The Redland, Papers EDITORIAL COMMITTEE

The Redland, Papers – EDITORIAL COMMITTEE

Angela Auset, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic

Gill Barrett, Principal Lecturer, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic

Paul Croll, Reader and Acting Head of Academic & Professional Development, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic

David Halpin, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic

Andrew PoIlard, Reader, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic

CONTENTS Issue No.1 [Summer Term, 1990]

David Halpin Editorial Introduction 2 Andy Hargrave First Impressions of ERA: a study of the early impact of recent educational reforms 3 Paul Croll Norm and criterion referenced assessment: some reflections In the context of assessment and testing in the National Curriculum 8 Don Kimber Some observations on the process of assessing children's learning In humanities In the early years 12 Andrew Pollard Assessment at seven: a new research project 20 Pat Frawley A testing experience 23 Notes for contributors 27 EDITORIAL INTRODUCTION by David Balpin, Senior Lecturer in Education, Faculty of Education Bristol Polytechnic

This is the first issue of the Faculty of Education's occasional publication, The Redland Papers. its launch coincides with an unprecedented period of educational change during which LEAs, schools and teacher education institutions are having to come to terms with a wide ranging set of challenges affecting the curriculum, assessment and the local management of schools.

All of the articles in this special introductory edition have been written either in response to, or as a commentary on, these challenges. Three of the contributions (those by Paul Croll, Don Kimber and Andrew Pollard) reflect specifically on assessment. The remainder focus, in one case, on aspects of teachers' initial reactions to aspects of the Education Reform Act (see Andy Hargrave's piece). In the other (written by Pat Frawley) on the way in which well set curriculum plans can fail to take into account important and unintended consequences for pupil interest and learning.

The articles in this edition also represent a comprehensive range of written styles and points of origination. Both Andy Hargraves and Paul Croll's contributions are conventionally ' academic' in form and focus, the former a summary account have recently concluded field work, the latter an analytical commentary on an important difference of emphasis in assessment. Don Kimber's piece, on the other hand, reports on collaborative work in the classroom. Andrew Pollard's article anticipates the activities of a research project that he co-directs. Using a journalistic style of writing, Pat Frawley draws our attention to the problems consequent upon an over-reliance on rational curriculum planning.

Taken together, the contributors to the first edition of The Redland Papers satisfy the editorial committee's requirement that articles should comment on current educational topics" and "comprise analysis of existing practice, methods and programmes" including "critical discussions and accounts of new ideas and methods" (see the Notes for Contributors on page 27). In future, it is hoped that it will provide a vehicle for the reporting by local teachers of their own action research and other studies.

A second issue of The Redland Papers will be published in the next academic year. Contributions for the second issue should reach the Faculty of Education by the end of October 1990, and be sent to The Editor, The Redland Papers, Faculty of Education, Redland Hill, Bristol BS6 6UZ. We very much hope that teachers and others concerned with education will take this opportunity to share their views and experiences.

David Halpin On behalf of the Editorial Committee May 1990 IMPRESSIONS OF ERA: A STUDY OF THE EARLY IMPACT OF RECENT EDUCATIONAL REFORMS by Andy Hargrave, BEd graduate, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic

INTRODUCTION

The 1988 Education Reform Act represents the most significant integrated series of proposals for education in England and Wales since 1944. As such, it has provoked a range of responses, some sceptical, others more conciliatory. In this paper I propose to review some of the early reactions of five secondary school teachers, two occupying senior positions of responsibility, whom I interviewed during the final term of last academic year. In the interviews I was particularly concerned to learn of their responses to proposals to legislate for a national curriculum, to introduce a comprehensive system of assessment and testing, to enforce collective acts of worship and to encourage the devolution of financial control from LEAs to individual schools. I was also aware at the time of widespread disappointment over the government's handling of the consultation process which preceded the introduction of the Reform Bill to Parliament. Accordingly, I wanted to learn more of how they felt about this aspect of the legislative programme. Interviews were conducted in two schools, tape recorded and organised around a semi-structured schedule of questions.

IMMEDIATE CONCERNS ABOUT WORSHIP AND LMS

The clauses within the Act, which attracted some of the fiercest responses from the teachers, I interviewed were those relating to the need in schools for a collective act of Christian worship. This was especially acute in one of the schools in my sample to the extent that its roll included a large number of pupils of Asian origin. The realisation among teachers at this school that this proposal would demand sensitive handling was beginning to dawn during the time of my visits, one of which coincided with a staff briefing on the collective worship requirement. Not surprisingly, given their central role In organising and implementing worship in school, a Head of Year and a Deputy Headteacher were the source of the two most illuminating comments on this issue:

"This school is unlikely to adopt a 'prayers and hymns' type assembly. There is the danger of falling foul of the law."

“With thirty Muslim girls at this school we are worried about losing the unity of the school if we have to arrange separate assemblies for them.”

Some anxieties seemed to be based upon a misunderstanding of the implications of the Act as identified by its supporters. This was most noticeable In the case of LMS. Some of the teachers I spoke to, for example, thought the advent of LMS would have a cramping, and not a liberating, effect on their school's capacity to respond quickly to issues that required urgent treatment. Indeed, they saw LMS as a continuation of bureaucratic intervention and not a mechanism for devolving responsibility to schools and increasing their room for manoeuvre. Also, there was a feeling that any change in the arrangements affecting the financial management of schools was bound to have detrimental consequences. This fear seemed to derive from a 1ong-standing suspicion that change always meant giving up what you already had for less. It was also connected to anxieties about the impact of proposals to levy charges for certain school activities (so-called ‘extras’) which, given the levels of social disadvantage prevalent in the catchment areas of the two schools, would prejudice their capacity to sustain, let alone develop further, their extensive programmes of enrichment activities. Typical of the comments I heard about this matter was the following: "This school will suffer [under LMS]. Our pupils will be hit hard in terms of the quality and range of education we can provide."

We're having to redefine our policy on school trips. We're working closely with the LEA on implementing LMS."

LONGER TERM MANAGEMENT CONCERNS

More longer-term concerns were focussed on the management of the proposed reforms, which were particularly acute in relation to the requirements of the National Curriculum. In this connection, senior members of staff anticipated difficulties in keeping up with the demands of the DES's timetable for implementation. Some also expressed worries about their school's capacity to accommodate the requirement to teach all the subjects of the National Curriculum to the full ability range throughout the school. This worry took two forms. On the one hand, administrative difficulties were foreseen; and, on the other hand, some respondents clearly were unsure of how effective they will be in teaching their specialist subjects to pupils who formerly would have chosen to drop them at the earliest opportunity. The following extracts illustrate the full range of these feelings:

"I think we've got to be looking at a more flexible approach to the school day. Thinking in the long-term I reckon a four term year is a possibility as well."

