|
Ever since the launch of the literacy hour,
in combination with a national curriculum and a strong emphasis
on league tables and achieving targets, there has been a debate
around whether creativity, and hence education standards,
are being damaged.
Key issues
In 2006, the Guardian reported that Creative Partnerships (CP) celebrated its fourth anniversary
in autumn 2006 with a positive endorsement from Ofsted of
the programme's effectiveness in schools. In a report, inspectors
said that the experience of working alongside creative practitioners
helped pupils develop personal and social skills, encouraged
them to be more risk-taking and had a beneficial effect on
their literacy, numeracy and ICT skills.
Ofsted sampled 36 schools from CPs first phase. Inspectors
found "good creative approaches and positive attitudes" by
school leaders, teachers and creative practitioners, including
writers, environmental designers, entrepreneurs, artists and
performers. Most pupils involved in the projects "displayed
some of the attributes of creativity" through initiatives
that developed improvisation, risk-taking and resilience.
Inspectors also judged CPs to have made a significant contribution
to the government's Every Child Matters agenda.
From CPs beginnings, the £140 million programme has snowballed,
with creative work spreading into every subject area and leading,
in some cases, to a rewriting of the curriculum.. At least
545,000 young people, 50,000 teachers and 2,500 schools have
benefited, CP claims, and more than 4,500 creative practitioners
have helped to deliver over 5,000 projects.
The report from Ofsted is the latest of four new pieces of
independent research which gives CPs an "evidence base", says
Mr Collard, from which to argue its case as its bids for government
funding beyond 2008. Reports concur that in schools where
CP works, not only does it work well but standards go up.
However, Ofsted also has some criticisms of CPs: the report
indicates that it does not work in every school. Some programmes
were less successful when school aims were "imprecise" and
inspectors say some schools need to be more rigorous in linking
CP projects to their school improvement plans. The contribution
of CPs was sometimes "insufficiently tracked overall". Pupils'
starting points were "insufficiently identified", and sometimes
in arts subjects "creativity was assumed when it was not necessarily
evident".
When it comes to creativity, the inspectors steer clear of
defining what creativity means in a school context but they
are critical of the fact that "generally pupils were unable
to transfer the skills learned in CPs programmes to other
aspects of their work." Standards, nevertheless, do appear
to group when children are engaged and motivated. Ofsted's
findings in this respect are corroborated by a survey of CP
headteachers, carried out early in 2006 by the British Market
Research Bureau, in which 79% of heads felt that their schools'
involvement with CPs had led to an increase in attainment.
Asked about the worst aspects of CPs, 17% said too much paperwork
and form-filling and 12% said financial constraints.
A study by the National Foundation for Educational Research
on February 2006, of 13,000 young people involved in CP, also
found evidence of raised achievement. Young people who had
taken part in CP activities were shown to outperform those
in their schools who had not.
(Guardian, 3 October 2006)
In June 2006, the TES reported that in the proposed key stage 3 national curriculum, for September
2008, the Qualifications
and Curriculum Authority (QCA) was trying to inject a
new emphasis on creativity and the need for pupil's to relate
to the world outside the classroom into the 11 to 14 curriculum.
In May 2006, the TES reported on a shift in the Zeitgeist
and discusses the QCA's Futures and Innovation Programme.
To read this article in full visit: www.tes.co.uk/search/story/?story_id=2240974
During May 2006, the literacy hour was all but abolished
in its original form, with primary teachers being told to
make their lessons more creative, using a variety of methods.
Research, by academics at York university, tracked the
attitudes of teachers in 50 schools, initially studied in
1992-94. One headteacher told researchers that the literacy and numeracy strategies cost teachers
their ability to work flexibly and creatively. "It's gone
full circle. Creativity and flexibility are being valued now,
and a lot of the constraints are being removed by the Government
because I think they've seen a lot was lost."
You can read the full report, Coming
Full Circle? The impact of New Labour's education policies
on primary school teachers' work, by Rosemary Webb
and Graham Vulliamy, at www.atl.org.uk
2003
In October 2003, The Times reported on an early years teaching experiment among some of
the most deprived children. The "enriched curriculum" had been in operation for three years and those who taught
it said their pupils were still strangers to boredom and lethargy.
The scheme was being evaluated by psychologists
at Queen's University in Belfast. The first 150 children on
the scheme were judged to be "extremely deficient in
oral language skills" when they started school at four.
After a year they were judged to be catching up their oral
skills to the norm for their age - faster than control groups
of a similar profile being taught in the traditional way.
After three years their literacy and numeracy was just as
good as others and - a vital plus - they were still keen to
learn.
The enriched curriculum is a play-based scheme aimed at selling
learning and discovery to small children. Listening, concentrating
and speaking are emphasised in turn. It is an almost seamless
continuation of nursery, with a lot of physical play outdoors
as well as small-scale play indoors.
With its syllabic singing, action rhymes and
games of pretend, the enriched curriculum is similar to pre-school
teaching in Finland, which is top of the European literacy
league and where formal teaching begins between six and seven.
The "enriched curriculum" is assessed and records
are kept but it is not assessed by tests. The breadth of experiences
that a child must have is outlined and is compulsory. The
key idea is to teach them without struggle or failure.
The Find it, promote it Qualifications and Curriculum Authority
website was the outcome of a three-year working party with
120 teachers. They investigated how they could develop pupils'
creativity through existing schemes of work and lesson plans.
The aim was to promote creativity across the curriculum.
A key finding was that pupils leapt ahead
in their learning when they had a chance to think and be
creative. They thrived on questioning, on connecting their
learning with their experiences and building on what they
already knew. They were motivated when they saw possibilities
in an activity and had time to explore, to play with ideas,
solve problems and work with others.
Where pupils had the chance to share their
thinking, reflect critically on what they were doing, get feedback
and develop their critical thinking skills, the quality of
their work soared. For more information, visit
www.ncaction.org.uk/creativity/
In
June 2003, an extra £70 million was announced for creative partnerships, which have enabled children
from 16 of England's most deprived areas to benefit from trips
to theatres, museums and galleries. The funding allowed the scheme to extend to a further 20 areas. Charles Clarke announced:
"Creativity isn't an add on. It must form a vital and
integral part of every child's experience of school. Research
has shown that, if it does, it can contribute to improved
learning and increased standards across the school as a whole."
At the same time the Qualifications and Curriculum
Authority launched a new website called Arts Alive! Ken Boston,
the authority's chief executive, said: "The arts are
a vital element of a broad and balanced curriculum and contribute
to pupils' creative, behavioural and academic development." See
www.qca.org.uk/artsalive
| 80px.gif)
