CONSULTATION RESPONSE {short description of image}  
PROPOSALS for a 6-Term Year

Response of the Suffolk Division of the National Union of Teachers

Summary: Having carefully gathered the views of members, the Suffolk Division of the NUT concludes that the current proposals for a 6-term year do not meet with majority or consensus approval amongst teachers. Overall, the case for these particular changes is not made and any perceived advantages are outweighed by considerable disruption and consequences for the wider community, as well as to pupils and teaching programmes, which are difficult to predict. Some of the detail in the proposals has not been circulated by the LEA to schools or to the public (i.e. the actual dates as proposed). When these are considered, it is clear that the proposals fail to achieve the "advantages" claimed for such change. Only the idea of fixing the Spring ("Easter") holiday meets with clear majority approval. We therefore recommend a gradual and cautious approach which evaluates and monitors the effects of change, over a prolonged period of experimentation and careful trialling. At a time of continuing difficulty in recruiting and retaining teachers, any imposed changes which fail to take teachers' views fully into account will be counter-productive, if the aim is really to improve the education of our children.

  1. This response has been considered and endorsed on May 23rd 2002 by a meeting of the Suffolk NUT Division Council which represents members of all 6 NUT Local Associations in Suffolk. The Union has around 2,200 in-service members in the County.
  2. The NUT in Suffolk published the proposals in full to its members, based on the dates given in the Independent Commission on the Organisation of the School Year's report "The Rhythms of Schooling". The Union was careful to present the proposals without comment, requesting members' reactions. However, unlike the LEA, we did print the full details, including proposed term dates for 2003-4 and 2004-5.
  3. The Suffolk NUT gathered members views through: a) Agenda items in General Meetings; b) a website "Debates" page where members could post their views and c) e-mail feed-back facility where members indicated their views less publicly. The contents of the Debates page is given as Appendix 3. The Bury St Edmunds & District Association of the NUT also surveyed members on four key aspects of the proposals. Comments from this survey are given in Appendix 2.
  4. The National Union of Teachers National Executive has expressed its opposition to the proposals, nationally, and has communicated the following objections to the LGA:
    · The proposals would not reduce the current problems of workload, stress and teacher shortage, a fact confirmed by the report commissioned from PricewaterhouseCoopers, by the Government on teacher workload.
    · They might lead to considerable disruption in the organisation of examination timetables. The curriculum and teaching arrangements might need reorganisation.
    · There is no evidence that a six term year would have positive benefits for educational outcomes.
    · The two-week autumn break would fall between two terms of nine and eight weeks, respectively, which are in total considerably longer than the current autumn term, thereby negating the benefits of the longer break.
    · The proposals would be unlikely to reduce pressure upon main holiday periods. Reorganisation might also lead to revival of LGA proposals for changes in teachers' conditions of service floated in 1999 including, inter alia, lengthening of the working year.
  5. Responses from members support the National NUT view, including the results of the survey undertaken by Bury St Edmunds & District Association of the NUT in May with four key questions. The Association provided members with the dates proposed for the Eastern Region for 2004-2005 beforehand, so the opinions were based on a proper understanding of the implications re. holiday dates, actual term lengths, etc.
    % YES % NO % Other
    Do you agree with the idea of a fixed "Easter" holiday? 68 32 0
    Do you want to see terms of equal length? 70 27 3
    Do you want to start Term 1 in August? 22 74 4
    Do you agree to reducing the summer holiday to less than 6 weeks? 36 63 1
  6. It is clear from our soundings that there is a difference of response from teachers if the questions asked are (a) on the principles, as opposed to (b) taking into account the effect of applying those principles (e.g. actual dates). Our soundings show that nearly 3/4 of teachers want to see terms of more equal length and accept that, to achieve this, the main Spring holiday will not always coincide with the religious festival of Easter. However, a similar number do not want to start the school year in August.
  7. There is a sizeable minority of opinion which is against separating the school holiday from the religious festival of Easter. This has come mainly from the Aided and/or Primary sectors. The Union is anxious to promote equal opportunities for all and we would therefore find it difficult to argue that festivals of any one religion should take precedence over those of other religions, given the multi-faith nature of modern British society. At the same time, we believe that working practices should always make it possible for people of all globally recognised faiths to be able to practise their religion without hindrance or discrimination.
  8. The views of the Aided Sector must nevertheless carry considerable weight in this particular consultation, because their Governing Bodies decide the term dates, rather than the LEA. Having said that, it might be considered impractical for the Aided Schools' terms to vary significantly from those of County Schools in the same catchment area. However, where staff object vehemently (such as over returning in August, perhaps), there could be friction and a lack of consistency in the County.
  9. The main objection of members to the proposals is the excessive length of terms 1 and 2, the equivalent of the Autumn Term. Even given a 2-week break in October, members see this as an unnecessarily long haul from the Summer to Christmas. Psychologically, that period will still be seen as "the Autumn Term" and the proposals make it by far the longest stretch, even if it is considered as two terms. The two terms, taken together, are more than two weeks longer than any other 2 terms, taken together. Furthermore, starting in August makes BOTH term 1 and term 2 the longest of the year (2004-2005). If terms were really of equal length, they would be of 31 or 32 days (190 / 6) as far as pupil days are concerned. The table below illustrates the unequal length of terms using the dates proposed by the Regional Group:
    2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 Average Variation from Average
    Term 1 36 38 38 37.3 + 6 days
    Term 2 35 37 37 36.3 + 5 days
    Term 3 30 28 28 28.6 - 3 days
    Term 4 30 28 30 29.3 - 2 days
