Guest post: Gove’s grammar test – political meddling as bad as it gets

Results suggest an improved overall performance in this year’s SATs tests, but Mary Meredith is not too happy about the grammar, punctuation and spelling test introduced by Michael Gove, suggesting it  has nothing to do with genuine standards and everything to do with politics…

Be honest, can you confidently answer this question?MM01It’s taken from the DfE’s sample KS2 ‘English grammar, punctuation and spelling test,’ for first assessment in 2016. There’s a KS1 version as well. These ominously dubbed ‘GAPS’ are designed to assess understanding of the new ‘essential knowledge’ in Gove’s revised and highly prescriptive 2014 primary curriculum.

The question does seem a tad tricky for a 10 or 11 year old, doesn’t it?

Mind you, it is the tenth question and they are supposed to “appear in order of difficulty, where possible.” So let’s have a look at the first…MM02 Reassured? No, I’m not either. And what’s with all of this decontextualized naming of parts anyway?

Well according to Appendix 2 of the revised primary curriculum, which lists the grammatical terms to be covered from Years 1 – 6, an emphasis on formal grammar instruction during the primary years will raise standards in writing and ensure learners are ‘secondary ready’:  “Explicit knowledge of grammar is very important, as it gives us more conscious control and choice in our language.”

We are led to believe that if pupils can understand and apply the correct grammatical terminology, they will become more “sophisticated” writers.

This is erroneous Daily Telegraph-pleasing opinion, stated as fact. However, we would be naïve to expect anything different from the Department – and especially in relation to English, about which anything Gove doesn’t know isn’t worth knowing.

It must also be remembered that the debate around grammar has always inflamed passions and policy in this area has tended to reflect changing attitudes in society rather than academic research. We have not served our children at all well in this regard.

The dominant view from the late 1960s was that “Most children cannot learn grammar.. and to those who can, it is of little value” (Thompson, 1969). Grammar instruction was seen as positively damaging – divisive and a shackle on the imagination. The pendulum began to swing the other way with the introduction of Labour’s National Literacy Strategy in 1997 and with that, ‘Grammar for Writing’. There is indeed some good evidence that ‘sentence combining’, widely used in the USA, is effective. Several studies, cited in Richard Hudson’s comprehensive review of grammar teaching, support a ‘surreptitious approach’: that is, minimal terminology underpinned by a clear theory of grammar. This is of course precisely what Alan Peat’s ubiquitous ‘Pocket App of Exciting Sentences’ offers us and, significantly, explains its popularity. In the end, teachers do know what works.

But of course Gove would never have any of this. We knew nothing. We were ‘the blob’; the enemy of world-class education and true ‘academia’. We weren’t to be consulted and simply had to accept, amongst all of the other nonsense, that lots of impressive grammatical terminology and a ‘rigorous’ test of it in Year 6 would raise standards. “Children will flourish if we challenge them but the Blob, in thrall to Sixties ideologies, wants to continue the devaluation of the exam system” Gove explained.

Nicky Morgan has changed the tone but not the message and now the profession is left to pick up the pieces. Many of these will be very sharp. Not least the requirement for 85% of learners to achieve expected levels in all SAT tests from 2016. We ignore the pernicious GAPS at our peril, therefore, and clearly we are going to have to use all of our creativity as teachers to persuade struggling nine-year-olds that distinguishing your modals from your subjunctives is fun.

Neither will we be able to kid ourselves that we are engaged in this struggle for any reason other than to meet floor targets. The ‘GAPS’ is a fundamentally inauthentic test in that it has nothing to offer the learner – but strife. It is simply a check to ensure that Gove’s prescriptive curriculum is taught.  Think about it – if the explicit teaching of grammar was really introduced to raise standards in writing, as is claimed, then why does the SAT assess the means, grammatical knowledge, rather than the end – proficiency in writing?   It makes no sense. The equivalent would be to score Tom Daley on his warm up routine rather than on his dive. But as we’ve seen, Gove’s curricular equivalent of the warm up carries with it a politically important impression of rigour and, regardless of whether it helps them attain genuine standards in writing or not, children from September will be urged to master the drill. After which they can forget it.

