Sorry, It's Education Again - Guest post

I’d kind of promised myself that I’d have a rest from blogging about education and then along came a link provided by Autonomous Mind to this post.

Within a very interesting article he says he is not in favour of the state educating any child. This is a lightbulb moment is it not? All the more so as a further commenter here makes the point that education is not compulsory; as in it is not compulsory for children to be educated within the state system albeit with certain legal requirements.

It reminded me, that in my time working with schools and educators I’d come to the conclusion, that things had to change but in order to have them change significantly it would take three cycles of children going through their entire education. Why that length of time? Because following changes, the first batch would still be tainted by the present system, the second batch would be truly the first to go through an improved system and the third batch would go through a completely changed, improved and delivering system. A long time? Well yes, but, of course, not a long time in the great scheme of things.

The answer of course is simpler. Move away from state (and religion but that’s another story) based education. It’s a no brainer. And conveniently, here we are with our good friend, Mr. Michael Gove, trying to facilitate free schools, which are free from local authority control. Of course this policy does not form part of the education strategy for Scotland but let’s hope that it soon will be.

This approach however, has been visited before. You’ll all be familiar with Dunblane and the terrible tragedy, which took place at a primary school there. In fact there was, and still is, a second primary school in Dunblane, St Mary’s Episcopal Primary School. The school was one of only two schools, the other being Dornoch Academy, in Scotland, which opted out from local authority control enabled by a policy, introduced by the Conservative Government in 1988. The school was well run, supported by committed parents and had been recognised as a good school with good results.

Following the election of a Labour Government in London, the opt out choice was removed and a prolonged battle ensued to have the school returned to the “stewardship” of the local council. The parents, teachers and pupils put up a pretty good fight to keep the school independent and whilst it was subsumed the school still continues to perform well.

Bottom line? Three options.

Firstly set up a free (independent) school from scratch. Lots of money required, but if what is being offered is appealing to enough parents, has credibility and longevity then it’s worth a go. (But only if you are in England).

Secondly, educate at home which is the cheapest, controlled and most flexible option. Gain the necessary permissions etc. (using “home education Scotland” as a search phrase in Google etc. will bring up a wealth of information and organisations who can help). No need to stick to a recognised curriculum although you would have to meet the local authority and EU requirements, which shouldn’t be an issue.

Thirdly. Stick with state education but get involved. Either become a parent helper, get elected as a member of the Parent Council or add value in supporting the delivery of extra curricular activities.

When I worked with schools I started off thinking that if I helped just one pupil move closer to their full potential it would be worthwhile. By the time I stopped I felt I had to help all of the pupils involved to move closer to their full potential.

petem130

Tweet

Military 'Softening-Up' Pupils

Christine Grahame is a list MSP for the south of Scotland. In other words she didn't win election to Holyrood but attained her seat courtesy of her party, the SNP, whose members voted for her.

At times she has been controversial and at times I have supported her, but her latest outburst shows how out of touch she is with reality.

Six months ago she complained the army were recruiting in 'poor' areas. Now she is accusing the Ministry of Defence of a campaign of deception over visits to Scottish schools by representatives of the armed forces. She claims the MoD are 'softening up pupils' for recruitment when they reach the age of 16 and that they were visiting primary schools and nurseries and she wants the visits banned.

Time Ms Grahame did a fact-finding tour rather than sitting in her plush office reading documents she has received from local authorities. The police service, fire service and various other public services visit schools so why is Ms Grahame discriminating against the military? Don't our children deserve to meet people who dedicate their lives towards our protection or is it only the men in camouflage kit who they shouldn't be permitted to meet?

The senior Army commander in Scotland, Brigadier George Lowder, said the army "simply do not recruit in schools - primary or secondary".

"The army gets numerous informal and official requests from schools every year and gets no special treatment or access, but neither should it be excluded or discriminated against.

"This is not recruiting - far from it."

The army has careers officers who will visit a school if invited, in the same way as the police and other services visit schools to speak to young people who are of an age to make career choices. Any military personnel who visit schools, other than careers officers, ought to be welcomed by our political masters because children need to hear first hand how our country is protected and perhaps the older ones will become aware of how the military is regularly used as political pawns by our leaders.

A soldier speaking to a group of children and answering their questions can create confidence in our youngsters, because they see a person of discipline and knowledge interacting with them, the 'real deal', rather than reading information from a book or watching a video. Children will remember a visit and chat from a member of our armed forces far longer than a propaganda visit from a politician.

Maybe that's Ms Grahame's gripe.

Tweet

A Statistic Which Shames Labour

A boy plays in a run-down street in Govan, Glasgow

Two million children now live in homes where there is no working adult. The Office for National Statistics said the number of children in workless households rose by an annual 170,000 to 1.9 million in April-June of this year, as fathers were among the hardest hit by swingeing job cuts.

One in six children now live in homes where no adult works. The number of children in homes where at least one adult of working age does not have a job also rose up 50,000 to 3.6 million.

While lone-parent households continue to make up the largest proportion of workless households at 40.4%, the figures suggest the latest increase is largely driven by fathers losing their jobs.

Wasn't the eradication of child poverty one of Labour's manifesto pledges since 1999? Yes it was.

Mr Brown, when Chancellor, set targets in 1998 to halve the 3.4 million children at that time living in poverty to 1.7 million by 2010 and eradicate it by 2020. (Source The Times)

In the past 12 years we’ve heard much about how labour are lifting children out of poverty but these figures show there has been little movement. Why? Labour and previous governments over the past 30+ years have slowly eroded the quality of education we offer our children. The introduction of comprehensive schools, with the loss of the academies and secondary moderns, squeezed children of all abilities under one roof. This deprived all children the chance to develop fully because teachers were unable to cope (through no fault of their own) with the variety of abilities presented to them. The children who were interested in learning vocational skills suffered most as facilities were far more limited than those offered in the ‘old’ secondary moderns.

Then we had the Labour policy which insisted schools stop any form of competition. They said this destroyed confidence in our children. Another mad idea which has been detrimental to our children’s development over recent years.

The answer to child poverty is to give our children a first class education and ensure each and every one of them can read and write. We now have two generations who may not have done a day’s work in their lives and their children see the hopelessness within the home. Surely it’s not beyond our politicians to ensure these children receive a schooling worthy of one of the richest countries in the world.

Throwing money at the problem, is not enough, it has to be thrown in the right direction. Continually upping benefits is a short-term, short-sighted solution which does little to help children from poorer homes achieve their potential.

Tweet