1.

Understand the purpose and use of resources in the student’s own specialist area

1.1 Explain the purpose of resources in learning and teaching

The purpose of classroom resources in learning and teaching it’s huge necessity in planning for
the lessons and learners is to understand the three elements facts are to aiding, the learning
and teaching,to identifying of the learning outcome experience by using video, images, charts
to help visually provide in depth explanation during teaching a session to achieve the knowledge
and experience of learning. The purpose of classroom resources is to increase understanding,
to reinforce the key fact, creating a deeper learning, motivation and ideas. There are many
different types of categories, charts, whiteboards, posters etc. many teaching resources like
whiteboard supplementary aid to learning and teaching.

Teaching and learning resources are the tools that classroom teachers use to help the students
learn quickly and effectively by using the whiteboard or complex as a computer program, video
or stories told by the teacher or learner will increase the knowledge of the learners. The
importance of teaching and learning resources provides something for them to see, do,
understand and hand on activities to help them to be a better learner in class. When learners
are in a physical classroom the learners are able to collect or get some information from an
experienced teacher. The classroom may have a different range of learners with different needs
and goals.

The classroom must be fill of resources as a teacher dealing with learners in the classroom is
very dealing may find very difficult task because all the learners are different to each other it
very important for teacher she or he would include variety of learning and teaching resources
during teaching because adaptation capability and preference of students maybe different all
depends on the competency of the teacher that how she or he is going to convert the traditional
classroom into a resourceful teaching and learning environment.

The classroom resources are categories into four groups: Simple, Compound, Complex,
Abstract

Simple Resources - textbooks, whiteboard, poster, charts and image

Compound Resources is to use two or more resources jointly for the better outcome. Class
size reduction and adequate teacher preparations lesson plan before entering into the
classroom and the use of technology and expertise of the teacher.

Complex Resources which are not easily brought, measured or adjusted are considered as
complex resources that can include the instructional approaches and teaching philosophies.
The category instructional approaches individual teaching, one to one teaching, cooperative
teaching, computer instruction teaching.
Abstract Resources collegial decision making practices, internal teaching accountability
distributed leadership role. How can we develop a classroom as a resource room? It is up to
the teacher and the knowledge and expertise of the teacher. The role of a teacher is very
important according to Judson (2006) “teacher is the key determinant in implementation of and
classroom innovation”.

With the best regards to educational technologies, teacher belief in self-efficacy and the school
context can affect their implementation and use of technology the most important piece of
classroom resource is a whiteboard or smart board it can be used in many different context,
important points of content, drawing diagrams, flow chart, brainstorming, charts number to solve
mathematical problems, use of different colour pens etc.

The behaviour of teachers with learners is very important. The instructional equality of the
teacher should be good with the learners. The physical layout of a classroom space can
influence the relationship among the learners, their peers, the teacher and the content being
taught. The teacher can use different group activities to enhance interaction among learners
which the role of the teacher is to facilitate. Smart class is a system designed to bring the
teacher and learners at different physical locations together in an interactive environment using
video conferencing and broadcasting techniques. The tech-able classroom resources include
smart boards, projector, computer, index cards, audience response systems e.g. google
collaboration tools, 3D printing and wikis in the classroom safe environment setting.

1.2 Evaluate the effectiveness of specific resources from your own specialist area in meeting
individual learning needs

Effectiveness of specific resources, e.g. specific to knowledge content, addressing and

developing required skills, matched to abilities of learners, appropriate level of
challenge, linked to desired learning outcomes, actively involving learners, supporting
individual learning and study, aid to demonstration, the value of ‘real thing’, simulation
when ‘real thing’ is unavailable, extending learning, use of new technologies. I agree to
partner with my students in which we both hold responsibility to the learning. If
teaching has not taken place and the students have not learned to the best of their
abilities. How my students conceived and measured, influences and the development of
the education policy in my daily delivery of the curriculum. In my specialist area I teach
my students that their learning is not my responsibility but their to by making sure the
resources are available for their educational needs. By improving student attitudes,
motivation and confidence contributes to positive learning outcomes. The concept of
positive effective learning is not limited to just students achievement gains,
differentiating between factors can become impossible. My teaching method is very
effective because I focused on my classroom resources to help students achieve growth
in class result from inspired, competent teaching of a board rich curriculum that
engaged students and motivated their learning and prepared them for continued
success. According to Ofsted, a good classroom practice in general must include
teachers addressing individual student needs effectively. The principles and criteria are
clearly set out in the inspection handbook of Ofsted that teachers can consult regularly.
(Ofsted 2005).