    Term 5 29 29 28 28.6 - 3 days
    Term 6 30 30 29 29.6 - 2 days
    Members note that there is no sensible reason for terms 1 and 2 being at least a whole week longer than the rest. With modular examinations and planning units of work for all stages and years, having truly uniform stretches of time is seen as of the greatest potential educational advantage of change. The current proposals do not actually provide such uniformity.
  10. The extreme length of these two terms is made worse by the short Christmas holiday for 2004-5 (10 weekdays from December 23rd to January 4th). Details such as this indicate the importance of not just responding on the basis of the principles: the implications in practice are crucial.
  11. It is not possible to make terms of really equal length, without radically altering the start and finish dates of the school year. The "Autumn" stretch is always longer than the others. More radical changes would rely on changing the academic year to starting in January and running through to December, or at least to count the 190 pupil days on that calendar basis. The only fixed holiday would then be the Christmas-New Year holiday. Thereafter, various models could provide terms of equal length with options for a long summer holiday involving July, August and/or September in varying amounts and with great flexibility, with a moveable "Easter" break. We note that Scottish and Danish schools, for example, return to school in August, but their term patterns are already more regular, and their assessment and examination regulations are not as prescriptive as in England.
  12. The need for a long summer holiday is clearly reflected in members' responses. We note that the Summer school closure period in England and Wales is actually one of the shortest such "holidays" in Europe, and significantly less than in France, for example.
  13. Members are also concerned that the dates for 2004-5 onwards do not include the 5 Professional Development (non-pupil) Days which will have to be added to the teachers' working year. As there is no suggestion emanating from Government that these 5 PD days will not be required from 2004 onwards, then Schools would have to eat into the school closure periods to find the time. As most schools add one or two PD Days to the beginning of Term 1 this would inevitably mean starting Term 1 even earlier (e.g. August 23rd or even August 20th in 2004). Furthermore, other PD days would have to target the supposedly longer "half-term" holidays, such as the proposed two-week holiday in October. The situation is made even more complicated by the STRB's report on workload (May 2002) which is talking of an entitlement to 5 additional professional development days, in addition to the 195 working days (See Appendix 1). This would eat still further into holiday periods.
  14. It is clear from our soundings that teacher objections to the current proposals are based on securing educational advantage by reducing term lengths, rather than concern about starting in August. Some have supported the proposals overall because they prefer to have more holiday time in July, than in August.
  15. The logic of the "six-week term" approach, given that the Christmas / New Year holidays are fixed and the Spring and Summer terms are affected by 4 bank holidays is that Term 1 should start much later in September and term 6 extend right to the end of July / beginning of August. This is unlikely to be popular.
  16. Several members have suggested counter-proposals, including support for a 4-term year, and for a 6-term year with all terms of 31 or 32 days (which would 32 or 33 days if PD days are included. Another suggested model, which fits in well with established holidays, is a 5-week unit or 10-week term. These often mean that terms cannot always start on a Monday and end on a Friday, but this is not considered as important as making terms genuinely equal in length. We favour the ideal of each term having at least 6 full weeks (divisible into 1,2 or 3-week modules of work). The current proposals do not even allow for 6 complete weeks in each term and create difficulties in the shorter, summer terms, which are also the most disrupted by other activities and examinations. When bank holidays appear in term time, they detract from the "full week" stipulation and mean once again that terms cannot start on Mondays and end on Fridays on every occasion.
  17. There are many ramifications for any changes in term dates, not least for examination boards. There must be a nationwide consensus for term dates in May, June and July if timetables for national public exams are going to be possible. There must be a clear and well-informed consensus on any changes, with dire consequences for any mistakes and unexpected outcomes.
  18. Furthermore, any changes of just one week or so for holidays in May and June will inevitably cause difficulty for all the national testing which takes place. This will make it particularly difficult for some areas to experiment with innovative patterns.
  19. We are concerned that some of the LEA's sampling of views will be flawed. The lack of illustrative dates in all the LEA's consultation documentation means that responses can only assume agreement or otherwise with broad principles, rather than with specific proposals. We have no confidence that the proposals are widely known or discussed amongst the public in general, or parents. Some headteachers filled in the whole-school survey without reference to staff, governors or parents and might have given only their personal view.
  20. Much research needs to be done amongst business and commerce to assess the impact of any proposed changes on the county's economy and work patterns. A large number of enterprises and activities change or are suspended depending on school closure periods. An example would be bus and other transport services where timetables (and therefore employment patterns) are tied to school days. Catering and entertainment/sporting business may also be affected, as well as child care and all services supporting children and young people, or employing parents of young children.
  21. There is great concern amongst teachers that the change in holidays, especially around Easter, will lead to more parents taking their children away on holiday during term time.
  22. There would also be clarification needed (and thought given) as to the contractual situation for teachers: (a) would there be six resignation dates and six notice periods for teachers and (additional notice) for headteachers? (b) How would the system cope with a teacher arriving from an area where they still have the traditional terms? (A procedure already exists for staff transferring to and from Scotland, but there could be a whole range of options, if some LEAs opt out of the proposed changes, while some opt in.)
  23. Any attempt to proceed nationally or regionally on the basis of such opposition, concern and lack of full research would be, in our view, reckless.