"I'm really glad that I'm not responsible for drawing up the timetable for the school. I mean, with ten or so compulsory subjects to squeeze in, there are bound to be some problems there."

We're planning for change. Our range of subjects and the way we've structured the timetable lends itself to the National Curriculum."

"I think we 11 be severely limited in terms of opportunities to enrich learning at the school."

"My Department will be teaching non-examinable classes and therefore will be spreading Geography across a broad spectrum of pupils ... in terms of their ability."

Similar concerns were expressed about the Act's proposals to enforce a comprehensive system of assessment and testing. Central to these concerns was anxiety about the system's likely effect on pupil learning and motivation:

'We must integrate tests and their results into how we improve pupils' learning. "

"Test results should not be publicly released or we risk scaring the hell out of a lot of children."

CONCERNS OF A PERSONAL NATURE

I found that the majority of responses to my questions revealed a deep level of personal concern among teachers about the Act. Although different respondents made comments about the requirements of specific areas of the new legislation, such as the National Curriculum, LMS, assessment and testing and the act of worship, they all felt equally that the Act called into question their professional commitment which they saw as contributing to a further loss of status. In other words, the Act, rather then enabling the teachers, was adding to their sense of low professional self-esteem. Accordingly, at this stage of its implementation, the Act appeared not only to further undermine teachers' professional self-image but also underline the uncertainty they have of their role as teachers.

Comments from my interviewees about these issues ranged from this one by a Head of Department about the National Curriculum. "Like most things in teaching, we'll be the last to hear and the first to be blamed when it goes wrong."

... to this by a M.P.G. teacher on L.M.S.:

"Having heard more about L.M.S. at a staff meeting last month, I've got to admit to being worried about the future of this school."

The low level of morale within the profession is emphasised by these three observations from a Deputy Head, M.P.G. teacher and Head of Year respectively:

"I would certainly oppose any move to opt-out of Local Authority control; some schools may benefit from it, others may lose out. We would certainly lose out."

"To be honest, the more 1 learn about the Act, the more depressed I get. In many ways I'd rather not know too much and just get on with the teaching."

"The school's budget is £1.25 million of which £1 million is spent on staffing. Under L.M.S. governors are looking to cut costs in order to re-direct investment. Staff cuts are the likely result.

In one school, personal concerns about changes to be made in the multi-faith nature of school assemblies took precedence over all others as is illustrated by the following quote derived from me of the school's Heads of Year:

"The 1944 Act kept the number of teachers who opted out of taking assemblies to a minimum, as it allowed a multi-faith approach. I'm certainly not prepared to conduct a purely Christian assembly."

A NEED FOR MORE INFORMATION

A number of respondents' concerns were of a less directly personal nature. Many of my interviewees, for example, expressed a need for more Information about general aspects of the reforms. Teachers' comments of this nature are typified by a dispassionate, distanced reaction to the change. In the main, such concerns were raised by non-senior staff members. The two comments, which immediately follow, relate to the National Curriculum. Both were made by M.P.G. teachers who had formed a general impression of this aspect of the legislation and were interested in discovering more about its requirements and effects:

"Quite a few of our girls took up the Italian option as a non-examinable subject. I don't think they'd be able to opt for this under the National Curriculum as the Working Paper seems to say that only one Modern Language can be studied."

"The minutiae of things like the National Curriculum are worked out in chats between teachers." The dispassionate nature of fact-seeking interviewees is borne out by this quote from a M.P.G. teacher who had just been informed of the voting arrangements for schools interested in opting out:

"I can't see any interest in this area for opting-out. You wouldn't get the necessary number of parents bothering to turn up and vote."

None of my interviewees was unmoved by the thought of interpreting and responding to the demands of the legislation. All of the teachers I spoke to, regardless of their seniority or experience, had something to say about the Reform Act. However, the sophistication of teachers' responses varied. Moreover, they were frequently influenced by the teacher's position within the hierarchy of the school. The following quote from a M.P.G. teacher, for instance, appears on first reading to be an example of a particularly cynical attitude. Interpreted another way, it may be indicative of a deep sense of professional insecurity linked to a defensive, retreating strategy.

"In many ways I'd rather not know too much (about the Act) and just get on with the teaching."

CONCLUSICK

This paper represents a 'snapshot’ of teachers' first reactions to the Education Reform Act. These early responses are characterised by scepticism and apprehension. It is unlikely that these negative reactions have dissipated altogether, but there can be little doubt that sow of the fears have receded.

Teachers know more now about the fine detail of aspects of the reforms. In particular, the programmes of study for the three core subjects of the National Curriculum have been published and approved. This feature of the legislation was the source of many teachers' fears, as can be seen from my research.

That these fears have not been confirmed is due in large part to the feeling among teachers that the reforms must be made to work and that the people whose responsibility it is to implement the Act are teachers themselves. It's a case, in other words, of teachers working with, rather than against the grain, albeit strategically and without essentially compromising their own educational values. In the long term, this means that fundamental change in education may become a reality for teachers; one that they may be able to internalise and put into effect to their own, and their pupils', satisfaction. Consequently and paradoxically, teachers' sense of their own professional worth may be restored through imaginative interpretations of the legislation, despite their resentment of its central imposition.

To conclude, teachers' gradual sense of ownership of educational change suggests that we need to view the implementation of the Act not as an event, but as a process Involving the interpretation of change by those concerned with adapting it to their values and needs. This leads me to one final question: can teachers 'hijack' the constituent parts of the legislation and make it fit their, rather than the government's priorities, or will they continue to feel 'terrorised' by its impact? I suspect they will do the former, and thus frustrate the government who anticipated the latter. NORM AND CRITERION REFERENCED ASSESSMENT: SOME REFLECTIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF ASSESSMENT AND TESTING IN THE NATIONAL CURRICULUM by Paul Croll, Reader in Education, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic.

INTRODUCTION

The subject of assessment is one that has been recently forced upon teachers' attention. Of all the changes which the National Curriculum will bring about, those concerned with pupil assessment are at the forefront of many teachers' concerns (see, for example, Croll, Halpin and Redman, 1989). In this paper I want to consider certain aspects of assessment and of the procedures associated with teacher assessments for the National Curriculum. 1 shall take as a starting point the distinction between norm and criterion referenced assessment but shall go on to suggest that the distinction is by no means as clear cut as is often supposed. This lack of a clear distinction has practical consequences for the practice of teacher assessment.