In my practice, I make use of both informal and formal sources of information

development in my own specialist area. In regard to informal sources, I encourage
students to make use of the library or study group provision where students can going
and take charge of projects, conducting research on what they are researching on from
a variety of resources such as reference fiction or non-fiction books, newspaper and
magazines related to my speciality, networked computers to be used in the classroom.
It introduces students to internet resources to inform specific subjects or areas such as
classroom or group discussions.

As a teacher, I can only achieve credibility by demonstrating required skills and

knowledge at the level taught in my discipline. I have feedback from my colleagues,
lesson observation and students feedback. I promote the development of
flexible/blended resources for extending learning opportunities due to complexity
subjects which really require additional supportive resources. I introduced students to
internet resources to inform specific subjects, to build a dynamic level of interaction
between teachers and students, peers as well as students with the virtual learning
environment (VLE).

2. Understand the Policy Context of Education and Training

2.1 Explain the ways in which social, political and economic factors influence
practice in your own area of specialism

In my essay I will look at the social and policy development in education over the
last 30 years that has influenced or failed young people in their education
especially in these policies in relation to social exclusion, inequality and poverty.

In my concerns about widening access and educational inequality in inner city

especially London in the 1980s which emerged widespread fear of injustice in
regards to the poor and falling stands in the UK education system. The concerns
are individuals leaving school early and without the basic education skills. The
examination underachievers had also recognised the education policy maker
particularly the problems. The Conservative Governments in the 1980s and
1990s increased the pace to reform and introduced the call “marlat mechanism”
into the UK education system in an attempt to force schools to raise the
standards. Then they move towards a “quasi-market” in education, which
children started by a significant piece of legislation in 1988 Education Reform Act
which has introduced the market reforms and national curriculum.

The Labour Government can up with the catchphrase “educiation, education,

education” the New Labour continues to develop educational policies on
excellence, introducing the notion of social exclusion and inclusion and
identifying policies to tackle issues of poverty through education. The New
Labour Government introduced Senior Secondary Schools and curricula that are
more vocationally responsive leading to the Education Maintenance Allowance
(EMA) subsidy for 16 to 19 years old. Political, economic and social influences
have not changed.

Political, economic and social influences have not changing policy in education
the only great change is the technological changes demanded the revision to
educational policy especially the curriculum made priorities and the teaching
styles in the 21st century for our children the future leads. The technologies
changing partners of everyday life, then the education cannot remain oblivious to
any future changes in the education system. The Government had to quickly
invest large amounts of money in the teaching of Information Communication
Technology (ICT) in schools and lifelong learning programmes.
The new educational policies should primarily be addressed at personal and
academic development that will ultimately provide a more equitable education
system for all.

The Department of Education and Skills (DfES) (2006) stated that the impact of
educational services not always to meet individual needs have a large
disproportionately that are still affecting one particular group of BME young
people, which is recognised in the Every Child Matters (ECM) consultation paper,
it’s asserts that ‘.....teenagers from some BME groups face greater challenges
than other in growing up’ (Youth Matters: Green Paper (2005:13). The poor
social service that is offered to BME young people is compounded by the
minority ethnic population being over-represented in almost all measures of
social exclusion (ODPM (2003) their poor socio-economic position is closely
associated low to education attainment and achievement. Governments need to
think about the educational policies and initiatives that must be responses to the
struggle over particular construction of social, political, economic and cultural
changes. The evidence of the positive impact of the reforms on the poor,
minorities and the socially excluded is minimal.
Social policies all influence what type of action available from or to the
government. The media has a huge influence in society. It impacts public views,
if they report negative issues regarding the education system that is failing
children of the future it's likely to cause unrest and unease in society. Society
has the right to demonstrate and demand all the right social needs for young
people to meet.