Appendix 1: The School Teachers Review Body Report on Workload anticipates retaining the 5 whole-school PD Days and adding an "entitlement" to further continuing professional development outside the school day and school closure periods.

Paragraph 91, Chapter 6: Taking into account, however: the desire of many teachers to spend more time on their development; the introduction of the performance management system which is likely to focus further attention on development; the demands posed by a rapidly changing school environment; and the need to replace the generation of middle and senior management getting close to retirement, we recommend that teachers be given a further entitlement to CPD, equivalent to five days, beyond the current 195 working days. Expenses such as course fees and travel costs should be paid. This would not be a requirement to undertake additional CPD but an option for the teacher. Teachers who wished to take advantage of this entitlement could use it to meet individual needs subject to the agreement to specific plans by the headteacher or appropriate authority.

Appendix 2: Comments from Bury St Edmunds & District NUT members, added to the survey form.

Note: Although the Bury St Edmunds & District Survey of members did not ask for comments, several were received. We print these comments below to supplement those given on the website (See Appendix 3).

Comments:

In Canada and France, schools shut for 2 months + in the summer and children’s education doesn’t suffer, but whilst in school there is parental and public support for good behaviour and work and completion of homework. Children there don’t expect to be entertained, they expect to work.

‘Yes’ to the first two questions because I am in a Primary School. At the moment, the workload for the Spring Term, and particularly Yr 1, is unworkable in a short term. Equal term length will also mean equality for children starting school. This year’s 1st term Reception had hardly settled in before it was time for the Easter Break.

Will an alteration to the term lengths and number mean alteration to our plans? I can see that school plans could fairly easily be adapted as we work on 6.5 termly plans anyway. However, the national literacy plans cover 3 whole terms. Will we be presented with new files to cover 6 terms? (This would be yet another excuse for the Government to gloat about how much money put into Education).

