挑戰最具挑戰性的學校？Challenge the challenging schools？
screenshot source: https://ioelondonblog.wordpress.com/2018/02/12/our-greatest-challenge-what-is-the-best-way-to-support-the-most-challenged-schools/
在開始閱讀之前請注意：
這只是一個中國學生出於興趣的翻譯練習( 本次內容主要是對最近一場辯論的博客總結)。儘管得到了學院的許可，但絕非這一系列博客的官方譯本，且不保證翻譯精準度，更像是帶有個人色彩的解讀。如果你想要知道原意，請以英文官網為準：https://ioelondonblog.wordpress.com/2018/02/12/our-greatest-challenge-what-is-the-best-way-to-support-the-most-challenged-schools/
Before you go, please notice:
This is just a Chinese student』s translation practice due to her own interest (the content is a translation of a blog post for the latest debate). Despite of permission from IOE events team and the author, this is not the official translation of the blog post, nor a 100%correct translation to the original ideas. It is more like a personal interpretation. If you would like to know the original ideas, please refer to: https://ioelondonblog.wordpress.com/2018/02/12/our-greatest-challenge-what-is-the-best-way-to-support-the-most-challenged-schools/
Our greatest challenge: what is the best way to support the most challenged schools?
我們面臨的最大挑戰：給最具挑戰性的學校提供什麼支持是最好的？
POSTED ON FEBRUARY12, 2018
IOE Events.
發佈於2018年2月12日
IOE Events 團隊
The fifth in our 『What if…?』 debates series, looking at how best to support the most challenged schools, featured the stellar line-up of the National Schools Commissioner, Sir David Carter, Sam Freedman of Teach First, Head of Passmores Academy (and 『Educating Essex』) Vic Goddard, and Lucy Heller, Chief Executive of the international education charity Ark.
「如果…」系列辯論的第五場關注的是如何最好地給最具挑戰性的學校提供支持，參與辯論的嘉賓陣容強大：全英學校委員David Carter爵士，代表「教學優先」項目的Sam Freedman，以及Passmores學院的校長Vic Goddard（BBC 紀錄片Educating Essex中的學校），以及國際教育慈善組織Ark的首席執行長Lucy Heller。
source:https://twitter.com/ioe_london
While some schools and students buck the odds, the correlation between disadvantage and lower educational attainment remains a strong one. This has been a central concern in education debate for some time, but it seems we keep taking two steps forward and one step back on (some might say one step forward and two steps back). We asked our panellists:if you were Secretary of State, what would you do tocrack this problem once and for all?This required some radical ideas; what we got was radical but also practicable (well, in theory at least – even the suggestion of moving Parliament to Sheffield; the upcoming re-fit does provide the opportunity, after all…).
儘管有些學校和學生就是能打破賭注，在不被眾人看好的情況下逆襲成功，但處於劣勢和較低的教育成果還是有著很強的相關性。在教育界人士的激辯中，這也確實一直都是關注的重點，但我們似乎總是向前走兩步又往後退一步（有些人也會說是向前走一步，往後退兩步）。所以我們向參與辯論的四位嘉賓提出提出這樣的問題：如果你是內閣大臣，那麼你要採取什麼樣的措施來一勞永逸地解決這個問題呢？這需要一些激進的想法；而目前我們需要激進的同時也需要實際上可操作的措施（至少從理論上來說，比如把議會搬到謝菲爾德去；似乎即將到來的改組確實給了我們這樣的機會，但是畢竟…）。
source:https://twitter.com/ioe_london
Inevitably, the greater difficulties challenged schools face in recruiting and retaining teachers was a major theme. There are many potential levers at our disposal toaddress this. Some are monetary: paying off teachers』 student loans; helpingthem with housing; offering higher salaries. Other levers speak to teachers』working life, highlighting the need to 『de-risk』, in career terms, time spentin more challenging schools.
不可避免的是，具有挑戰性的學校面臨的更大困境是招聘並且讓老師願意留下來。在我們這次辯論所提出的倡議中，有不少可能有效的手段。有些是物質上的：給來這些學校任職的教師取消其大學時的學生貸款；幫助他們安居；提供更高的薪水。當然還有其他的措施比如在教師工作方面，重視『降低風險』的必要性，換句話說也就是這些具有挑戰性的學校需要有更多的時間投入。
source:https://twitter.com/ioe_london
Vic Goddard set out why teaching in these schools is different: the teachers are generally youngerand less experienced (and often teaching outside their subject area);regardless of their career stage, they will also have much more work to dooutside the classroom. So, reducing these teachers』 contact time* issomething to consider. Professional development was also on the menu – ideallyin the form of a 10-year plan, and bespoke to the teacher but also to theclasses he/she is teaching.
Vic Goddard提出在這些學校中的教學之所以不同，在於：整體上教師隊伍偏年輕而去缺少經驗（往往教的科目不是自己本行）；不管處於什麼職業階段，他們也都有很多教學之外的工作要做。所以，降低這些教師的在教室里的教學時間*是非常重要的。在給他們提供的職業發展菜單上應該有專業發展這一項，理想狀態下應該是有為每個教師量身定製的並且和他/她所教授的課程有關的十年計劃。
source:https://twitter.com/ioe_london
This is the time that teachers spend actually teaching in class.
Across the panel and audience there was a spectrum of views on how directive the government should be in its management of the teaching workforce. Ultimately, there was a preference for a voluntary/incentives-based rather than conscription-based approach to encouraging teachers away from the leafy suburbs**. A notable insight was the extent to which schools are now 『growing their own』 teachers. In contrast to the almost missionary model of Teach First of old, which was lauded for simply getting 『high flying』 role models into disadvantaged communities, schools – and Teach First – are seeing real benefits from teachers returning to their former schools. And this related to a wider shift in thinking on socialmobility, more on which in a moment.
