When I arrived at Droitwich Spa School as head of English two years ago I came with a key stage 3 manual. I have since rewritten this twice - once when the new Order was introduced and now again, with the national strategy for English. But it is not just the one document that has had to be updated. Everything that the booklet relates to: schemes of work, resources, sample lesson plans and so on all have to be reviewed in the light of fresh change. So we have done much of it - methodically going through our resources and writing new ones - and I have updated and changed the manual to include coverage of word and sentence level. I have enjoyed the challenge and know that what we have now are improved resources.

So is there a subtext here? I like the strategy, with its inclusion of the history of the English language and emphasis on learning and applying grammatical terms to analysis. It seems that A-level Language is filtering down somewhat - about time - meeting up with the best of the literacy hour. Perhaps pupils in the future will not think that a noun is something you only find in French or German but know that it also exists in English. And the study of the writing of other cultures presents a better continuity between KS3 and the requirements of GCSE, hopefully with the result that the dreaded “Poetry from other Cultures and Traditions” may seem more relevant.

What a shame that such continuity has not been reflected in the way the national strategy has been introduced. If you compare its implementation to flat-packed furniture (I have recently spent three days putting together a computer desk so the ana-logy appeals to me), schools are given the product but no instructions on how to put it together with the already existing national curriculum. We have to study what we are given in order to understand how to make it work, which is a ridiculous waste of energy. If you are lucky or have had the experience before, you can adapt - maybe you could even phone a friend. You could, like me, have been sent on a course for two days, believing that you would come away with clear instructions, only to return with the realisation that you are much better off writing your own instructions and viewing the problem like a logic puzzle.

Well, doesn’t it seem amazing that we already have the national curriculum in place and now we have a subsection, an addition, with nowhere to put it? Very poor practice. If I did the same in the classroom it would mean handing my GCSE pupils a completed coursework folder and from that asking them to write the syllabus; then, two weeks later, handing them some past exam papers. “But what’s the relationship between them? Can you use your exam text for coursework? Do we write about the exam as separate from the coursework? Two syllabuses or one?” Exactly.

Some departments I know of have had two weeks off-timetable to solve the puzzle - some only a couple of days. I was fortunate that I had something to work from. Our KS3 manual includes a summary of the national curriculum and expectations, level descriptors, then what I call the minimum requirement for each year group under the attainment target headings with relevant scheme of work sheets for reference. This ensures that there is no overlap between years and that we fulfil our legal requirement, covering what we are supposed to. My answer was to take the lists in our KS3 manual for each year group and to go through each, carefully seeing what was already being covered and what needed to be added on or even removed and identifying discrete units as well as those that would be suitable for starter activities. Under each element, for example, Pre-914 Prose, is detail about how it relates to the national strategy. I found keeping the curriculum as a basic core made this task more straightforward. I was able to slot in the national strategy in places and make it a focus in others. Without having already separated the national curriculumnew Order into year groups, I would have found this very difficult.

From this we created resources. We are not the kind of department to work to a minute-by-minute plan. I have never found that these work. What we have instead are checklists and schemes of work sheets that provide examples with sample pieces of marked student work. Resources are available, for example grammar units and test sheets, media schemes and poetry anthologies, that relate to each area, and staff may use these or produce alternative resources of their own.

We need to allow colleagues freedom, but with this comes responsibility. Nothing would kill my ability to teach more quickly than a minute-by-minute plan or the notion of the whole of Year 8 studying war poetry at the same time.

I still remember doing a project in primary school on teeth and being really inspired by a charismatic teacher, only to feel let down and rather bitter when he did exactly the same project with exactly the same jokes with my younger brother two years later. Don’t underestimate the effect that this style has on pupils. Teachers must be allowed to breathe and should be creating new resources all the time for new classes.

If I have to study the same text - unavoidable for the SATS - I go about it in a different way. I still ensure that we cover what needs to be done - that is my contract and I take it seriously. But I do it my way and that is what we should be respected for - our professionalism and ability to adapt.I welcome greater clarity and higher expectations of what pupils can achieve but we all need to work together. So, they can keep throwing changes at me and I will wait in hope that we can finally get rid of some of the lack of coherence in education.

Jane Christopher is head of English atDroitwich Spa High School,WorcestershireWeb: www.droitwichspahigh.worcs.sch.uk