NORM AND CRITERION REFERENCED ASSESSMENT

A concern with and analysis of the distinction between norm and criterion referenced assessment will almost certainly be a major feature of any recently constructed course on assessment in education. Those of us who teach assessment, whether to initial or in-service teacher education students, typically use the norm-criterion distinction as a central analytic device. As a point of reference for a consideration of technical issues in assessment but also, and more crucially, as a basis for looking critically at the purposes for which educational assessments are used and the wider social implications and consequences of testing.

Norm referenced assessments are assessments where an individual's performance is judged with reference to the performance of others on the same test. For example, if the reading performance of a child is expressed as a reading age of, say, 8 years and two months, this means that on a test which has been tried out on a large sample of children the child in question has achieved the average score of 8 year 2 month olds in the sample. (Regression techniques, rather than dividing up the sample into exactly matched age groups are often used to establish such averages, but this does not affect the present discussion.) Such a score is often then expressed in terms of the relationship of the child's reading age to his or her chronological age.

The relationship of performance to age also informs the standardisation of published tests of ability and achievement which express levels of performance by means of a score which is referenced against a known average performance for children of that age (usually 100) and a known standard deviation (usually 15) of a distribution of scores constructed to follow a normal curve. The range of tests developed and published by the National Foundation for Educational research are probably the best known tests of this sort in Britain; this procedure also underlies scores on IQ tests. The known distribution of scores on a normal curve means that a child who receives a score of, for instance, 116 on such a test, giving a result just above one standard deviation from the mean, has performed at a level which puts her or him just within the top 16 per cent of the age group.

Norm referenced testing does not have to be related to a normal curve or to the idea of a normal distribution of achievements, although this is sometimes mistakenly thought to be so; possibly because of the semantic links between 'norm' and 'normal'. Whenever a test is reported or interpreted with reference to the achievement of others then norm referencing is taking place. A teacher who uses ranking to interpret tests, for instance saying that a child has come first or eighth or that a child is in the bottom ten per cent, is using norm referencing.

Criterion referenced testing Involves constructing assessment procedures which relate an individual's results not to the results of others but to whether or not they meet a pre-determined criterion set independently of the pattern of test results. A commonly given example of a criterion referenced test is the driving test which is supposed to assess whether or not people are safe drivers against some absolute criterion of adequate performance, not in terms of how they stand in relation to the average driver or whether they are in the top ten per cent of drivers. In education, criterion referenced tests are intended to establish whether or not someone has particular knowledge or competence not how they stand with relation to other people with regard to these.

Many discussions of assessment tend to emphasis the greater educational value of criterion referenced assessment compared with norm referenced methods. Norm referenced testing has been criticised for using a purely statistical model of academic achievement. Using norm referenced methods, whatever the overall level of achievement; some children must always be top and bottom. Standardisation against population norms means that approximately half of a population must always be below average however well they perform. Such methods are also criticised as being of little educational value; to know that a child is 18th in the class or in the top quarter of the population has no obvious implications for teaching, and test items may be selected on the grounds that they spread out performance rather than for their educational interest. Norm referencing has also been criticised for being elitist and being obsessed with differentiating children and sorting them into a hierarchical ranking.

In contrast, criterion referenced testing can be seen as being concerned to tell teachers what they need to know through concentrating on whether particular curriculum objectives have been met. And the content of criterion referenced items are more likely to relate to the actual content of what teachers are trying to assess.

Unfortunately, the distinction between the educationally valuable criterion referencing and the educationally irrelevant psychometrically oriented norm referencing is not as clear as the discussion above has suggested. Clearly, norm referenced procedures can include items which are of relevance for a teacher's educational judgement, and knowing that a child is below average is only meaningful in the context of educational judgements about the importance of what he or she is below average at. So norm referenced tests cannot be compiled without reference to educational criteria. More important, however, is the conceptual difficulty of constructing educational criteria without reference to the performance of children. Put briefly, it is difficult to see how we can construct an educationally useful criterion relating to an element of skill and knowledge without at least an implicit model of what is appropriate for a child of a particular age.

The relevance of the importance of the performance of others becomes particularly apparent when criterion referenced procedures are used, as they often are, for screening purposes for children with learning difficulties. In establishing such criteria the performance of other children of the same age is often explicitly taken into account. For example, in a discussion of an LEA screening procedure its authors say that the rationale for including an item was that "it should have a failure rate of between 6% and 15% of a normal school population of six and a half to seven and a half year olds". They also write of criterion referencing in this test as "referring to a fixed standard of achievement in this case the level at which at least 85% of the population will be successful" (Marshall and Wolfendale, 1977. p ). A discussion of the problem of setting the appropriate level of mastery in criterion -referenced tests concludes that: "Given that these objectives are quickly mastered in most children a criterion of 90% accuracy might well be reasonable." (Satterley, 1981, p50).

The point I want to make is not that the authors quoted above have illegitimately smuggled normative elements into what should be pure criteria, but that in making educational judgements about one child it is virtually impossible to ignore the information we have about the performance of others. The judgement that a child's progress is giving cause for concern is only possible in the context of what we know about most children of that age or developmental stage or with that level of educational experience. This is because educational performance is developmental and our knowledge of what is usual or possible developmentally is based on our experience of children. Consequently norm based criteria are almost certain to be part of any apparently criterion referenced assessments, even though this may not be as explicit as in the examples quoted above. Test constructors may not themselves be fully aware of it but their criteria are almost certain to reflect their experience of children.

TEACHER ASSESSMENTS FOR THE NATIONAL CURRICULUM

Another aspect of the relationship between norm and criterion referencing arises in the assessment procedures which teachers must engage in with respect to the National Curriculum. National Curriculum assessments appear to be criterion referenced. Specific levels of attainment have been established and children are to be judged in terms of whether they meet them. All the children in a class (or school or the UK) could achieve a particular level or none of them. However, it remains to be seen how successfully the various consortia working on assessment for the National Curriculum can operationalise the criteria for whether children have reached particular levels. The great difficulties experienced in writing grade-related criteria for GCSE suggests that it is optimistic to imagine that unambiguous and yet educationally justifiable criteria will be easily established.