Policy
There are different policy processes that are in place to have few government bodies
that carried out some of the policies.
National Government who develop the policy.
Local Government implement and action the national policy.
Communities or National Population the people will benefit from the policy.
National or Regional Government Agencies - such as Public Health of England, Local
Enterprise Councils who implement and action national
policy.
Government Department who implement and action national policy.

Policy relevance and implications

Policies aimed at encouraging higher education should not only target the young, but
also increase the uptake and positive valuation of education across the lifespan.
Awareness campaigns promoting the benefits of education, and portraying practical and
vocational skills as valuable in their own right, would affirm the inherent value of
education at all levels.
The negative impact of rising tuition fees on higher education applications should be
addressed and counteracted, at the least by capping the fee at the current level.
Alternative models of funding higher education should also be considered.
More funding should be made available in the early career stage to encourage
educational progression. Serious consideration should be given to reintroducing an
education maintenance allowance across the UK.
Policies should aim to remove the stigma attached to lower levels of education. For
instance, media guidelines could seek to limit stereotypical, negative portrayals of the
lower educated.

Social
Education has become one of the clearest indicators of life outcomes such as
employment, income and social status, and is a strong predictor of attitudes and
wellbeing.

Education is often used by people to shape their ‘social identity’, framing their
understanding of themselves and their relationships with other people. A positive,
affirming social identity is associated with a range of positive outcomes in life, such as
increased wellbeing, health, social trust and political engagement.

However, the emphasis on education in today’s society makes it much harder for people
with low levels of education to develop a positive social identity. This can negatively
affect self-esteem and wellbeing.

I conclude that the statement is not neutral and politically driven with respect to
the changes occurring in education policies.
 2.2 Investigate industry existing educational Policies on curriculum and practice in own areas of
specialism.

The business and industry sectors are among the more active groups to lobby the Government
to reference the lack of literacy and skills gaps in all areas of the workplace . These business
places would engage in partnerships with Schools, Colleges. The business industry has been
lobbying the government for some time to review the poor and basic functional skills of
applicants. The intervention to improve the functional skills in all levels of education can only
benefit the students and future employers while making it difficult for teachers delivering
curriculum planners to develop into an extremely busy curriculum and lesson plans. The
embedding of enterprise could prove to be an excellent policy should the teachers get the
training on how and when to use said embedded knowledge(A Guide to Enterprise Education ,
2010).

The Labour government in 2007 made significant changes to education system and policy with
a greater emphasis on assessment at all levels, with league tables for schools and the beefing
up of the school inspectorate OFSTED. In the drive to raise education standards schools that
where deemed to be failing their students were taken over and put in special measures eg.
Administration for schools. In 2010 the new Conservative Government continued the work of
OFSTED and turned its attention to improving teaching standards across the board and
changing the qualification structure for further education moving to a points based system with
interchangeable points linked to modules with standardized values. The new Government Policy
didn’t end there, new requirements for teachers/Lecturers to raise teaching standards with
greater emphasis on regular assessment . The standardized Points base modules have
certainly made Teaching/lecturing in higher education more course based leaving very little time
to expand on the subject matter. Students will point to lessons being high on content and boring
However this has led to greater emphasis on meeting performance indicators by the use of
regular feedback self assessment and assessment.

A new report by the Education Policy Institute (EPI), finds that a three-year funding package
totalling £13.5bn will be required by the government to reverse the damage to pupils’ learning
as a result of the pandemic.¶

The analysis, which models the impact of lost learning and sets out a series of fully costed,
evidence-based proposals, shows that significant investment will be required to deliver on the Prime
Minister’s promise to the nation that “no child is left behind.”¶
The government has stated that education recovery is central to its “build back better” agenda, and has
already committed £1.7bn in short-term catch-up funding to support pupils in England in the wake of the
biggest post-war disruption to the education system. A comprehensive, long-term education recovery
plan is expected to be unveiled soon.

The EPI report draws on its latest research on lost learning carried out for the Department for Education
(DfE), along with economic modelling on the long-run impact of the pandemic on young people’s
employment and life chances, and a review of the most effective policies in supporting pupils’
attainment and wellbeing.

