“The review heard that in “some subjects the current construction and balance of content appears to be inhibiting” mastery.”
I’ve had a quick look at Schools Week’s summary of the interim curriculum review published by the DfE, and that quote stood out for me. The Review itself includes twelve references to ‘mastery’ without, as far as I can tell from a quick skim through, defining exactly what they mean by the term. The Review states:
“There is strong evidence that securing mastery in a subject is vital for raising standards and enabling future expertise. ”
All fine and dandy, but I would suggest reading the Education Endowment’s paper on the subject. The devil is in the detail, and the subject is not apolitical:
““teaching for mastery” is characterised by teacher-led, whole-class teaching; common lesson content for all pupils; and use of manipulatives and representations. ”
The EEF report goes on to say that collaborative approaches have also been found to be effective. Having studied ‘mastery’ as part of my MA, I can say with some confidence that it lends itself to a dumbed down tick box approach to teaching and assessment.
I wonder what the DfE will decide is ‘mastery’, and what the ‘correct’ way of achieving it is. I have a pretty good idea, and hope I’m wrong.