In order to establish children's levels of attainment at the end of each stage of the national curriculum, teachers will make their own assessments, will give children Standard Assessment Tasks (SATs), and will meet in cross-school moderation meetings to moderate their assessments and ensure their fairness across all children. At secondary level there is now experience of such meetings through Mode 3 CSE and GCSE. For primary school teachers it will be a new experience.

There are two aspects to these moderation meetings, one relating to norm referenced and the other to criterion referenced assessments. The first aspect involves teachers calibrating their judgements against one another. In order to ensure fairness between children assessed by different teachers the teachers will compare their assessments and their SAT results and establish that they are using a common standard. As a result of these meetings children's assessments may be moved up or down if the evidence suggests that other teachers. In the group are using less or more rigorous criteria. The procedure ensures that a child would get the same assessment whichever teacher in the group was making it. Teacher experience of moderation procedures suggests that this can be done effectively.

The more ambitious aspect of the moderation meeting is to calibrate judgements not against one another but against an absolute standard: a criterion. Here teachers will have to establish not just that they are all using the criteria in the same way but that they are being true to the essence of the level of attainment. What seems almost inevitable, however, is that this 'true' level of attainment will be established consensually. Disagreements will be resolved by comparison with other groups, advice from advisers and assessment specialists and notions of an appropriate spread of pupil attainments. As in the case of the criterion referenced assessments discussed above the actual performance of children seems certain to play a part in establishing criteria: The discussion above has not been intended to dispute the value of the conceptual distinction between norm and criterion referenced testing, and teachers embarking on National Curriculum assessments will be better equipped if they are aware of the distinction. However, they are certain to find that the purity of the distinction disappears in practice. In the case of sets of attainments as developmentally linked as those in the National Curriculum the influence of children's actual performances on criteria for assessment will be inevitable. REFERENCES

CROLL, P., HALPIN, D. and REDMAN, K. (1989) 'The content and structure of teachers' inservice needs', Mimeo, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic.

KARSHAU, C and WOMMALE, S. (1977) 'Screening and early identification of children with problems' in Gilliland, J. (ed) Remling: Research and Classroom Practice (London: Ward Lock).

SATTERLEY, D. (1981) Assessment in Schools (Oxford: Basil Blackwell.) SOME OBSERVATIONS ON THE PROCESS OF ASSESSING CHILDRENS LEARNING IN HUMANITIES IN THE EARLY YEARS by Don Kimber, Senior Lecturer in Education, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic (with Sue Bracher, Oldbury Court Primary School, Bristol, Nick Clough, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic, and Jean Isaacs, Filton Avenue Infants School, Bristol)

BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

This investigation into problems of teacher assessment of humanities was prompted in part by the developing demands of the National Curriculum. The pattern of expectations relating to core and foundation subjects is slowly emerging. Although many are optimistic that at the end of the day children will gain overall from the introduction of this centralised curriculum, it is the question of assessment, and particularly how the assessment at key stages might be used and made public, which remains a source of deep misgiving.

Not least in this is the vexed question of how much will be teacher assessment (TA), as opposed to externally derived 'tests', the so-called Standard Assessment Tasks. The answer to this question has become clearer since the recent announcement by SEAC that it would be downgrading further the amount of TA in favour of externally derived assessment tasks for both young children and older pupils.

Another spur to this investigation was the following remark made to one of the authors by a teacher with reception class infants:

"Two of my colleagues say that they do not know much about geography and history, and will not do anything in these areas until the National Curriculum is published and they can no longer resist it."

There will no doubt be other teachers who share these sentiments. This is understandable given the rate of change and innovation which is being expected of many colleagues in school. However, many teachers do in fact engage their children in activities which enhance their understanding of people and the past, and of people and place both near and far. So this represents a situation in which teachers can easily downgrade their own abilities and achievements in the classroom in respect of foundation subjects such as History and Geography. Similarly, there could be the danger that some teachers might underestimate their effectiveness and ability when it comes to the question of assessing children's knowledge, understanding and skills.

The concern of this paper is with teacher assessment. In particular it discusses some of the practical implications of teacher assessment for the already fully occupied classroom teacher who is anxious to monitor children's progress across a range of curriculum areas, some of which may seem less familiar than others? The paper derives from some classroom-based work in history and geography involving children mainly in the early years.

The next part of this paper will further ‘scene set' and outline how the classroom-based activities were developed. There then follows some observations and insights gained from these enquiries, focusing upon the 'success' or otherwise of the assessment activities. Finally, by way of conclusion, some key points are outlined which impressed us as some critical questions with regard to the place of T.A. in assessing children's learning. SETTING THE SCENE ~ DEVELOPING THE PROJECT

This investigation into the nature of the assessment process was carried out in the summer term, 1989. It involved working with a small group of children in each of three schools. Two were infant groups - Filton Avenue Infants, and Oldbury Court Infants - with Cabot School being the other. The choice of schools was influenced by my knowing the class teachers well enough to be a 'critical friend'. Indeed, I judged that they would soon say if any of my proposals for work with their children were not consonant with their current needs, and would offer other points of criticism without embarrassment on either side. Their head teachers were also supportive to the general aims of the project.

There was an introductory visit to meet with children in their classroom setting at Filton Avenue and at Oldbury Court. This was followed a few days later by a second visit during which I worked with a group of five children and made an assessment of selected elements of learning. Having greater familiarity with Cabot School, I did not make an introductory visit preferring to work with a group immediately on arrival. Subsequently, I realised that this was a mistake!

The intention in each case was to follow the TGAT recommendation for teacher assessment whereby primary children's knowledge, understanding and skills are assessed and recorded while they are engaged in a normal' learning activity. Such assessment also aims to be diagnostic and formative, and thus assist the teacher in making decisions as to how to promote further learning. In our case, the activities with the three groups of children were designed to arise naturally out of ‘topic work' or other activities which the children were currently engaged in.

It proved simple enough to identify some history or geography from current teaching 'programmes'. In Filton Avenue Infants, Jean Isaacs had used a colourful poster of an imaginary landscape for 'language'; at Oldbury Court Infants, Sue Bracher was planning a trip to the Georgian House (part of a topic on 'structures') and Nick Clough, with other colleagues at Cabot Primary [where he worked before joining the Polytechnic], had involved children in planning and developing a school conservation area as part of a whole school project. The activities which would provide an opportunity for teacher assessment were developed in the light of, and as a response to, these curricular initiatives.