To reverse months of lost learning and prevent total lost future earnings for pupils running into the tens
of billions, the research shows that the government will need to put in place an ambitious, multi-year
programme of support.

Policies which EPI is calling on the government to implement include extended school hours for social
and academic activities, additional Pupil Premium funding, summer wellbeing programmes, more
incentives for teachers to work in “challenging areas”, further mental health support in schools and an
option for some pupils to retake the year.

The series of education interventions total £13.5bn over the course of this Parliament and taken
together, would seek to reverse the lost learning seen by pupils since March 2020. The package
compares with the DfE’s annual schools budget for England of £48bn.

While regaining months of lost academic progress must be the immediate priority, the report argues that
if implemented effectively, such interventions should be retained beyond the three-year period to
address pre-existing inequalities in education and improve outcomes.

EPI research shows that prior to the pandemic, disadvantaged pupils were already 18 months of
learning behind their more affluent peers by the time they took their GCSEs – with that attainment gap
already starting to widen.

The retention of these policies should also be met with further investment beyond schools – in wider
children’s services and mental health services; supported by an urgent child poverty strategy.

You can read the full report here.

 ¶

Key findings and recommendations¶

¶

How much learning have pupils lost and what will the long-run impact be?¶

The evidence on pupil learning loss, the impact on future earnings if left unaddressed and the level of
remedial funding required.¶

Analysis of pupil learning loss by EPI and Renaissance Learning for the Department for Education,
shows that by the first half of the 2020 autumn term, pupils in England had experienced losses of up to
two months in reading (in primary and secondary schools), and up to three months in maths (in primary
schools). Following school closures before Christmas and in early 2021, losses are likely to have
increased further.

● Based on an estimated range of pupil learning loss, this would result in total lost lifetime

earnings for pupils of between 1 and 3.4%, equating to £8,000 and £50,000 in lost earnings per

pupil. This would generate a total long-run cost between £62bn and £420bn across the 8 million

school children in England. This range is likely to be a highly conservative estimate of the true

long-run costs of lost learning.

 ● Based on expected levels of learning loss, and taking into account the typical expenditure on

schools, empirical evidence on the impact of additional spending on learning and the scale of

interventions implemented in similar countries, an education recovery funding package of

around £13.5bn will be required by the government.

Education recovery in schools: 10 proposals to prevent pupils from being left behind

The following activities and policies, which are most likely to be effective in supporting pupils in primary
and secondary schools, should be included in the forthcoming recovery plans:

● Extended school hours: schools should be open before and after normal school hours for

pupils to engage in a range of programmes, including sports clubs, social activities, games,

pastoral support and academic programmes. (3-year cost: £3.2bn).

● Summer wellbeing programmes: summer programmes should have an academic component

whilst also providing an opportunity for young people to socialise through sports and other

activities. The government has already made £200m available for 2021 “summer schools”, but

these are mostly targeted at those entering year 7. The programme should be open to all pupils

aged 5 to 16. (3-year cost: £2bn).

● One-to-one and small group tuition: the government currently provides one-to-one and small

group tuition via the National Tutoring Programme (NTP). It should continue to fund tuition over

the next three years, either through the NTP or directly through schools themselves –

depending on the success of the NTP over the next year. (£340m cost in total for 2022-23 and

2023-24)

● An increase and extension of the Pupil Premium: The Pupil Premium should be increased to

reflect the likely widening of the gap between poorer pupils and their peers following the

pandemic. It should also be extended to those on a Child Protection Plan (CPP), given these

pupils are more educationally disadvantaged. (3-year cost of increase: £720m. 3-year cost to

extend to CPP: £390m).

● Greater incentives for teachers to work in “challenging areas”: teacher quality is the most

important in-school driver of pupil outcomes. Extra payments given to teachers to work in
 “challenging areas” should be doubled to £2,000 per year, extended to existing teachers, and

focused on the poorest 20-25% of schools. (3-year cost: £135m).

● Extra funding for schools to hire a mental health support worker: given that young

people’s mental health has deteriorated over the last year, and the link between wellbeing and

attainment, schools should be given additional, ringed-fenced funding to hire a support worker.

