Only selected stakeholders get chance to influence draft ICT Programme of Study
The Department for Education has handed over responsibility for the draft ICT Programme of Study for the new ICT curriculum to the British Computer Society (BCS) and the Royal Academy of Engineering (RAEng).
These two organisations will lead on the development of curriculum work for all pupils in key stages 1 to 4 – and they are giving selected, invited stakeholders just one week to respond to its draft programme. The schools community is not included.
On September 18 the DfE signed a memorandum of understanding with BCS and RAEng stating: "It is essential that the Programme of Study is developed in association with and has 'buy-in' from key stakeholders across the sector." They will have to move quickly. The draft programme has to be submitted to the DfE by the October 23. The 'official' version will be published early in 2013 for public consultation.
More information can be found on the EdFutures wiki. The wiki also reveals that the collection of organisations behind the drive for curriculum change – the BCS, RAEng, Naace (advisers and consultants), ITTE (teacher educators), CAS (Computers and Schools), NextGen (industry) and Vital (teacher educators) – have found a very high level of consensus. (Apparently the group also includes three secondary computer science teachers, two university computer science academics and three teacher educators, two of them primary.)
'Digital literacy' an early casualty
It seems the notion of "digital literacy" has been an early casualty. This is how the wiki contributor describes the development: "To my great surprise we made significant progress in reaching a shared (I think unanimously) view about the key high level areas that needed to be included.
"Fundamental to achieving this was moving away from using some of the terminology that has caused so much confusion and disagreement in the discussions of the ICT curriculum over the last few years (eg digital literacy). Instead we went for a three strand approach: Fundamentals; Application; Implications.
"We then proceeded to debate our views on the purposes and aims of ICT. The importance of ICT being inspiring and creative was emphasised, as was the critical need for the impact of ICT on all disciplines to be recognised and thus built into the PoS for all the other subjects. We talked in quite a lot of detail about the specific 'elements' that should be taught at KS1 and KS2 – and again there was a high level of agreement.
"We spent a little less time on KS3 due to the pragmatics (people needed to leave!). There was some concern expressed about there being a PoS at KS4 – some members of the group felt very strongly that the ICT PoS shouldn't cover KS4 because of the realities of how that might work given that the main drivers at KS4 are the national exams (currently GCSEs)."
The group now has its work cut out to get its draft programme ready to share with selected stakeholders by October 1. Respondents will get just a week (until 12 noon on October 9) to make their views known (they are advised "block time in your diary"). Of course there will be the opportunity for responses to the DfE publication consultation but the wiki makes it clear that the important moment to wield influence is right now. That opportunity is not extended to schools and teachers.
EdFutures wik
This is a revised version of the original article following clarification from Peter Twining that consultation on the draft programme of study is not open (see below)
The thought of industry representatives creating a curriculum for teaching in schools is for me even more infuriating than having examination bodies effectively imposing curricula on schools through trite qualification specifications. Some might welcome this and say, "Yes, let's have accountants and statisticians creating the mathematics curriculum and novelists and journalists creating the English curriculum". Not I... Doing a thing is not the same as studying a thing. Those who are good at a thing are not necessarily the best people to support the study of that thing for those who are not good, or don't have an apptitude, for that thing. You end up with programmes of study that aim to advance those who have an aptitude for the thing (there is nothing wrong with this in itself) but do not support those that do not have an apptitude.
This is not the right approach for statutory subjects where we expect every child to be able to achieve certain standards. This is compounded if a programme of study is written with assumption that every person teaching it has an apptitude for the thing as well (eg a point I noted having tried to explain binary notation and boolean logic to primay ICT co-ordinator colleague).
I'm pleased that Merlin did manage to mention Naace, which as the ICT association is battling on to get the voice of teachers and schools heard. I hope that practising educators get heard and not just those with the loudest voices and a passionate interest in the debate. Sorry Peter.. I also agree with Bob that many schools will lose sight (or take longer to see) that the internet, personal devices and social media have changed the way that learning takes place for all of us in the 3rd Millennium. These schools may be able to get their pupils to do well in final exams but they will not be preparing them for life in the real world...
I assume it is the timetable for the National Curriculum review which is driving this. Thanks for the clarification though Peter,,, too have been anxious about the "Schmidt" influence on the ICT curriculum in schools and especially in the early key stages. ICT will be a compulsory National Curriculum subject and we must not forget that. It is vital we get this right!
When it comes to Computer Science I attended the launch of the Computing at Schools Network of Excellence launch at Manchester University last night (fittingly the Turing University) and was inspired by the stories already emerging from the fast developing networks of schools and Computer Science Departments. I have every faith that this aspect of the ICT curriculum is in good hands. As for the NC ICT, I am a little concerned that the ICT teachers (especially primary) and indeed the pupil voice (digital leaders?) will not be heard for the drafting of the PoS and consultation, but feel confident that Bill Mitchell at BCS will endeavour to ensure all stakeholders will get a hearing.
However, my main anxiety is for what I consider the biggest issue which will not be covered by the ICT National Curriculum or the Computer Science issue and that is the use of technology to enhance learning for all pupils across all subjects. For me this is the overriding issue and biggest challenge. I think that is where the newly established teaching schools and the remaining ITTE Higher Education providers should really focus their attention.
Secondly, the short time for feedback on the first draft of the ICT PoS reflects the timescale that the BCS and RAEng have been given for pulling together a draft ICP PoS for the DfE - the MoU with the DfE was signed on the 18th September and they have to have delivered a draft to the DfE by the 23rd October. The DfE will then review and no doubt revise the draft that BCS/RAEng submit, and there will then be a full public consultation in 2013.
So this first review is an opportunity to influence the very early draft, prior to review by the DfE and then a full public consultation. BCS and RAEng are at pains to get stakeholder input and buy-in. If you have been following my views on the emerging debate about the ICT curriculum over the last few months you will know that I have been pretty critical of the hard Computer Science push, which I thought was inappropriatley overshadowing the larger issue of preparing digitally competent citizens.
I am currently feeling much more comfortable that a sensible balance will be achieved in the BCS/RAEng draft PoS - and the shift away from talking about Computer Science, IT and Digital Literacy was fundamental to that progress being made in my view. Too many people have too many vested interests tied up with the terminology (myself included). I for one am very happy with the move to Foundations, Application and Implications as the three core strands within the ICT PoS ... PeterT