At the time of undertaking this work, the National Curriculum content for History and Geography could only be guessed at. However, the publication of the English and Science programmes of study and the earlier HMI Curriculum Matters for History and Geography helped us to select some components of knowledge, understanding and skills which might bear some similarity to those anticipated for Levels 2, 3 and 4 of the History and Geography components.

Using the landscape poster, I intended assessing children's vocabulary of landscape (knowledge), and their understanding of simple locational terms, e.g. next to, to the left, further away from. For the children in Olbury Court, pictures of houses at different periods of time (modern, Georgian, Medieval) would be studied and discussed. I would then seek to assess their understanding of (i) the language of time, e.g. new, old, recent. and (ii) the change of typical building materials over time. The children in Cabot were older (middle juniors) and by getting them to map the conservation area, and record on it some of the major changes, I hoped to be able to assess their skills of mapping, and of their being able to identify and to understand ideas of changes in land use. In the event, these learning activities did correspond with some of the elements of the interim reports of the History and Geography working parties. In the case of the former, the proposed ATs 1 and 3 were reflected, with some traces of AT 5. In the latter, the proposed ATs 5, 6 and 8, level 2, were mirrored In our activities.

To experience this process of assessing young children, I was relying upon some commonplace observations. I would be noting what they had to say both amongst themselves as well as to me. With the two infant groups of children, my intention was to observe how they went about their tasks so as to obtain evidence of their understanding of the qualities which I had identified following discussions with Jean and Sue.

The two activities with the infants provided plenty of opportunity for talk and discussion. With the children in Filton Avenue, we would be building up and adding to a simple base map which I drew from the poster. The children drew figures represented on the poster, and then stuck them on to our group map in a position relative to other features already located on the map. With the children from Oldbury Court, activities were focused upon pictures of houses, and of street scenes, which led into a simple model-making exercise of the Georgian House.

Assessment of geographical understanding and skills of the middle juniors in Cabot could be based not only upon children's conversation, but also much more upon the product of the activity, i.e. the maps drawn by each child. These maps in turn could also be the basis of discussion with individual children, which would provide further evidence of children's understanding of ideas such as change in land use over time.

ELEMENTS OF CHILDRENS LEARNING IDENTIFIED FOR TRIAL ASSESSMENT

Filton Avenue

(i) ability to recognise and name features of the landscape ‘landscape language'/vocabulary;

(ii) understanding of everyday words used to indicate location;

(iii) understanding of the idea of 'best location'.

Oldbury Court

(i) knowledge of the basic features of houses, and common building materials;

(ii) understanding of the basic language of time;

(iii) understanding of the idea of particular materials being used at particular periods in time.

(i) mapping skills and spatial awareness;

(ii) ability to identify and to understand ideas of changes in land use over time past;

(iii) knowledge and understanding of the likely and preferred changes over the next year. Also a video camera was available for each session to record features of classroom interaction. These were then used as part of the basis for discussion between colleagues.

SOME OBSERVATIONS OF THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS

How successful, then, was this attempt to set up classroom learning activities which provided sound opportunities for assessing children's achievements in history and geography? What were some of the issues for Teacher Assessment thrown up?

Broadly, the trial approaches to assessment in the two infant classrooms were encouraging and positive in a number of respects. However, the work with middle juniors based on an activity outside the classroom proved initially to be a mini-disaster. Subsequent discussion with Nick, however, suggested that this third study gave valuable insights into the need to ensure a reliable assessment-milieu for children.

With each group the intention was to record children's levels of achievement on a piece of card. Their names were listed down the side, and the elements of learning to be assessed (see above) were at the top of columns. These were wide enough for comments as well as ticks to be recorded for each child.

A major difficulty with both infant groups was to take time out to physically record assessment details. I was only with a group while the class teacher had the rest of the class! When actively involved with children in activities which require teacher inputs - not to mention other children coming up to ask for "spellings, or ask what we were doing - there was only time for a hasty tick or two on the record card. Nevertheless, the practical activities provided plenty of chances to talk with individual children and ascertain with some confidence their levels of understanding. Although the 'lessons' lasted about an hour and a half or more, it did not prove possible to proceed at a pace so as to cover the later assessment items as originally planned. This was not unexpected. An interesting tension that quickly emerged was between what was educationally desirable from the children's viewpoint, on the one hand, and the desire to assess and record a selected number of children's abilities on the other. In these situations, emphasis was given to the former. Particular interests and enthusiasm of the children were pursued.

There were a number of other positive and encouraging features that emerged. One was the opportunity given for children to communicate effectively in non-verbal ways. By pointing at pictures, or choosing how to design their house, some children who were less articulate could express their appreciation of time or of place. As would be expected, where children completed a recording task (drawing a map), or made something (paper and card model of the Georgian House), this provided an especially rich resource for assessing children's skills and understanding.

The cross-curricular potential within the activities was immediately apparent. Again, in terms of assessment, it was recognised how readily, and naturally, the teacher could be able to consider assessment of children's understanding in other 'subject areas'. Some of the science attainment targets could easily have been considered. This will be simpler when we are more familiar with other subjects, and to some extent will simplify the task of teacher assessment, as was again advocated In TGAT. However, the practice of seeing the National Curriculum as simply a mega-checklist, and assessment as the ticking off of as many boxes as possible at one go, is certainly not to be advocated. In this small group situation it did appear that fair assessment of children's achievements and abilities was possible. In my view there was sufficient evidence in what the children did and said to be able to judge the qualities identified for assessment. In most instances my 'scoring' of children's abilities accorded with the class teacher's expectations as we learnt in our follow-up discussions. However, there were the couple of instances where children showed up more strongly (by my reckoning) and this was where my assessment of their understanding was on the basis of physical communication or graphical communication rather than verbal or written communication.

To enhance the effectiveness and standing of Teacher Assessment, it must be actively encouraged and practised, even if it is a quick and simple observational record of a specific ability (attainment target) at the end of the lesson. However, the need to observe and record all the children in a group (if only jotting a tick), was a useful reminder of the presence of those quieter children in a group who can easily get less teacher attention. Also, ongoing recording of assessment like this does point the mind for the teacher in a way which is not the case in other activities which are planned and presented in a more creative and free-wheeling spirit.

NOT TO BE REPEATED IN FROM OF THE CHILDREN

In addition to illuminating some positive aspects of the process of Teacher Assessment, the experience with middle juniors in Cabot School raised other issues concerning the role and judgement of the teacher assessor, and of the 'assessment milieu'. At the end of the activity basically a mapping exercise of the school conservation area - the children produced some mixed results.