This could be an educational psychologist, pastoral worker, or counsellor. Current plans do not

guarantee immediate or sufficient support for all schools (3-year cost: £1.5bn).

● New guidance to schools to support better wellbeing and inclusion: clear guidance should

be given to schools to improve understanding of children’s complex wellbeing needs and the

need to avoid exclusions following the pandemic. (3-year cost: neutral).

● Softer accountability measures for schools in 2021-22: Ofsted should refrain from a

“business as usual” approach and instead focus inspection on how well schools are supporting

pupils following the pandemic. Given the changes to exam grades, school performance tables

should continue to be suspended for the 2022 cohort.

● A new continuous professional development (CPD) fund for teachers: high-quality CPD for

teachers has been shown to have a significant effect on pupil attainment. The government

should create a new and distinct CPD fund for all teachers which focuses on delivering

high-quality support programmes with greater transparency and accountabilityA new report by

the Education Policy Institute (EPI), finds that a three-year funding package totalling

£13.5bn will be required by the government to reverse the damage to pupils’ learning as

a result of the pandemic.

The analysis, which models the impact of lost learning and sets out a series of fully costed,
evidence-based proposals, shows that significant investment will be required to deliver on the Prime
Minister’s promise to the nation that “no child is left behind.”

The government has stated that education recovery is central to its “build back better” agenda, and has
already committed £1.7bn in short-term catch-up funding to support pupils in England in the wake of the
biggest post-war disruption to the education system. A comprehensive, long-term education recovery
plan is expected to be unveiled soon.
The EPI report draws on its latest research on lost learning carried out for the Department for Education
(DfE), along with economic modelling on the long-run impact of the pandemic on young people’s
employment and life chances, and a review of the most effective policies in supporting pupils’
attainment and wellbeing.

To reverse months of lost learning and prevent total lost future earnings for pupils running into the tens
of billions, the research shows that the government will need to put in place an ambitious, multi-year
programme of support.

Policies which EPI is calling on the government to implement include extended school hours for social
and academic activities, additional Pupil Premium funding, summer wellbeing programmes, more
incentives for teachers to work in “challenging areas”, further mental health support in schools and an
option for some pupils to retake the year.

The series of education interventions total £13.5bn over the course of this Parliament and taken
together, would seek to reverse the lost learning seen by pupils since March 2020. The package
compares with the DfE’s annual schools budget for England of £48bn.

While regaining months of lost academic progress must be the immediate priority, the report argues that
if implemented effectively, such interventions should be retained beyond the three-year period to
address pre-existing inequalities in education and improve outcomes.

EPI research shows that prior to the pandemic, disadvantaged pupils were already 18 months of
learning behind their more affluent peers by the time they took their GCSEs – with that attainment gap
already starting to widen.

The retention of these policies should also be met with further investment beyond schools – in wider
children’s services and mental health services; supported by an urgent child poverty strategy.

You can read the full report here.

Key findings and recommendations

How much learning have pupils lost and what will the long-run impact be?

The evidence on pupil learning loss, the impact on future earnings if left unaddressed and the level of
remedial funding required.

● Analysis of pupil learning loss by EPI and Renaissance Learning for the Department for

Education, shows that by the first half of the 2020 autumn term, pupils in England had

experienced losses of up to two months in reading (in primary and secondary schools), and up

to three months in maths (in primary schools). Following school closures before Christmas and

in early 2021, losses are likely to have increased further.

● Based on an estimated range of pupil learning loss, this would result in total lost lifetime

earnings for pupils of between 1 and 3.4%, equating to £8,000 and £50,000 in lost earnings per

pupil. This would generate a total long-run cost between £62bn and £420bn across the 8 million

school children in England. This range is likely to be a highly conservative estimate of the true

long-run costs of lost learning.

 ● Based on expected levels of learning loss, and taking into account the typical expenditure on

schools, empirical evidence on the impact of additional spending on learning and the scale of

interventions implemented in similar countries, an education recovery funding package of

around £13.5bn will be required by the government.