PD Days: it would be outrageous to put them into the short breaks. The only reason there are not more teachers suffering from stress is that we have clear breaks to look forward to. To break into a week’s school holiday for a PD day may interfere with teachers’ own holiday plans.

What a lot of fuss over 1 week’s change: moving 1 week from the Summer Holiday to the October break What amount of administration will that cause (and cost)?

I was very concerned to read somewhere that the NUT had support these plans. This member doesn’t.

Will the Travel Industry seek more opportunities to raise the cost of holidays during any longer breaks? This will then entice even more parents (many of whom take no notice of school holidays anyway) to take children out of school in term time - already a serious problem at testing times (and others).

Will this make children perform any better? This government is very fond of holding up other countries as examples. So follow other European countries where children start school later have a shorter working day, yet apparently come out at the end better educated. But that’s another story.

The idea of starting earlier in August is appalling. We need longer holidays at Christmas, at time when staff and children are at a "winter low! and need extra time to recover as Christmas is not much of a rest anyway.

Definitely need full week for each half-term, no "eating into the week with PD Days.

Teachers and other school staff already have to pay "peak prices" for holidays. I expect prices will go up as the holiday business puts them up even more in order to keep their incomes up because they’ll have shorter summer hols in which to catch all those people who cannot go at any other time of year. And all those responsible families who refuse to take their children out of school time in order to take advantage of cheaper holiday rates. The six week summer break should stay: it’s the only time when the body clock actually begins to truly "clock off".

Can’t see the point of this new proposed system, other than the 2 week break in October, which is very necessary.

5-term x 8 weeks would be better, but ....

If PD Days were taken at the beginning of every term, those teaching groups on a Monday (as the only day of contact) would miss out badly and schools may need to consider having a 6 or 7-day school week rather than the normal 5.

With even more bank holidays included in the new system - 5!! When do you have PDD days? More Mondays missed??

I personally would prefer 2 weeks in May than in October and as my children go to school in Cambridgeshire, I would like to see both counties have the same dates, unlike the differences of this year!

There is the option of 5 terms of 8 weeks. Has this model been explored and term/holiday patterns published?

My major concern is returning for 4 days before the Bank Holiday in August and for 4 days after the Easter holiday. I think we will lose of lot of pupils in these 4 days. It would also be more realistic in terms of attendance to have 2 weeks off in May, not October, although I realise that this would not be possible with the present exam system.

As a parent, I would not like my children to return to school in August. Will parents be consulted?

It’s important that PD days don’t eat into the holidays. I remember spending many hours in my holidays planning, re-organising classrooms, libraries cupboards, etc., when I was on contract. (From a supply teacher)

The Suffolk Proposals for 2003-2004 seem to be pretty much as normal. Those for 04-05 are a real "dog’s breakfast, presumably put together by a committee! My own preference would be for a five term year (8+2; 8+2 8+2; 8+2; 8+4) This would give much needed consistency and regularity to our patterns of work. The proposals as they exist for 04-05 should be thrown out.

Unless the changes proposed are national, or at least regional, it will cause chaos for families such as mine, where parents and children attend schools in other counties. In this corner of Suffolk I know many families which would be affected. Recently half term differed completely and the Easter holiday overlapped but variously, which was very inconvenient.

10-day holiday in October is horrid!! Much better would be 5 days in October and 10 days in May/June.

As I am part-time .6 I don’t feel the desperate need for holidays as I did working full time, so feel I can’t comment properly. Also the change is so little, I wonder if it’s worth it. If anything I would prefer the October holiday to be 8 days and the Feb holiday to be 7. Maybe PD days could be taken during this time instead of August and/or Easter.

It seems to me that the Autumn term(s) is still considerably longer than the others. Why not add another week on in July instead of starting in August?

GCSE exam results arrive in schools on the 4th Thursday in August. We can’t cope with Yr 12 arriving to start a sixth-form course, before they have their GCSE results.

I believe we should adopt the 4-term year. The most important aspect of the change must be equal term lengths as 4 or 5 weeks is not long enough to motivate students or to study in depth and 8 weeks leads to exhaustion and apathy in students and staff.

Appendix 3: Individual Views posted on the "Debates" website. See separate pages.