The state government under Stephan Weil has announced a school reform - and the debate about grades and repeat schooling is in full swing. In this interview, educational scientist Prof Dr Klaus Zierer calls for a differentiated view - based on the individual pupil.
QUESTION: The state government under Stephan Weil has announced a comprehensive school reform for Lower Saxony. The plan is to replace grades in primary schools with learning development reports and to gradually abolish the practice of sitting out. As an education expert, what do you think of these initiatives?
ZIERER: Both grades and the abolition of sitting-outs are controversial issues and must be viewed in an extremely differentiated way. Any attempt to make a generalised argument here is reductionist and programmatic.
QUESTION: Let's start with the issue of school retention.
To claim that grades are only bad and should therefore be abolished is, in my opinion, too short-sighted.
ZIERER: Firstly, a few important aspects. If being left behind means that a pupil repeats a year without receiving appropriate support, then it makes no sense. But it doesn't have to be like that. In the same way, it doesn't make sense to transfer all pupils without conditions. Support measures are also necessary here. Another thing to bear in mind is that there are systemic effects to being left behind. For example, the decision to keep a pupil in school must be seen in the context of the type of school and the year group and is dependent on the question of the school system's structure and the organisation of the transfer - keyword: parental will. Depending on how the decision is made here, this can have an impact on pupils being left behind.
QUESTION: And the grades?
ZIERER: The same applies to grades: to claim that grades are only bad and should therefore be abolished is, in my opinion, too short-sighted. Grades also have advantages. In addition, the hope that learning development reports will make everything better is not justified per se. A lot of development work still needs to be done here so that these learning development reports are not just formulated grades.
QUESTION: Do these reforms promote equal opportunities?
The individual must be the starting point for educational measures.
ZIERER: Equal opportunities and educational equity are the social education issues: Without education for all, there can be no democracy. But here, too, a differentiated view is necessary in order to be able to distinguish between equalising justice and discriminating justice, for example. The principle must be: suum cuique. In this respect, the individual must be the starting point for educational measures. So not the same for everyone! With a view to the issue of pupils staying in school, we can conclude that there may well be cases where this is the best solution. With regard to marks, a learning development report certainly has advantages over grades because they can be more differentiated. But the two can also be combined.
QUESTION: Isn't "doing laps of honour" also a pedagogical opportunity for those who remain in school?
The idea that there is a learning culture in which everyone can achieve everything and everyone is willing to give their all may be an infectious one. But it does not correspond to reality.
ZIERER: I've already mentioned that we should take a very differentiated look at the individual when it comes to this question. And then it may well be that repeating a year is the better option - because too much material was missed due to illness, because the family environment was so tense that nothing worked for a whole school year, etc. In addition, a new class group can also have positive effects. In the debate about school drop-outs, people often talk about the negative labelling of those who are left behind and usually fail to mention that those who are pulled along are themselves subject to these negative labels in their classes. In this respect, I would like to emphasise once again: We should take a very differentiated look at the individual here. The idea that there is a learning culture in which everyone can achieve everything and everyone is willing to give their all may be an infectious one. However, it does not correspond to reality. In addition: Achieving the class goal can be an important motivation.
QUESTION: Aren't teachers already stretched to their limits by challenges such as inclusion?
Many of the reforms that weigh on teachers have no pedagogical basis.
ZIERER: Yes! And not just since inclusion. What image of school is currently being painted and, above all, politically promoted? An all-day school in which all children - regardless of what conditions they come to school with - are taught, in which there is no sitting out, in which teachers cater to all the needs of society and which is also the best of all schools internationally and so on. No teacher can do that. What's more, many of these reforms that weigh on teachers have no pedagogical basis. Take the all-day school as an example: anyone who argues that primary school pupils, for example, are best at school all day is not primarily considering pedagogical arguments, but sociological and economic ones: The urge for freedom and independence is satisfied and the economic power of each individual is utilised.
QUESTION: The red-green government also wants to abolish the recently introduced turbo A-levels at comprehensive schools. The grammar schools themselves are to be free to decide on the eight-year (G8) and nine-year (G9) grammar schools. How do you assess this - do you see advantages or disadvantages?
ZIERER: This option seems sensible to me because it makes it possible to focus on the individual and their abilities - even if I would never have introduced the G8. Education is not a race, even if there are good reasons for the economy and the state budget to see it that way.
QUESTION: In your opinion, what resistance are the reform endeavours likely to encounter?
My demand is: smaller per capita quotas - in all educational institutions.
ZIERER: These reform discussions are political. In this respect, there will once again be a back and forth between the major parties. It's tiring because it's very much overlaid with programmes. Unfortunately, more and more educationalists are allowing themselves to be drawn into one camp - which is understandable, because this opens the floodgates. But it doesn't help the cause.
QUESTION: What consequences will the school reform have for training and further education at universities?
ZIERER: Hopefully not a degree programme in which it is no longer possible to fail! That would be a disaster. But I fear that we will once again be faced with a flood of reforms - which will then be reversed after a few years of reflection. See G8. It is precisely the hallmark of our current education policy that there are somersaults back and forth. However, we also know that structural and systemic reforms have the least effect. In this respect, it would make more sense to improve the specific working conditions on the ground. For example, there is currently a debate about class size because it supposedly has no positive effect - in my view, this is complete nonsense. At the university, I have to assess an average of 200 exams per semester from over 400 registered students. Feedback - one of the most important factors when it comes to evidence-based assessment - is hardly possible here. In comparison, my colleague at Oxford has twelve students over an academic year. So my demand would be: smaller head quotas - in all educational institutions.