Education recovery in schools: 10 proposals to prevent pupils from being left behind

The following activities and policies, which are most likely to be effective in supporting pupils in primary
and secondary schools, should be included in the forthcoming recovery plans:

● Extended school hours: schools should be open before and after normal school hours for

pupils to engage in a range of programmes, including sports clubs, social activities, games,

pastoral support and academic programmes. (3-year cost: £3.2bn).

● Summer wellbeing programmes: summer programmes should have an academic component

whilst also providing an opportunity for young people to socialise through sports and other

activities. The government has already made £200m available for 2021 “summer schools”, but

these are mostly targeted at those entering year 7. The programme should be open to all pupils

aged 5 to 16. (3-year cost: £2bn).

● One-to-one and small group tuition: the government currently provides one-to-one and small

group tuition via the National Tutoring Programme (NTP). It should continue to fund tuition over

the next three years, either through the NTP or directly through schools themselves –

depending on the success of the NTP over the next year. (£340m cost in total for 2022-23 and

2023-24)

● An increase and extension of the Pupil Premium: The Pupil Premium should be increased to

reflect the likely widening of the gap between poorer pupils and their peers following the

pandemic. It should also be extended to those on a Child Protection Plan (CPP), given these

pupils are more educationally disadvantaged. (3-year cost of increase: £720m. 3-year cost to

extend to CPP: £390m).

● Greater incentives for teachers to work in “challenging areas”: teacher quality is the most

important in-school driver of pupil outcomes. Extra payments given to teachers to work in
 “challenging areas” should be doubled to £2,000 per year, extended to existing teachers, and

focused on the poorest 20-25% of schools. (3-year cost: £135m).

● Extra funding for schools to hire a mental health support worker: given that young

people’s mental health has deteriorated over the last year, and the link between wellbeing and

attainment, schools should be given additional, ringed-fenced funding to hire a support worker.

This could be an educational psychologist, pastoral worker, or counsellor. Current plans do not

guarantee immediate or sufficient support for all schools (3-year cost: £1.5bn).

● New guidance to schools to support better wellbeing and inclusion: clear guidance should

be given to schools to improve understanding of children’s complex wellbeing needs and the

need to avoid exclusions following the pandemic. (3-year cost: neutral).

● Softer accountability measures for schools in 2021-22: Ofsted should refrain from a

“business as usual” approach and instead focus inspection on how well schools are supporting

pupils following the pandemic. Given the changes to exam grades, school performance tables

should continue to be suspended for the 2022 cohort.

● A new continuous professional development (CPD) fund for teachers: high-quality CPD for

teachers has been shown to have a significant effect on pupil attainment. The government

should create a new and distinct CPD fund for all teachers which focuses on delivering

high-quality support programmes with greater transparency and accountability. (3-year cost:

£1.2bn).

● Allow pupils to repeat a year if appropriate: to tackle some extreme individual cases of

learning loss, the government should introduce a new right for pupils to repeat a year of

education, where this is supported by their parent or parents. This would only apply to a very

small minority of pupils. (2-year cost: £180m).

Recovery for younger children: early years education

Schools alone should not be left to provide support – the recovery must also include support for
younger children in the early years – where high quality education and care can play a decisive role.
The following policies should be included:
 ● Increase funding for the Early Years Pupil Premium: bringing it up to the same rate as

primary aged pupils. (3-year cost: £400m).

● Fund a pilot study into the effect of higher quality early years education on young

children: government funding for early years providers is below the OECD average. A pilot

would provide evidence on the impact of high-quality provision funded at a higher rate than

what is currently provided. (3-year cost: £83m).

Recovery for older students: 16-19 education

16-19 education already faced severe challenges prior to the pandemic, seeing the largest real-terms
loss of funding in any phase of education since 2010/11. The following policies for colleges, sixth forms
and those studying apprenticeships will be required to reverse the impact of the pandemic:

● Extend the 16-19 Tuition Fund for a further two years (2-year cost: £204m).

● Provide funding to extend 16-19 courses for an additional year where there is demand

(3-year cost: £990m).

● Fund post-16 places in Alternative Provision (3-year cost: £263m).

● Fund a new 16-19 Student Premium (3-year cost: £740m).

● Target subsidies towards younger apprentices aged 18-24 (3-year cost: neutral).

