An ‘at‐risk’ curriculum for ‘at‐risk’ students? Special educational needs and disability in the new Australian Curriculum

The number of students who are ‘at risk’ including those with special education needs and or disabilities is increasing rapidly worldwide in all schools. This has prompted widespread debate regarding the impact of initiatives in Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting for this group of students. Teachers, parents and administrators need to have further information to enable them to contribute to the development of content, assessment and reporting processes in the curriculum that are inclusive, relevant, reliable and valid. This paper explores some of the issues and dilemmas raised by recent policy discussions regarding the inception of a first national Australian Curriculum. It draws purposively on literature relating to developments in England and Wales, where national curriculum provision has existed for over 25 years, as well as the responses of a group of stakeholders (teachers and leaders) from both England/Wales and Australian schools and settings. These data highlight both tension and opportunity in this area of work.     

‘Where are You?’ Giving Voice to the Teacher by Reclaiming the Private/Public Distinction

In a time of cultural pluralism and legitimation crisis (Habermas), there is an increasing uncertainty among teachers in Sweden about with what right they are fostering other people's children. What does it mean to teach ‘common values’ to the coming generation? How do teachers find legitimacy and authority for this endeavour, not as family members or as politicians, but as teachers? To respond to this uncertainty, the paper takes the public/private distinction as a starting‐point for rethinking the place of the school. Drawing on the work of Hannah Arendt and of Jan Masschelein and Maarten Simons, it argues that the school is an in‐between place—a place that transforms values into ‘common goods’ and turns fostering into a teaching matter. The overall purpose of the paper is to sketch out the consequences of this ‘in‐betweenness’ for what it means to find one's voice as a teacher in fostering the coming generation.     

‘Are we being de‐gifted,Miss?’ Primary school gifted and talented co‐ordinators’ responses to the Gifted and Talented Education Policy in England

Over a decade ago the UK government launched its gifted and talented education policy in England, yet there has been very little published research which considers how schools and teachers are interpreting and implementing the policy. By seeking the views of the gifted and talented co‐ordinators (For ease of reference, the term gifted and talented (G&T) co‐ordinator is used throughout the paper as a generic shorthand for the research participants who were either designated school gifted and talented co‐ordinators or teachers or head teachers with responsibility for policy implementation) with responsibility for addressing the requirements of the policy, the study reported in this paper explored how primary schools in England responded to the policy. Drawing on data gathered using questionnaires with a national sample of primary schools as well as follow‐up in‐depth interviews with a sample of G&T co‐ordinators, the authors report their findings. The study found that there was considerable unease about the concept of identifying and ‘labelling’ a group of pupils as ‘gifted and talented’. G&T co‐ordinators found it difficult to interpret the policy requirements and were responding pragmatically to what they considered to be required by the government. Curriculum provision for the selected group of gifted and talented pupils was patchy. The paper concludes by identifying a need for further professional development for teachers and by challenging the policy's over‐emphasis on identifying and labelling gifted and talented pupils. We posit whether the gifted and talented education policy would have been better introduced and enjoyed greater success by leaving the identification of pupils to one side and by placing greater emphasis on developing effective learning and teaching strategies instead.     

‘Do I have to spell it out?’ Dyslexia,Lexism, and an object of comparison

In this article I mount an attack on the problematic conceptions of literacy that lie behind the Standards and Testing Agency's 2015 Interim Teacher Assessment Frameworks at the End of Key Stage 2 and the Key Stage 2 English Grammar, Punctuation and Spelling Tests. I employ an object of comparison (a philosophical method), for attitudes towards literacy and dyslexics. I challenge current conceptions of the Othering of, and discrimination against, dyslexics. I argue for the concept of ‘Lexism’ as an alternative explanatory account for the existence of dyslexics.     

Are statisticians cold‐blooded bosses? a new perspective on the ‘old’ concept of statistical population

Spurred by recent writings regarding statistical pragmatism, we propose a simple, practical approach to introducing students to a new style of statistical thinking that models nature through the lens of data‐generating processes, not populations.     

Discussion of ‘are Statisticians Cold‐blooded Bosses? A New Perspective on the “Old” Concept of Statistical Population’ by Y. Lu and K. S. S. Henning

This articles argues in favour of a recently introduced approach to statistical inference which focuses on understanding the data generating process. A comprehensive example supports the discussion.     

‘Career and Money Aside,What's the Point of University?’ A Comparison of Students’ Non‐economic Entry Motives in Three European Countries

This paper explores students’ non‐economic motives for attending university. Drawing on the results of a tri‐national survey involving online questionnaires and email interviews with education students at English, German and Portuguese universities, it compares and discusses the extent to which the participants are motivated by a number of extrinsic and intrinsic factors. In contrast to certain other studies, the findings reveal a strong consensus across all three settings in relation to certain motivational elements—strong intrinsic desires for self‐improvement and low motivations driven by social pressures or seeing university as a default option. More pronounced national differences emerge, however, regarding motives to contribute to society and the appeal of the social dimension of university life. The paper interprets the similarities and differences revealed and considers a number of conclusions.     