By comparison with the teaching-and-assessment activity with the other two groups of children, this occasion proved to be a minor disaster ... at least in terms of trying to make a fair assessment of children's knowledge, understanding and abilities. It was very valuable in underscoring some of the potential pitfalls to be avoided when engaging in assessment. These would be apparent enough to many experienced teachers. However, there could be times when in responding to demands in the light of the National Curriculum, it will not always be easy to avoid some of them.

Two children carried out concientous and successful mapping exercises, and in the time available one was able to discuss her map in relation to the area surveyed. However, four of the six children failed to produce "satisfactory results" according to my criteria and expectations. This could be taken to mean that they had "not passed this particular assessment test". They had not done justice to themselves, but it was more a case that I had not provided a satisfactory teaching and learning environment for them to work in. What were some of the factors, which probably denied these children a ‘fair’ opportunity to show what they knew and could do, as I feel, had been the case with the two other groups. I will, after all, be likely have a vested interested as the class teacher for my children to score' as highly as possible.

First, there were shortcomings in setting up the activity. From a teaching point of view there was too brief an introduction to the activity, and assumptions were made about what the children were already capable of. The original intention of concentrating the mapping on the pond and its immediate area was changed to include the entire strip of 35m or so. Although marked out with pegs on each corner, it appeared to be too daunting a task in the way in which the activity was set out for them. The spread of the group over this wider area, rather than the more compact groupings as in the other classrooms, made for greater inconvenience and difficulties for the assessment process, as well as for supporting children's work. In particular, the opportunities for talking with all the children, and for encouraging inter-group discussion, were more restricted.

Second, there was the question of interaction and co-operation within the group of children. One child, who had worked well during the morning, was noted for engaging in disruptive behaviour. During this afternoon there was much evidence to support that view, but that was the result, in part, of my not generating and maintaining his level of motivation. This type of behaviour, often demanding much one-to-one attention from the teacher (me, in this instance), did not help other children in settling to their activity. Children learn in a social setting. When they are assessed in 'normal teaching situations', how can we ensure that their assessment results are not distorted adversely an account of other children in the group?

Third, there were aspects of the assessment-milieu, which were not helpful to the children. In terms of time, it was an afternoon, whereas the other two groups of children were in the morning. Does this point to halving the time available during the school day for more positive assessment, i.e. "sing the morning session as far as possible so as to avoid the afternoon? Levels of concentration were also affected by the fact that it was the hottest day of the year to date (June) - temperature well into the 80's, and very humid to boot. The windows of adjacent classrooms were open, and this facilitated mutual distractions from within and without the classrooms.

Overall, I failed to engage all the children fully in this activity. Regarding assessment, I was only able to consider the first item mapping abilities and spatial awareness. Two children were able to demonstrate a satisfactory appreciation of spatial patterns, by their maps and in discussion. The other children did not produce plans anywhere near as good. But to what extent was that an indication of their mapping abilities, or of my management skills?

CONCLUDING REMARKS

We still have concerns about the due recognition of other qualities, such as working co-operatively or independently, in the overall assessment of children's achievements in the National Curriculum.

It is important for the children, as well as the professional standing of teachers, that Teacher Assessment is a strong element of the assessment in school. Children will be best served, especially those in primary years Yl to Y6, by a very substantial part of their assessment being carried out by their own teacher, rather than too much reliance upon SAT's, developed by the experts in association with their related publishing firms. The intentions in the original TGAT recommendations should be sustained in this respect.

Although availability of time remains a problem, it will be a valuable experience to try some simple assessment activities in History and Geography (as well as other curriculum areas), before they come on stream officially. This might well be with just one or two children, as opposed to a larger group.

There are no experts who know all the solutions to ensuring fair and accurate assessment of children's progress in other people's classrooms. They will know some helpful methods; they will also be or should be - aware of some of the limitations. Thus any who feel

Like the two colleagues of the reception class teacher referred to above, and who think they "do not know any history or geography", should have a go at assessing some of their children in this area. This will not only deepen an appreciation of assessment issues, but I will also increase awareness of children's knowledge of history and geography in the world around them.

SOURCES FOR FURTHER READING

AVON LOCAL EDUCATION AUTRORITY (1982) History and Geography in the Primary School (Bristol: Avon LEA).

BALE J. (1987) Geography In the Primary School (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul).

BLYTHE, J.E. (1988) History in the primary School (London: McGraw--Hill).

BLYTHE. J.E. (1988) History 5-9 (London: Hodder & Stoughton).

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION & SCIENCE (1985) History in the Primary and Secondary Years (London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office).

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION & SCIENCE (1986) Geography from 5-16: Curriculum Matters Series No.7 (London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office).

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION & SCIENCE (1988) History from 5-16: Curriculum Matters Series No.11 (London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office).

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION & SCIENCE (1989) Environmental Education from 5-16: Curriculun Matters Series No.13 (London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office).

INNER LONDON EDUCATION AUTRORITY (1980) History in the Primary School: Curriculum Guidelines (london: ILEA).

INNER LONDON EDUCATION AUTHORITY (1986) The Study of Places in the Primary School[Revised Edition] (London: ILEA). ASSESSMENT AT SEVEN: A NEW RESEARCH PROJECT by Andrew Pollard Reader in Primary Education, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic (with Patricia Broadfoot, and Paul Croll, Bristol Polytechnic)

SOME UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

The assessment of children at the end of their infant school education has been one of the most controversial aspects of the legislation on the National Curriculum. Many questions and issues have been raised: will assessment harm 'good infant practice'? Will curriculum breadth be sacrificed to SATs. Will assessment processes intrude in the close relationships, which are usually established between infant school teachers and the children they teach? Can assessment at seven years old be carried out fairly, reliably and validly? Will it lead to assessment at 5 years old? Have teachers got enough time to carry out classroom-based formative assessment or will assessment demands prevent them actually teaching? Will formative assessment lead to improvements in the quality of teaching and of children's learning as TGAT suggested? Will the reporting of individual test results to parents and the publication of aggregated results for schools really lead to an improvement in 'standards'? Will relatively unsuccessful children develop a sense of stigma? Will publication of school results impact on enrolment and, with LMS, on school resources?

We do not know the answers to these questions. What is apparent, however, is that the issue of assessment poses many genuine educational dilemmas in which alternative educational concerns vie with each other for priority. Perhaps the most telling dilemma is that we 'know and understand' ~ child with all their individual differences but by doing so we raise the fear of such differences increasing inequalities in skills, attitudes or knowledge that are treated or valued in different ways.

