By Alison Stenlake

Teachers have reacted angrily to what they call the "aggressive" targets set by the government to address underachievement.

David Blunkett's announcement at the National Union of Teachers secondary education conference was met with dismay and disbelief from teachers in both high and low-achieving schools.

They feel the targets are a threat to teachers who they say are already doing their best to raise standards against a backdrop of poverty, unemployment and other social disadvantages.

Mal Davies, head teacher of Willows High School in Cardiff, said: "My school will struggle to reach the target of 20% it has set itself this year, but staff do everything they can to help pupils.

"Our pupils come from a deprived area where their parents are not experienced in education themselves, and the idea of home study is totally alien to them.

'Scared off'

"The danger is by setting these targets, exceptional teachers we need to attract - those who can go into schools like ours and really make a difference - will be scared off for fear of being labelled a 'failing' teacher, or coming from a failing school."

Mr Davies said schools could share good practice, but the idea of 'super heads' needed to be thought through as no head teacher could be a panacea to solve all a school's problems.

He added that the idea of twinning underachieving schools with beacon schools, or other successful schools, could breed resentment.

Bruce Lavery, NUT branch secretary for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, said that his school, which he declined to name, could not meet the 15% target of five grade A*-Cs over three years, despite having been taken out of special measures.

Mr Lavery said the new government measures completely missed the point, and added that any staff from beacon schools who came to teach in his school would be "eaten alive" by the pupils.

Uphill struggle

"The pupils in my school try to hide the fact that they are going to school at all. They stuff their homework books down the sleeves of their puffa jackets.

"That's the kind of problem we need to address - getting them there in the first place."

He added that GCSEs were about getting pupils to gain qualifications - across the whole range from A*-G and not just from A*-C.

An over-emphasis on the higher grades made lower-achieving pupils feel that their qualifications were devalued.

"When I am doing pupils' predicted grades, and they are lower than a C, I see the lights go off in their faces. They feel labelled failures.

Linda Conroy, a teacher at Richmond School in North Yorkshire, said schools should be judged on their quality of education, not on results.

She said schools would be stigmatised by failing to achieve the targets set by the government.

'All are unique'

"I don't disagree with the basic aims - we all want the best standards for our schools, but they cannot be judged in the same context," she said.

"Each school is unique and its achievements are not always recognisable by results."

She added that the idea of creating a separate pay structure for super heads would be divisive.

The NUT's Deputy General Secretary, Steve Sinnott, told BBC News 24 that delegates at the conference wished Mr Blunkett had worked with them to produce more realistic targets than the ones he had set out.

'Failed policy'

"Teachers will be doing their best to achieve those targets," he said. "Where we think he has got it wrong is in naming schools that are on a hit list - naming and shaming them.

"We know that a policy of that sort creates blight in certain schools - that often the very highly qualified teachers will leave those schools, that committed teachers may leave those schools, and those schools suffer."

He dismissed the 'super heads' initiative as "a gimmick" that had been heard before.

The NUT's General Secretary Doug McAvoy said the targets were being presented in an "aggressive, hostile and threatening way".

He said there was proof that targets did encourage schools to make concentrated efforts to meet them, but said that targets should not be used as a public threat.

"Criticism of schools on the basis of exam results and test results is not fair. Schools do not have a level playing field on which comparisons can be made.

"Education is about more than GCSE results, and the judgement of schools should be about more than the achievement of schools in ensuring a good pass rate at GCSE level.

"Teachers feel more pressure than support. More and more teachers are feeling demoralised."

The Secondary Heads Association (SHA) has said it is concerned about the increased pressure the targets will put on secondary schools.

"For schools in difficult situations, the balance between pressure and support from the government is not yet right," said the General Secretary, John Dunford.

'Wrong measure'

"The nature of today's announcement will make it even more difficult for these schools to retain and recruit good staff."

He also took issue with the measure used - five GCSEs at A*-C - because he said it would oblige schools to concentrate their resources on the "small number of children" at the C/D grade borderline, instead of raising the achievement of all.

The Association of Teachers and Lecturers said the timetable the government was setting was "realistic".

But questions remained, said the General Secretary, Peter Smith.

"How does the government expect the high-risk 500 schools to overcome problems in recruiting and retaining good teachers?

"We have seen the sticks but there are no signs of any carrots."