The New Salford Sentence Reading Test (2012) and the Diagnostic Reading Analysis (2008) assess ‘inference’ – but what forms of inference do they test?

Several inference types serving distinct purposes are established in the literature on reading comprehension. Despite this highlighting that inference is a non‐unitary construct, reading tests tend to treat it as a single ability. Consequently, different tests can assess different inferential abilities. Professionals, knowing what is implicitly assessed in an assessment tool, can make informed decisions on test selection and take a critical approach to interpreting test outcomes. This article examines the inferential abilities assessed by the New Salford Sentence Reading Test and the Diagnostic Reading Analysis. Both are aimed at practitioners working with children of primary and secondary school age. Each takes inference to be a unitary construct. Qualitative analysis of the inferential questions in the tests revealed that they assess different forms of inference. The New Salford Sentence Reading Test predominantly assesses inferences requiring background knowledge. In contrast, the Diagnostic Reading Analysis requires inferences relying on textual evidence to a greater extent. The article concludes that it is reasonable to assert that the Diagnostic Reading Analysis is preferable to the New Salford Sentence Reading Test on the basis of test fairness and the consistency in sampling inferences types.     

I agree to sit next to you. Does that mean I like you? Measuring using the wrong tapeline – the lack of ‘Social Distance’ measures for inclusive school development and research – a review of the literature

This review provides an overview of definitions and measurements of ‘Social Distance’ and attitudes children without disabilities carry towards children with disabilities. Measures include explicit and implicit approaches but clearly, the ‘Bogardus Social Distance Scale’ (A Social Distance Scale, 1933, 14 May 2014) is the most used scale in research, yet it is outdated. For a deeper look into what impacts children's ‘Social Distance’ in inclusive school settings and in order to find measurable constructs, relevant attitude questionnaires are discussed. To bring long‐used measures and attitudes together, a comprehensive model of ‘Social distance’ is introduced. This model integrates the classical view on ‘Social Distance’ as interaction willingness with feelings associated with this interaction and includes attitudes children carry towards individuals and towards the group the interaction partner is believed to belong to. In summary, this paper shows the need for a more comprehensive and precise measure on how school children really engage with one another.     

‘Universal’ early education: Who benefits? Patterns in take‐up of the entitlement to free early education among three‐year‐olds in England

For over a decade, all three‐year‐olds in England have been entitled to a free part‐time early education place. One aim of this policy is to close developmental gaps between higher‐income and low‐income children. However, the success of the initiative depends on children accessing the places. Using the National Pupil Database, we examine all autumn‐born four‐year‐olds attending in January 2011, and ask whether they started attending when first eligible, in January 2010. One in five children did not access their free place from the beginning, and the proportion is much higher among children from families with persistently low incomes. We also find differences by ethnicity and home language, but these factors explain only a small share of the income gradient. We go on to explore associations between non‐take‐up and local area factors. In areas with higher child poverty rates, take‐up is lower overall, but the gap between low‐income and other families is smaller. There are also various associations between take‐up and local proportions of different provider types (maintained, private, voluntary, Sure Start). In particular, the voluntary sector seems to have more flexibility than maintained provision to offer places in January, and more success than private providers in reaching children from lower‐income backgrounds. The analysis also highlights how take‐up overall is relatively high and the gap by income level is smaller in areas with more Sure Start provision. This suggests that aspects of Sure Start facilitated access among low‐income families, and could perhaps be replicated as implementation of the free entitlement continues to be expanded.     

Do Pre‐entry Interventions such as ‘Aimhigher’ Impact on Student Retention and Success? A Review of the Literature

This paper reviews the potential impact of pre‐entry widening access interventions on student retention and success in higher education. It thus addresses two contemporary policy concerns: What is the impact of pre‐entry widening access interventions; and how can we improve student retention and success? A review of academic and practitioner literature finds limited research about the impact of pre‐entry interventions in general and very little on the impact of pre‐entry interventions on students' retention and success in higher education. A review of the research, however, identifies the importance of factors which pre‐entry interventions address: pre‐entry decision making, expectations about higher education and academic preparation. To date, however, the impact of pre‐entry interventions on retention in higher education has been largely ignored. Thus pre‐entry activities, such as Aimhigher, should be evaluated for their impact on student retention. The paper offers an outline evaluation framework, including evaluation topics and suggested key performance indicators to bridge this gap.     

Back to the future? A case study in changing curriculum and assessment: The story of the London Association for the Teaching of English’s Alternative ‘O’ Level English Language Paper

In the early 1950s, the London Association for the Teaching of English (L.A.T.E.) became increasingly concerned about the syllabuses and examination papers for GCE 'O' English Language and English Literature. Worried about the potentially adverse effects of the London Board's papers on children's learning, teachers' practice and curriculum design, L.A.T.E. worked with interested schools to draft, write and submit an alternative GCE syllabus and examination paper for 'O' Level English Language. This article is an account of that process, and its possible resonance for the subject community in the present day.