AIMS OF THE PACE PROJECT

Teachers and others in the South West have an excellent opportunity to become involved in a new research and eventual project focused on such issues. This project -Primary Assessment, Curriculum and Experience [PAGE] - is funded with a grant of £157,000 by the Economic and Social Research Council for just over three years, starting in the Autumn of 1989. It is, at present, the only large-scale independent research project that sets out to evaluate the impact of the National Curriculum on infant children and their teachers. The project draws an the strengths of the Redland Centre for Primary Education, of Bristol Polytechnic, and of the Centre for Assessment Studies, of Bristol University and is directed by Paul Croll and Andrew Pollard at Bristol Polytechnic and Patricia Broadfoot at the University of Bristol.

The three substantive aims of the study are.

1. To describe and analyse the responses of pupils and teachers in infant schools and infant departments to the National Curriculum and related innovations. This will include a consideration of the views of heads and teachers of the new proposals and their impact on the school and, in particular, an analysis and evaluation of the development of strategies for change.

2. To consider the impact of the National Curriculum on the curriculum and pedagogy of the infant school. Issues of teacher aims and expectations, curriculum content and time allocation, as well as teaching methods and pupil classroom experience, will be addressed. 3. To evaluate the assessment materials in action and their impact on pupils.

The research design is complex but, in essence, has three main features. First, there will be two rounds of interviews with 150 teachers drawn from 50 schools in 10 LEAs across the country. These interviews will focus on teachers' feelings and responses to the National Curriculum and assessment procedures and will take place in 1989/90 as the National Curriculum begins and again, two years later. Second, and at the heart of the study, will be detailed classroom studies of those classes of children in ten schools who will experience the unreported 'dummy' SAT assessments in the summer of 1991 and the children whose results will be 'reported' in 1992. In the latter case the research team will have followed the children through the previous two years with a number of short, intensive periods of classroom observation and discussion. Working closely with the teachers the researchers will gather a great deal of data on developments in the tried formative assessment and pedagogy since the introduction of the National Curriculum. They will also work Intensively with the children, talking with them about their views on school and actively focusing on the children's experience in the light of the new requirements. As the Standard Assessment Tasks are administered, the researchers will be present to observe the process and to talk again with the teachers and children about their experience of SATs.

All this data, coming as it will from a wide-ranging sample and having been collected in a systematic way, should enable the research team to address many of the questions and issues posed earlier. Thus far, despite the unusual attempt to combine quantitative and qualitative data, the project is fairly conventional in research terms. However, the project team also recognises the very real skills and expertise which others, in classrooms, schools and other Institutions, also have to offer on this issue. For this reason the project has been designed to have a 'federated' aspect - and this is the project's third main feature.

Federated research has been conceived as an opportunity to involve a wide range of other people in the project. Some of these people may be other researchers with an interest in infant education. For instance, we already know of a number of people conducting ethnographies (long-term studies of the perspectives and social worlds of school life) who are interested and they will have a great contribution to make. Similarly, teachers who are actively developing assessment procedures may well be interested in becoming involved and those adopting varieties of 'action research, models will be particularly welcome. We believe the joint strengths of different research approaches can be constructively harnessed together around the focus provided by the project.

There will be a conference to discuss the possibilities of widespread teacher involvement in the spring or summer of 1990.

Since the Redland Centre for Primary Education services two existing networks of teacher researchers - the Classroom Action Research Network (CARN) and the Association for the, study of Primary Education (ASPE) -and hosts the south West regional office of the National Primary Centre, members of these organisations will be specifically invited to become involved in data gathering. An open Invitation will also be extended to others.

The result, we hope, will be that a large federated team of teachers and researchers will be created. This team will focus on curriculum change and assessment issues, and will be able to follow not only their own studies but to collect comparative data in a structured way. We do not know what the results of this study will be. What we do know, though, is that it is almost alone in its scale and significance and that it thus provides a unique opportunity for genuinely independent evaluation of the Government's educational 'reforms' as they effect infant education.

Conducting the project in a systematic and rigorous way is something which staff in higher education institutions are qualified and able to do. It is a service to the profession generally and will provide informed analysis for public debate in the years ahead. However, if we are able to enlist the ingenuity, enthusiasm and commitment of large numbers of primary school teachers into the federated research activities, then this will strengthen the authenticity and voice of the project considerably.

If you would like more information on the Federated Programme, please write to: Dorothy Abbott (Research Officer) or Marilyn Osborne (Research Fellow) at the Redland Centre for Primary Education,

Bristol Polytechnic, Redland Hill House, Redland Hill, Bristol BS6 6UZ A TESTING EXPERIENCE by Pat Frawley, Principal Lecturer in Education, Faculty of Education, Bristol Polytechnic

During the Summer the children seemed to suffer from a growing frustration. Even T~ normally brash and confident, seemed unusually subdued by the heat.

"What's the matter Tom?” I asked. Tommy put on his best scowl, reserved for indicating that he was of an age to begin resenting authority. It took him a moment to realise that I actually wanted his opinion, then his face cleared and he answered, We're a bit fed up with this topic, it isn't as good as the last one and we don't seem to get out of the classroom".

I turned to the rest of the group. "Any suggestions?” I enquired. Helen, normally reticent and nervous suddenly came to life. "The best project was the one we did when we came back from the Forest of Dean; you remember, when we put on that exhibition that everybody came to. If you can think of somewhere to go, I’ll bring my Polaroid and we can use the photos like we did before, to remind us, when we do our work."

"As many as you like and as far as you like", said the Head, when I enquired about the latest position on school journeys. "You are the agent of change here. Just make sure you get them all to fill in these three forms and send out the details of insurance cover and the cost."

"Oh, and make sure you put all the details in your National Curriculum forecast, otherwise we might not be able to claim the VAT back."

I thought deeply for about three seconds before deciding upon a trip to the local church. This opened up the possibility of several visits beginning almost immediately, since the churchyard could be reached within about five minutes via the footways and bridle paths through the village.

On our first visit to the church the children discovered many fascinating things; a story on a gravestone, a sundial set in the face of a buttress and the vestiges of another located, to the mystification of all, on the shady side of the church.

The children vied with each other to find the oldest headstone; took rubbings; drew; chattered and poked their noses into corners, through gateways and under trees.

I was just beginning to plan the next visit along the lines of some more systematic investigation, when I heard raised voices.

"Of course it isn't, you idiot!"

