Rob Webster has not yet reached the point of irritation. Which, when you consider the facts, is remarkable.

For more than 10 years, the associate professor at UCL Institute of Education has painstakingly broken the role of the teaching assistant down into its constituent parts and attempted to rebuild it into something that works better for teachers, for the TAs themselves and, most of all, for the pupils. He has done that iteratively, each time showing his working through rigorous research projects - starting with the DISS report in 2009 - and each time he has got closer to a blueprint that ensures every school has a team of TAs that is as powerful as it possibly can be.

And yet the education system has, aside from a few dedicated schools, consistently looked the other way.

That should make him angry. But actually, he’s just confused. “Why, after all these years, has so little changed?” asks Webster in our cover feature this week.

It’s a good question. This is substantial, robust research that has a direct impact on pupil outcomes, both academic and pastoral. It focuses on the most disadvantaged children - those with SEND, those eligible for free school meals, those who slip to the fringes of the learning. It promises a more efficient and economical use of a valuable resource and, at a time when catch-up is a priority, Webster is offering education a safe bet to change lives for the better.

Giving clarity to the role of teaching assistants

In an era in which research is supposed to be driving education policy, the Department for Education should have embraced Webster’s work with the same dedication it has demonstrated for the work of E D Hirsch, Michael Young and Daniel Willingham. But, as Webster explains, the opposite is true.

There is “a long history of TAs being virtually invisible to policymakers,” he writes. “For instance, consider the government’s current drive to improve teacher training and professional development, through the introduction of the Early Career Framework and overhaul of the initial teacher training provision. Where do TAs fit into this drive?”

This is not just a crime of absence, though, but of curated circumstance. Not only is there not the policy drive, there has also been the creation of an environment in schools where these ideas do not have fertile ground to grow. Heads are faced with competing societal roles and depleting financial resources to fulfil those responsibilities. Desperate, they turn to the resource they do have some flexibility with: TAs.

This has led to deployment driven by necessity and the creation of what Webster calls “Swiss Army knife” TAs. They are sent to fix every issue in the creaking system, whether they are qualified for that role or not: mental health and wellbeing support, academic and behaviour interventions, parental engagement, admin support, stand-in teachers, logistics coordinators … and that’s just the start. Because of this, the role has become ever-more opaque.

In his feature, Webster makes yet another attempt to force us on to a different path. In a new Education Endowment Foundation study, he again demonstrates that there is a chance to make a real difference to pupil outcomes if we use TAs in a certain way. On reading the guidance, heads will see the sense in it, but, as ever, their hands will be tied by policy and circumstance. The risk is that the message will slip away once more.

We can’t let that happen. Our TA workforce is too important. TAs’ role in catch-up, and more broadly, is too important. Our pupils are too important. Webster may not be irritated yet, but teachers should be. And if Nadhim Zahawi, the new education secretary, really believes in the power of education to change lives, he should look back at the actions of the previous ministers at the DfE, and he should be irritated, too.

@jon_severs

This article originally appeared in the 24 September 2021 issue under the headline “We can’t throw away this chance to get the very best out of TAs”