Are you a low achiever? How do you know? In what context? Compared to whom?

In fact, what does it actually mean?

 

Usually it means you don’t do so well when measured against whatever the current measurement system is. As I write, it’s called age-related expectations. Well, I’ve just turned 70; I wonder what my age-related expectations are. Doddering, dribbling, dementia’d Tory Brexiteer anti-woke Mail-reading rich misogynist? Well, against these age-related expectations I’m a complete and utter failure. Ah, but hang on a minute, if I changed the criteria I could suddenly become a high achiever. Hah!

 

When a child enters the school system and turns from a child into a “pupil”, they immediately start to be measured against the set of age-related expectations that the government has so thoughtfully provided for them. If they don’t match these expectations, then, uh-oh, they are “failing” (or any of the euphemisms used to register this, such as “emerging” or “less able”). It’s unlikely that any child will be great at hitting all of them, so nearly all children will experience “failure” at some point, which is unpleasant and demotivating. Especially when some of your peers are demonstrably “succeeding” and being praised for it.

 

Then, any child who seems a long way off from matching these arbitrary criteria could end up being given an “SEND” diagnosis, which theoretically should open the gate to extra support provision. But here we need to ask the question this support – what exactly is it meant to support the child to do?  If it is meant to nudge the child towards matching  the age-related expectations (you know, the ones the child didn’t “achieve” before), then we need to ask – why? Are these expectations appropriate for this child?

 

So perhaps it might be useful to look at this a different way. Instead of nudging, cajoling, even forcing children to meet these expectations, why not find out what individual children are good at, and set a different set of criteria to measure their learning and therefore their progress against, which acknowledges, legitimises and celebrates their abilities and strengths? Hang on, isn’t this what happens in special schools?

 

The unpleasant smell in the room when discussing the “gap” in achievement is called “differentiation”. This is where pupils who don’t fit the age-related expectations model are still measured against it, except they have to be called “low achievers” so they can be given “easier” routes to meeting the same criteria. But how does this help, or even address the fundamental issue, which is one of not discovering children’s individual talents and interests or recognising differences in, for example, neurodiversity, and then designing an appropriate curriculum for that child? Teachers are endlessly inventive and do their best to treat pupils as individuals, but are only enabled to do this within the prevailing governmental orthodoxy. Plus, of course, the external tyranny colloquially known as “Ofsted”.

 

In this context, I wonder what education would look like if teachers designed it? Would age-related expectations still even be a thing?

 

Just saying.

 

Max Fishel

Max is currently a member of pdnet, and governor of  a mainstream primary school. He is Member of the Diversity and Inclusion Committee for u3a  and attends and contributes to various All Party Parliamentary Groups focussing on Disability and Education. He has 40 years experience of the State education sector, most recently as assistant Headteacher in a special school, and lead for a team of Specialist Advisory teachers for physical Disability. He also performs stand-up spoken word poetry and is a musician.

 

All  blogs represent the views solely of the named author, and not those of the Fabian Education Policy Group or the wider Fabian Society