Online reader wishing to purchase from World Language Books in July 2009: promowlb63982 Resources may be found at http://www.worldlanguagebooks.com/ Belonging – A Runnymede Trust project ----------------------------------------------Belonging is a project designed to enable young people to explore intercultural dialogue. Devised by Manifesta in association with the Runnymede Trust, the project organized a series of video workshops in suburban locations with young people from a diverse range of ethnic backgrounds in London (Newham), Lisbon (Casal da Boba) and Paris (20th arrondissement). Focusing on themes around migration, identities and the making of new communities, Belonging explored how young people talk about belonging - how migration over time shapes communities, and how young people understand their identities and relationships to each other while having roots and backgrounds related to more than one place. Two experienced teachers and curriculum writers, Professor Chris Gaine and Cristina Bennett, devised lesson plans for Citizenship, English, Geography and History based around the films. Each lesson plan uses some of the films as well as information about the areas in the suburbs of London, Paris and Lisbon that form the backdrop for them. The learning and teaching principles that underlie all the lessons in the Belonging series are derived from the QCA National Curriculum cross-curriculum dimensions, global dimension key concepts, and personal, learning and thinking skills. Web site links are below. http://curriculum.qca.org.uk/key-stages-3-and-4/cross-curriculum-dimensions/index.aspx http://www.dfid.gov.uk/pubs/files/dev-global-dim.pdf http://curriculum.qca.org.uk/key-stages-3-and-4/skills/plts/index.aspx For each lesson, specific learning intentions are included; these are directly linked to the learning outcomes for each single lesson, as well as for each sequence of subject specific lessons. For more information visit www.runnymedetrust.org/projects/belonging/teachers.html We are grateful to Vastiana Belfon from Real Histories Directory, The Runnymede Trust, 7 Plough Yard, Shoreditch, London EC2A 3LP Tel: 020 7377 9222 Fax: 020 7377 6622 for telling us of this project. Other contact details are: Email: realhistories@runnymedetrust.org or web site at www.realhistories.org.uk Situations Vacant -------------------Subscribers who have elected to receive News and Information about EMA Online, as opposed to the Newsletter, will have now been notified recently on two occasions of vacancies in two local authorities. This separate emailing list, to which many subscribers to this newsletter also belong, seemed to be the best medium for circulating the vacancies communicated to us. If you want to join this second emailing list, please log on to the web site www.emaonline.org.uk and change your profile accordingly. We can help if you get into difficulty or have forgotten your password. Meanwhile those of you who have some responsibility for recruitment, why not also send us the details to circulate? We are not asking for any financial contribution and we will just do our best to put the advert out in time. Targeting advertisements at the right community is key as any
marketing guru will tell you. So if the post has a specific remit for black, ethnic minority or EAL pupils students – your next employee might well be subscribed to EMA Online already. Rest and recreation ----------------------EMA Online extends best wishes to you for the forthcoming vacation and trusts that it will be refreshing for you. Normally there is no newsletter published in August but new materials will be posted on the site as they are communicated to us. Special thanks this month are due to NALDIC, Ginny Burfield and the Runnymede Trust for the articles submitted. Please send contributions for the September 2009 newsletter to ema@bgfl.org or use the feedback option on the website. Doug Masterton EMA Online web site manager