Abstract
Abstract In 1989, a national questionnaire survey of 901 primary teachers was undertaken by the Leverhulme Primary Project team and published in Research Papers in Education (Wragg et al., 1989). A follow‐up survey was conducted in 1991, with a sample size of 433 teachers in 131 schools. Teachers were asked on both occasions how competent they felt to teach the National Curriculum introduced by the 1988 Education Act with their existing subject knowledge. In 1989, whether results were analysed by school size, age of teacher, sex or age group taught, the rank order was similar. Teachers saw themselves as most competent in English and mathematics. Science, music and technology were rated lowest. In 1991, they still perceived themselves to be most competent in English and mathematics but science was elevated to third from eighth place. Music and technology, however, were ranked the lowest, as previously. Within subjects, science and technology show general improvements in personal competence whereas in English and mathematics the trend is to perceive these subjects to be more difficult to teach. Most teachers declared their priorities for future in‐service training (INSET) as being in computers, information technology (IT) and the humanities. National assessment and testing was applied formally and publicly to year‐2 children at the end of key stage 1 during the summer of 1991. The questionnaire was thus revised to obtain information of teachers' experience with this process. The quality and nature of INSET and support given to teachers in relation to national testing, while geographically variable, was found to be generally lacking, with school and class routines substantially disrupted, and a preoccupation with assessment tending to drive the curriculum. There were increased pressures on time, increase in workload and evidence of high stress levels on the part of teachers. Year‐2 children were substantially unaffected by the experience of National Curriculum assessment, although younger ones, according to teachers and heads, were neglected during the assessment period. Teachers in general were not opposed to the National Curriculum, but concerns about national assessment were dominant. Partly this is due to the change process itself and partly to procedural and structural difficulties encountered by teachers in some subject‐specific areas and in conducting national assessment. The preferred assessment model itself in the eyes of teachers requires a reappraisal.
Keywords
Related Publications
The Perceptions of Primary School Teachers of Online Learning during the COVID-19 Pandemic Period: A Case Study in Indonesia
This study explores the perceptions of primary school teachers of online learning in a program developed in Indonesia called School from Home during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Data ...
Teachers' Sense of Efficacy and the Organizational Health of Schools
This study examined the relationships between 2 carefully specified dimensions of teacher efficacy (general and personal teaching efficacy) and aspects of a healthy school clima...
Like lightning in a bottle: attempting to capture the pedagogical excellence of successful teachers of black students<sup>1</sup>
Abstract Despite the dismal academic outlook for black students in urban schools, some teachers are capable of helping black students attain academic and cultural success. These...
From Preparation to Practice: Designing a Continuum to Strengthen and Sustain Teaching
This paper was written to stimulate discussions and debate about what a professional learning continuum from initial preparation through the early years of teaching could be lik...
Foxfire Grows Up
For more than twenty years, students at Rabun Gap High School, a conservative, traditionally organized public school in Appalachian Georgia, have published Foxfire books and mag...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1992
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 53-78
- Citations
- 90
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1080/0267152920070104