Comprehensive Isn't A Dirty Word

The Department for Education has stated that the majority of secondary schools in England are now academies or are in the process of seeking academy status. (For the purpose of definition: academies have local flexibility over staff pay and conditions.) So, when removed from accountability to local authorities or national standards, schools can pretty much do whatever they want as long as they don’t receive too many complaints and produce good grades. That may seem reasonable, but just because the grade average is of a high quality doesn’t make up for the underprivileged few who are continually left behind. If your son or daughter wasn’t up to scratch because they couldn‘t conform to that school‘s particularly individualised teaching methods, would you be content that at least your school had a nationally prestigious status? Would you have the time and energy to ‘shop around’ for an educational institution that was better suited to your child’s needs? At least the comprehensive system was equal for all and everyone had the same fair chance of success. Individual entrepreneurialism can be determined at college or university, when people rightly choose their subject options; prior to that everyone should be on an equal footing in compulsory education.
A spokesman for the Department for Education said: "It is only when schools have been under-performing for a number of years that the government steps in to ensure improvement”. So according to the government, over half of secondary schools were under-performing! That may be acceptable to a right-wing ideology, but a lot of parents and teachers are happy with their children’s education and wouldn’t want an overhaul of the system. Perhaps the government should leave schools alone for a while, let kids enjoy learning without the constant pressure of tests and exams, and let teachers enjoy teaching without the constant pressure of league tables and Ofsted repercussions. But then that wouldn’t suit the needs of capitalist competition and the desire to be superior, would it?!

Inaccurate Reporting

A recent ‘independent’ report into last year’s riots has determined that the blame lied with education and opportunity. It says that a lack of support and opportunity for young people contributed to the outbreak of the riots, and that low educational achievement of some teenagers necessitates financial penalties for schools that fail to teach basic levels of literacy.
However, the panel was appointed by David Cameron and Nick Clegg. So let’s explore these motives further.
Suggestion No. 1: One of the reasons that theft is so prominent is because materialistic values and economic consumption are promoted as the be all and end all of society. And lack of education may cause disgruntlement, but a redistribution of wealth so that nobody feels financially excluded may provide a better solution.
Suggestion No. 2: Neither citizens nor society is completely to blame for anything. There are roots in the social environment that set about a start of such things and individuals who are too weak to resist the opportunity to do something bad. Live with that reality.
And suggestion No. 3: Appoint a panel that isn’t appointed by the government (thereby, independent!). Just a thought.

Educational Elitism Is Counterproductive

A-level results were released this week and (would you believe it!) the number of A grades went up yet again. Wow, I would never have expected that. And so more students scream with delight for the slavering media without ever really realising that the more A grades there are, the more difficult it is for those students to distinguish themselves from each other. It has now reached the point where universities are having to make students go through interview procedures or check for extra-curricular activities on their Records Of Achievement (regardless of what grades they have) in order to decide which are the brightest because the majority are continually getting high marks. This isn't a victory for the educational system, it is a manipulation of the curriculum by teachers who tell students every technique in the book for passing exams and thereby giving their colleges good standing in the league tables. Surely it would be better to have a system where the top 20% (or less) of students got A grades and nobody else did; this would distinguish the best from the rest.
Another unnerving development is that independent and grammar schools showed double the improvement that comprehensives managed. This is another example of how the rich are given greater advantages over the average person who can't afford to 'shop around' for their children's education. Comprehensive is almost a dirty word for politicians nowadays, but that's only because they've neglected them for so long in favour of 'Middle England' voters. So please take it from me: people are not getting cleverer, society is just becoming more sneaky about it.