“Yes it is, I know, because if it was iron it would have gone rusty, wouldn't it?"

"It might be just gold paint. Probably somebody goes up and paints it."

I followed the direction of the children's gaze to the golden weathercock at the top of the church tower. "It's no good", said Tommy to me, his enthusiasm obvious, -you'll just have to arrange for us to climb up” It was a few days before I managed to arrange for us to climb the tower. Assurances to the vicar that no carved initials would appear on the stair rails and that t he bell ropes would be free from knots, had to be followed by diplomatic advances to Vic, the local postman-fireman-churchwarden and the chief clock-repairer; keeper of the keys to the tower.

At length, thirty-one children, Vic and myself, passed through the wrought iron gates adorned with various coats of arms. Here in the base of the tower, Vic halted to utter dire warnings. Indicating me with his forefinger he explained to the children how he would exact punishment far worse than any I had ever inflicted upon them, if they failed to do exactly as they were told. In an aside to me he explained that as the leaden roof was often slippery and there was a thirty-metre drop to the ground, he felt it best to “put the fear of God into them” before we ascended. I thought this a singularly inappropriate sentiment, under the circumstances.

The wooden spiral staircase groaned and swayed alarmingly as we climbed the seven metres to the first floor. “Its all right”, Vic assured us, “It’s quite safe, come on up”. I remember being distinctly frightened at one point when all thirty-three of us were on the stairway at one time. I hoped fervently that it was not going to be like this all the way up. I needn’t have worried. It wasn’t. The remainder of the ascent was by ladder. I had thought, in my innocence, that the gasps of astonishment from the children preceding me might be because they had seen the huge pendulum of the church clock, (just as I had predicted) or because they had found in the wall the holes used by the builders of the tower to support their wooden scaffolding. My amazement was a great as theirs when I too saw were our route lay. An almost vertical ladder, with no handrail, led up to the clock-room.

With some difficulty, everyone managed to negotiate this obstacle. Coming last, in case any meteoric descents occurred, I emerged through the hole in the floor to find Vic waxing lyrical about his escapement mechanism and squirting oil liberally in all directions. The more mechanically minded were attending closely, whilst others appeared to take a greater interest in the large quantity of pigeon droppings which had accumulated near the wooden louvered windows.

It was at this point in time that I noticed Tommy, in particular. He was looking pale and nervous. All his attention was concentrated on a large crack in the flooring, through which he could see the floor below. He appeared reluctant to move away from the wall. When Vic had finished his guided tour of the clock, Tommy hung back while the other children climbed the next ladder to the belfry.

"The bells will ring out in one minute, when the clock chimes"; called Vic. "Put your fingers in your ears when I tell you."

When the time came. Helen - placid nervous Helen - was stranded halfway up the ladder, unable to put her fingers in her ears for hanging on for dear life. When the chimes rang she dissolved into tears and half clambered half slithered down the ladder again. Tommy backed further against the wall.

"Would you rather stay here?" I enquired of Helen when the chimes had stopped.” No I think I’ll be alright now" she replied. Helen, with her friends encouraging her from above, once more mounted the ladder and climbed to the top. Tommy moved round the wall and stood with his hands on the ladder. Gripping the ladder tightly, his fingers scarlet and his face pale, he too climbed it.

The children took it in turns to clamber out onto the roof of the tower. They commented on the view and criticised the weathercock. The latter had looked like a beautiful golden cockerel from ground level, but a close view revealed it as a crude and hideous approximation of the creature, which it was meant to represent. It was made from wood but was finished with a thin layer of gilt and was clearly designed to be seen at its best from thirty metres below and as for away as possible. We made our way gingerly back to ground level.

Back In the churchyard the children talked and laughed excitedly. Helen looked at her friends with a delighted smile- "I never thought I'd be able to do it", she said. Tommy, for once, was at a loss for words

We returned to school and had just begun our next set of activities when the Head appeared with one of the school governors ….”and this class is looking at local history. We don't have the National Curriculum for this kind of work yet, but I'm sure that when we do have the tests our children will do well."

"Better than other schools?" enquired the governor.

"Oh yes, I'm sure", replied the Head.

The governor turned to me. "Tell me" he said, "Is it Possible for these children to understand what the National Curriculum is?” It took me a while to realise that he actually wanted my opinion. I quickly removed the defensive frown from my face and answered brightly “Yes, they've learned all about weather cocks” The governor stared at me pointedly for a moment, muttered something which I didn't quite catch, and turned back to the Head. The Head smiled his most condescending smile, reserved for indicating that he was of an age to be in authority. "We'll be going", he announced.

I turned back to the class to find Helen and Tommy waiting for me. 'We would just like to know", said Helen, "when we are going up the tower again."

"You don't have to do it again if you'd rather not", I said. "Anyhow, there's no real need to go again, since we've settled the argument about the weather-cock."

"Oh, that thing", said Tommy. 'We aren't interested in that."

"It's because it's such good fun getting up there", said Helen, without even a trace of a smile, "and the view from the top is absolutely brilliant!"

They both broke into their most winning smiles reserved for persuading those in authority. I sighed and reached for my diary. NOTES FOR CONTRIBUTORS

The editorial committee is particularly concerned to attract contributions from classroom teachers, college lecturers, youth and community workers, head and deputy teachers, college principals and their deputies, teacher educators, student teachers, educational researchers and LEA officers and advisers.

Contributions may comprise analyses of existing practice, methods and programmes; critical discussions and accounts of new ideas and Methods; of developments and controversial issues; and reports on research and the like.

Manuscripts, which will not be returned, should be sent to The Editor, The Redland Papers, Faculty of Education, Redland Hill, Bristol BS6 6UZ. Articles should be typed on one side of the paper and double-spaced. Contributions should have a title and bear the name, role, status, personal address and, where different, the place of work of the author(s).

Contributors are encouraged to write directly about their experience and should not feel constrained by academic conventions.

Articles should not exceed the limit of 2000 words.

Notes should always be avoided.

If used, References should be indicated in the text by giving the author's name, with the year of publication in brackets (e.g. Smith & Brown (1989)). The references should be listed in full at the end of the paper in the following form:

SMITH, J & BROWN, R. (1989) 'Notes for contributors', The Redland Papers, Issue No.1, Spring Term, p.27.

BROWN, R. & SMITH, J. (1989) Writing for Publication (London: The Redland Press)

All contributions will be submitted to a referee on whose advise the editorial committee will draw when making Its decision to publish or not, or to seek revision before publication. All contributions will receive feedback.