Our children deserve so much better than this. “A completely archaic 1870s elementary-schooling-for-the poor curriculum”, to quote Professor Terry Wrigley of Leeds Metropolitan University, will do nothing to equip young people with the skills essential for success in 21st century life. This truth is perfectly exemplified by Gove’s irrelevant GAPS test – one that has nothing to do with genuine standards and everything to do with politics.

 

You can follow Mary on Twitter @marymered

 

Do you agree with Mary’s assessment of the grammar, punctuation and spelling test or see things differently? Please let us know in the comments or via Twitter…

 

Guest posts on Schools Improvement Net

If you have an opinion, observation or experience about schools and how to make things better, please read our guidelines and contact us using this form.

Please note that a guest post does not imply any endorsement from Schools Improvement Net – we will do our best to share things that look potentially interesting or helpful but always do your own research!

Brian Cox: universities need to play a bigger role in society
English children 'less happy than those in developing countries'
Categories: Guest Post and Primary.

Comments

  1. andylutwyche

    SchoolsImprove Wholeheartedly agree with marymered on this – taking random sentences out of context is pointless & hard for sake of it

  2. andylutwyche

    SchoolsImprove marymered Grammar is important but needs to be placed in context where relevance can be easily seen so it’s worthwhile

  3. artmadnana

    SchoolsImprove marymered makes depressing reading. Worrying too that many Primary teachers have little understanding of grammatical terms.

  4. PieCorbett

    DavidWray moses_brian The test kicks off with two very hard questions – it is badly constructed as a test and will not help young writers

  5. PieCorbett

    DavidWray moses_brian Indeed, the likelihood is that teachers will devote more time 2 grammar & less to using grammar to construct meaning

  6. 64outsider

    DavidWray PieCorbett They want to convert all the children into clones!! It’s a conspiracy. Be afraid…be very afraid!

  7. 64outsider

    DavidWray PieCorbett …or it could simply mean that they want the kids to speak/ write properly, ‘like, ya know wot I mean bruh?’

  8. DavidWray

    64outsider PieCorbett I know you are being ironic, but that probably IS the kind of flawed logic politicians use. So much for evidence!

  9. SusanByrdy

    SchoolsImprove Subjunctive mood is “essential” grammatical knowlege for Yr 6s? Ridiculous. I learned about moods in my linguistics degree!

  10. PeterHutchinso5

    ian_bec SchoolsImprove It’s not as if knowledge of the English subjunctive is very helpful when learning languages like French + Spanish.

  11. AspieDeLaZouch

    SusanByrdy SchoolsImprove But subjunctive is so useful, eg. “It was suggested to Mr Gove that he would be better employed elsewhere.”

  12. artmadnana

    SusanByrdy SchoolsImprove it’s really worrying that Y5/6 teachers won’t have the firm grasp of language function to teach this well.

  13. ian_bec

    PeterHutchinso5 SchoolsImprove I went to a Grammar School 30 odd years ago. Did very little English grammar. Which did make the emphasis>

  14. ian_bec

    PeterHutchinso5 SchoolsImprove > in French and Latin a bit confusing. But, have survived thus far w/o close knowledge of subjunctive mood.

  15. PeterHutchinso5

    ian_bec As an ex French teacher I well remember the puzzled faces when I tried to explain that the subjunctive was not a tense, but a mood!

  16. AynieLR

    SchoolsImprove marymered so which, out of 3 plausibly correct answers, is ‘correct’?I don’t ‘get’ obsession with the ‘naming of parts’.

  17. Meraud_Hand

    DavidWray supernash69 It’s decontextualized & pushes study of language away from analyzing its functions of persuasion/control/community..

Let us know what you think...