Growing pressures for conformity de-skill and demotivate teachers, study warns

Increasing pressure on teachers to adhere to curriculum policies is “deeply demotivating” and directly leads people to leave the profession, a new study warns.

Teachers value being able to be creative and collaborate with each other to design lessons, but are increasingly subject to school policies requiring their compliance.

Research shows that it also reduces their curriculum development skills and reduces teacher autonomy and motivation, as well as relationships between colleagues and with students.

There is a teacher recruitment and retention crisis in England. Recruitment of physical sciences teachers poses a particular challenge, with government recruitment targets failing to meet over the past ten years and a high proportion of physical sciences teachers leaving their posts early in their careers.

The study says that at a time when teacher retention is particularly low, policies that reduce teacher motivation should be a “deep concern.”

Dr Victoria Wong, from the University of Exeter, who led the study, said: “We found evidence that trust policies in schools and academies that demand compliance are potentially very demotivating for teachers and can deprive them of the opportunity to learn curriculum development for themselves.

“This might save time in the short term, but it would result in a loss of skills and experience in the profession, both through the direct loss of good teachers in the classroom and through reduced opportunities to learn from more experienced colleagues. Neither the loss of experienced teachers nor the loss of skills in the profession will lead to higher quality teaching.”

Dr Wong interviewed 15 highly experienced teachers about curriculum development at the academy, school or classroom level. The teachers involved had served either for more than 25 years as teachers or for more than 20 years and had worked with a learned society, the Association for Science Education, a relevant educational charity, a government agency, or an awarding body. Two of them had spent most of their careers in (selective) secondary schools, the others taught mainly in non-selective public schools, several in areas of high socio-economic deprivation. There were two biology teachers, seven chemistry teachers and six physics teachers.

The interviews showed that teachers, particularly experienced teachers, are flexible and can and do change their practice. This flexibility is particularly apparent when they respond to changes in assessment strategy. Teachers described a variety of creative ways in which they worked to engage and motivate students.

Participants expressed concerns about many new teachers’ lack of confidence in their ability to be creative in the classroom and argued that if new teachers failed to demonstrate creativity, they would be more likely to leave the profession.

As well as wanting the freedom to teach as they wish, teachers also value working collaboratively with their colleagues in a subject to improve aspects of their curriculum and associated resources.

Many teachers reported a reduction in their freedom as individuals and departments to design curriculum and teach due to school policies requiring uniformity and conformity in classroom practices. Some of the examples of expected compliance significantly limited teachers’ options in their classrooms.

Several participants argued that teachers are more likely to have the confidence to move away from centrally planned resources with experience and when teaching within their own subject, but that science is often taught by non-specialists, potentially limiting teachers’ confidence in their creativity.

Reasons given for an increase in compliance included: pressure from Ofsted; improve results in external examinations; saving time; improve teaching in the department; wanting to teach the “best” way and management teams do not trust teachers to do a good job if they are given more independence.

How the “best path” was decided was often unclear. One of the teachers described their leadership team looking for examples of practice in schools considered high performing, with the belief that if those schools taught a certain way, then it must be the “best way.” Other participants expressed concern that decisions about the “best way” were often made by people who had no experience teaching science, arguing that teaching strategies are often subject-specific and that this is not recognized by school policies that prioritize compliance.

Participants described various impacts related to the pressure to conform. These included increased monitoring, disciplinary procedures for non-compliance and feelings of demotivation.

The opportunity to develop increased skills and relationships helps explain why the opportunity to collaborate is an important factor in retaining teachers.

Some participants described the curricula planned at the academy trust level. These resources can reduce workload, but this comes at the expense of opportunities to develop teachers’ confidence, skills and competence in curriculum development.

Dr Wong said: “Removing the space for teachers to act as professionals and make their own judgments reduces teacher autonomy, fails to respect or recognize their skills and is likely to lead to poorer relationships with students because the material is not suitable for them. Three of the participants attributed leaving a school or profession to lack of opportunities for self-determination in the classroom, while several others discussed the highly prescriptive institutions they were familiar with and saying they would not be willing to teach without autonomy. Trusting relationships between school leaders and staff can support teacher motivation and contribute to retention.”

Reducing teacher autonomy deskills the profession. Teachers lacking curriculum design skills can lead school leaders to choose to use an externally written curriculum and the problem spreads until confidence and the ability to be creative in the classroom becomes the preserve of those with experience. Several participants expressed concerns about the ability of less experienced colleagues to design engaging curriculum – and that without it, teaching would be boring and unmotivating for both teachers and students.

The findings of this study have implications for all subjects and schools pursuing or considering more restrictive curriculum policies as well as organizations such as Ofsted.

The results are published in The program log.