參與辯論的嘉賓和聽眾在政府該如何指示教師工作量的管理上觀點各異。最終，大家都傾向於認為一個自願的/基於鼓勵的路徑鼓勵離開綠意盎然的郊區**去有挑戰性的學校從事教師行業要比徵兵式的方法好得多。值得注意的是，學校如何『培養他們自己的』老師。和『教學優先』傳教士般的傳統模式不同，各所學校-包括教學優先項目的學校-都在看到讓老師回到他們的母校真是好處多多。這也和思考社會流動性這一更廣泛的轉型有關。
source:https://twitter.com/ioe_london
Accountability was of course the other stand-out theme, the sentiment of the discussion summed up in the comment that we 『should focus less on weighing the pig and more on how to fatten it』. Government must be able to act briskly where problems are emerging– but accountability cannot be one size fits all, and needs to be pro-active and supportive, not reactive and punitive. An apparent 『easy win』 would be to better delineate the roles of Ofsted and the Regional Schools Commissioners.
問責制當然也是一個備受矚目的話題。整場討論的觀點最終可以歸結為這句妙語：我們『應該少關注給豬稱重還是多關注如何喂胖它』。政府必須要能夠利索地解決正在萌生的問題—但明確責任界限不是一刀切，還需要有積極主動的承擔和支撐，而不是消極被動的反饋或懲罰。這其中教育標準局和區域學校委員會所承擔的角色就值得深入思考。
source:https://twitter.com/ioe_london
Getting more radical, there were calls for an end to grammar schools and private schools. In the same vein, the need for a re-balancing of competition and collaboration came through strongly. While a system will always encompass both elements, a greater emphasis on schools』 collective role in educating the whole of the community, and supporting each other to that end, should be more inspiring than dog-eat-dog competition. Sometimes this will need stronger regulation/lessautonomy – not least over admissions (and illegal exclusions).
更激進的想法是，有嘉賓號召終結所有的文法學校和私校。同樣的論調還有，我們需要重新平衡競爭和合作的關係。儘管教育系統總是對兩項要素都很重視，但是應該更關注學校在這個社區的教育中起到的整體性作用，這樣的小鳥關乎職稱會產生更有激勵性的競爭，而不是狗咬狗的惡性競爭。有時候這會需要更多的規範/更少的自治—不只體現在錄取人數（和不合法的開除）。
source:https://twitter.com/ioe_london
In amongst these strands there were echoes of the New Labour children』s workforce/multi-agency working agenda (Every Child Matters). This came sharply to the fore in relationto children』s mental health, support for which, all panellists were clear, isat crisis point. Funding cuts have eroded both in-school support as well asChild and Adolescent Mental Health Services, and children being turned awayfrom the latter simply rebounds on schools, and of course the pupils themselves.
這次辯論中有部分內容讓人回想起新工黨提出的「每個兒童都重要」。在提到兒童的精神健康時，所有的辯論嘉賓都態度清晰地表明現在是危機時刻了。由於資金的減少，無論是學校內的還是兒童和青少年精神健康服務中心所提供的支持都受到了損害，後者拒絕了兒童之後把問題又還給了學校，最終受傷的當然是孩子。
Universities are part of the mix. Why are our most selective institutions not enrolling the best students from across all schools? Why are they not opening campuses in higher education 『cold spots』 in the UK as well as overseas? At the other end of the pipeline, so is early years provision, where policy is, in the words of one panellist, being driven by electioneering around the needs of working parents rather than the needs of the most needy children.
大學情況更為複雜一些。為什麼我們那些最精挑細選的機構沒錄取那些來自各所學校最棒的學生？為什麼他們不在英國高等教育的『冷點』區域建立校園，或者建立海外校園？在供應鏈的末端，和早期教育一樣，用一位演講嘉賓的話來講，政策是在努力拉攏工薪階層的父母，為了競選而在考慮他們的需求，忽視了最需要這些政策的兒童。
source:https://twitter.com/ioe_london
And this brings us full circle to the overarching problem – inequalities. Here the comments reflected the shift we』re beginning to see in the wider debate on social mobility – away from a 『(rescuing) embers from the ashes』 model to a focus on distributing resources, including talent, in a way that helps all communities to flourish. Schools sit at the heart of their communities, so hopefully they will feel the benefit of this shift in sentiment very soon…
這就把我們帶回了這個關於不平等的大問題。這就讓我們想起之前在討論社會流動性是的一些評論-遠離『（拯救）塵埃里的灰燼』，轉向關注資源的分布，包括天賦，以及如何幫助所有的社區都實現繁榮興旺。學校坐落於每個社區的心臟位置，那麼他們也應該也能夠很快感受到變化所帶來的好處。
source:https://twitter.com/ioe_london
*contact time：This is the time that teachers spend actually teaching in class.
**the leafy suburbs
Leafy suburbs in this blog refers to greener spaces that are attractive toindividuals and families, usually away from congestion, pollution, big citiesetc. – so in other words, what would drive teachers to leave the peace andquiet of suburbia to move to a less scenic, busier and more challenging area/environment to teach.
-2018.02.15 00:00 截止-
感謝你看到這裡，也請你如果覺得有幫助，發給你覺得可能會感興趣的朋友，一起開始討論、辯論吧！哪怕爭得面紅耳赤，卻仍然沒能達成一致的結論也沒關係，因為這本來就是最巨大的挑戰，而你已經走出了第一步——不再假裝它不存在。
Thanks for reading this, and it would be great if you are willing to forward and discuss even debate with friends on this topic. It does not matter if you have no consensus at the end, afterall it is the greatest challenge and you are not treating it as the elephant in the room.
TAG:GEO |