This report is funded by Unbound. Unbound Philanthropy is an independent private grant-making

foundation that seeks to contribute to a vibrant, welcoming society and an immigration system rooted in
justice. We support pragmatic, innovative and responsive approaches to inclusion in the United States
and United Kingdom to explore and advance what this looks like in practice.
 ¶

DOWNLOAD ¶

AUTHORS¶

WHITNEY CRENNA-JENNINGS¶

Associate Director, Mental health, Wellbeing & Inclusion¶

VIEW DETAILS¶

NATALIE PERERA¶

Chief Executive¶

VIEW DETAILS¶
 LUKE SIBIETA¶

Research Fellow¶

VIEW DETAILS¶

FURTHER INFORMATION¶

Have a question about our research? Get in touch on¶

info@epi.org.uk or 020 7340 1160¶

Related¶

¶
 PUBLICATIONS¶

Learning loss research: Understanding progress in the 2020 to 2021 academic

year¶
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER¶

Our newsletter will keep you up to date with our most recent publications, reports, briefings and events
on education and young people’s wellbeing¶

SUBSCRIBE¶

​ HOME¶

​ EVENTS¶

​ ABOUT¶

​ BOOKSHOP¶

​ RESEARCH AREAS¶

​ JOB OPPORTUNITIES¶

​ CONTACT¶

​ SITEMAP¶

​ PRIVACY POLICY¶

@EduPolicyInst How should “efficiency” in school groups be measured? Which school groups are

most efficient? Today we've launched… https://t.co/z18kaYiGwL¶

6 days ago¶

@EduPolicyInst RT @CeciZunigaM: We are still looking for schools to get involved in this study

exploring the impacts of the pandemic on children's languag…¶

3 hours ago¶

@EduPolicyInst We're delighted to announce the recruitment of three new experienced Research

Fellows to our team.… https://t.co/UdOEgLbUG3¶

1 day ago¶
@EduPolicyInst "The government is in danger of sleepwalking into a spending review in which

educational recovery is relegated to a… https://t.co/LIudltlAsB¶

2 days ago¶

@EduPolicyInst What impact has the pandemic had on children's language, socio-emotional and

educational outcomes? A new project… https://t.co/KtCqSl3fBY¶

6 days ago¶

@EduPolicyInst How should “efficiency” in school groups be measured? Which school groups are

most efficient? Today we've launched… https://t.co/z18kaYiGwL¶

6 days ago¶

@EduPolicyInst RT @CeciZunigaM: We are still looking for schools to get involved in this study

exploring the impacts of the pandemic on children's languag…¶

3 hours ago¶
EDUCATION POLICY INSTITUTE¶

150 Buckingham Palace Road,¶

London, SW1W 9TR¶

020 7340 1160¶

info@epi.org.uk¶

​ ¶

​ ¶

​ ¶

​ Privacy Policy¶
© 2021 Education Policy Institute, All Rights Reserved. The Education Policy Institute is registered

with the Charity Commission - Charity no. 1102186.¶

This site use¶

● . (3-year cost: £1.2bn).¶

● Allow pupils to repeat a year if appropriate: to tackle some extreme individual cases of learning

loss, the government should introduce a new right for pupils to repeat a year of education,

where this is supported by their parent or parents. This would only apply to a very small minority

of pupils. (2-year cost: £180m).¶

Recovery for younger children: early years education¶

● Schools alone should not be left to provide support – the recovery must also include support for

younger children in the early years – where high quality education and care can play a decisive

role. The following policies should be included:¶

● Increase funding for the Early Years Pupil Premium: bringing it up to the same rate as

primary aged pupils. (3-year cost: £400m).¶

Fund a pilot study into the effect of higher quality early years education on young children:
government funding for early years providers is below the OECD average. A pilot would provide
evidence on the impact of high-quality provision funded at a higher rate than what is currently provided.
(3-year cost: £83m).¶

Recovery for older students: 16-19 education

16-19 education already faced severe challenges prior to the pandemic, seeing the largest real-terms
loss of funding in any phase of education since 2010/11. The following policies for colleges, sixth forms
and those studying apprenticeships will be required to reverse the impact of the pandemic: