Blair's Vision For Schools...

This must be the final nail in the coffin of any socialist idealogy in the New Labour party... as Blair turn his back totally on the comprehensive ideal and sells out the future for our children...

And what does Blair offer us?...

A vision of Independant Specialist Schools... where he imagines all schools attaining specialist status... where schools will gain independance from LEAs... where all schools will have a school uniform... where failing schools will be closed and replaced by new city academies (note lack of rural equivalent)... where schools will be able to select a proportion of students by "aptitude"... and where education will continue a downward slide into politically controlled bollocks...

C'mon Blair... admit it... you've sold out the working classes... you've betrayed the comprehensive ideal... you are seeking to return to the old grammar/secondary modern model but don't have the balls to do it openly and honestly...

This is your greatest betrayal... you swept into power on a promise of "education, education, education" whilst all you have done is to continue the disasterous ideas put into place by the tories... you had the opportunity to ensure a first class education for all children regardless of location, social background and cost... and you have sold out... you hide behind the lie of parental choice... and you are sticking the knife into every teacher, teaching assistant and child... well done...

And don't even get me started on the complete barrel of bollocks being spouted by Michael fucking Howard...

Fly...
.

 

Simple thing to do Mr Bliar...

Take the money you would spend in the near future on unjust war in Iraq....

and the schools not doing that well right now could be made better about 10 times over...

Blair, you are an asshole.

 

Ok, I have a feeling that I am going to be a bit controversial here, and pick up on one point made...
I think grammar schools are a great idea. I don't think getting rid of selective schools is necessary. In fact, I think it's a crap idea. I see no problem with having grammar schools which allow the more able students to move at a pace which suits them more, and allow the others to move at a pace that suits them.
I realise that I have only experienced one side of the British school system, as I have just finished compulsory education at a selective school, and have gained a great education through it. And obviously, the majority of locals have no problem with it, as my school was the first to go through the process of having a ballot to decide its school status, and the locals chose to keep it selective.
I'd like to hear other people's views of selective schools and comprehensives...as I obviously have no experience of a comprehensive so my view is biased.

 

I teach in a specialist school but I was taught in a comprehesive school...

The problem was that the comprehensive system was never allowed to work properly because the politicians never had the balls to abolish private education... as long as private education continues to exist, we will continue to live in an elitest society where advantage can be bought by the power of your check book...

Comprehensive education should be able to provide for the full range of student needs... the whole idea was that your local school would be able to provide the best education for your child whatever their needs and abilities... from those requiring specific support for learning difficulties right up to students of the highest intelligence and ability...

I was a top band student... I walked away with 11 "O" Levels and 3 "A" Levels... not bad for a bog standard school... I'm not claiming that my school was perfect... of course there were problems along the way... but, more often than not, many of these were due to restrictions created by finance and poor resources...

And the financing of schools has been a fucking scandal in this country... how can we call ourselves a civilised nation when we have allowed successive governements to underfund our schools on such a significant level over such an extended period of time... particularly with the Tories seeing as public schools have always been the foundation upon which tory privilage has been built... the Civil Service has always been built from the ranks of the public school tie system... and the same was always the case with our "intelligence" network... public school has always been seen as preperation for power... not puppet like Blair... the real power in the beaurocrats who control the establishment...

How can we ever hope to create a meritocracy if we allow a system of privilage and elitism to continue?...

Fly...
.

ps... this is not an attack on you Mercy, nor anybody else who attends a private school... but I do feel very strongly about the inherant inequality in our two-tier education system...
.

 

My school isn't private...I don't pay to go or anything...it is a public school...just selective...

 

leaving my up its own arse private school was the best thing i've evr done. it made me appreciate it so much.

 

I went to an all boys grammar school (One of the last that Thatcher managed to stop from closing)

I got my place by passing the eleven plus which was no more than a glorified puzzle book. This meant that it was automatically assumed that I would be far more academic than I would be creative/sporting/musical etc.

What a load of crap. I'm both creative and musical, I'm shit at academic stuff and spent 5 years at the bottom of my class being discouraged from doing the things I liked.

When it came to options I had to choose between art, CDT and music plus I was not allowed to take an RE o-level. However I was forced to do 2 types of maths, 2 languages and English literature, none of these I had any interest in.

There just weren't enough options to achieve in the areas I was good at.

 

I'm on the fence. I went to a CofE secondary school, which I guess was pretty much a grammar school by another name. I know for a fact if I'd gone to the local comp., my life would've been hell. Seeing as the comp. was in the heart of Toxteth in Liverpool, it was a training ground for car thieves, drug dealers, and criminals of all varieties. Intelligent or vaguely academic kids would've had the shit kicked outta them. With a comprehensive system in place, what would've been my alternative?

Having said that, I recognise that this is an extreme example. In most places, I see no reason why the comprehensive system shouldn't work just fine. It also helps to reduce elitism and break down class division. Also, the school I went to had many flaws, not least of which was a distinct lack of respect for anything that wasn't considered classically academic. I remember receiving zero support for my interest in computers, and even being held back from the top groups because the teachers didn't believe I had any ability in that are (snobs). Ten years later, I work for one of the largest business ISPs in the country as a 2nd line broadband support engineer. I think I can safely say that me 'n' computers get along pretty well.

 

I think that the only way a comprehensive system would really work would be to abolish absolutely every other type of school, so that all the academic teachers were not creamed off for the 'elite'.

 

Hmmmmm... one of the teachers in my school left because his class dicsipline was fucking awful... one of those teachers who got locked into stock cupboards... after leaving my school, he got a post in a private girls school... so I refuse to accept that he was a better teacher... if anything, the environment into which he went was easier for him to teach in... why?... well, imagine the pressure to conform from parents who are paying significant money for the education of their beloved biological offspring...

But I agree... the only way for comprehensice education to work is to abolish all other options and to pump all money and resources and expertise into a fully realised education system...

Fly...
.

 

Yeah I know what you are saying, but one of the 'selling points' at my school was that they claimed to have the best teachers ~ I know from experience that this wasn't true, most of them were total eccentrics.

Anyway I said more academic, not better teachers, there's all the difference in the world.

 

The whole point of education is based around the transfer of knowledge and skills...

You can be the the most knowledgeable academic in the world but, if you don't have the skills to transfer that knowledge to the next generation, your academic brilliance is worthless in an educational context...

Fly...
.

 

Absolutely. The best teacher I had was an A level Sociology teacher, she was fantastic, she had the passion behind her words which for me was the best means of communicating her knowledge. She was one on the Greenham Common protestors so she lived what she taught as well. I had 2 other sociology tutors (did a whole A-level in one year) who just bored the pants off me and I didn't learn anything from them.

As a teacher you need to hold the interest of your pupil and as soon as you lose that, you're buggered!

 

Yeh, I had to pass the whole 11 plus thing too to get into mine (don't really understand how those tests can determine your future education...but I guess they must work some how).
I think grammar schools (the few that are left) are a lot different now. I'm not amazingly strong at 'academic' subjects, I am strong at the creative side of stuff...music, art, english etc. I've had the oppotunity to study all of these, and when it came to picking GCSE options, I managed to chose 3 arts subjects (not including the 2 englishs), and only had to do one science GCSE I guess the restrictions on GCSE options aren't as strict as they used to be...though I was still made to do other subjects that i wasn't really bothered about.
It sometimes used to annoy me that teachers expected you to be amazingly talented and interested in every subject, just because you passed the eleven plus...but as you go through the school and teachers get to know you, they realise your strengths and back off a little.
There is a lot pressure to follow a strict route of education though....
GCSEs.....A levels...Uni.....preferably ending up as a doctor or politician (William Hague went to my school, and since then I think they've stopped teaching politics )

Anyway, I'm rambling now...but my point is, I fully support the selective school system. Though I am leaving my school at the first oppotunity p) I am aware that I have recieved a great education at the grammar school, and hope that others get the same oppotunity in the future

 

in both the cases of education and the NHS we have the same problem. the government pays for people to be trained and then they work for private companys with more money than state operated ones. The greatest trick the Tories ever played is telling people that they will get Choice when what they mean is that they will protect the pivilages of an elite few. People do not want choice they want good schools there is a big differance, and I hope that the present state of Britain's schools does not trick people into voting for them again, it will be one of the worst days in Britains history if we show ourselves to be that stupid.

 

But the point is this... what happens to those who don't get the opportunity because they don't pass the 11-plus?... do we condemn them to an education that is not as good as the one you have received?...

The 11-plus was an incredibly devisive thing... just going back into my family history... my mum failed the exam and went to a secondary modern school where she received the most basic of education... her sister passed and went to a grammer school which set her up for a very successful life in work... two sisters whose lives took radically different directions at the age of 11 because of an exam...

Mercy... I'm glad that you recognise the value of the education that you've received... you've been accepted into the elite... that's what grammar school do... they are there to recognise the academic elite and then cream them off for the best education... don't misunderstand me... I have no problem with intelligence being recognised and rewarded... I don't see why they should be hidden away from us proles... whether it is in grammar schools or fee-paying independant schools... again, I refute the idea that the quality of teaching is guaranteed to be better... no... but I expect the results of these schools to be better simply because they are teaching the best children because they have selected them... mostly from middle class families...

And this is what Blair is pandering to... he is pandering to the whims of the middle classes... particularly those who can't afford private education... everything suggests a turning back of the clock to before the comprehensive system... compulsory uniforms... house systems... shall we reintroduce regular beatings by sado-masochistic prefects too?...

Selective schools simple reinforce the class divisions of the past... oh... the fee-paying schools always bleat about scholarships for working class children... but the majority of students who attend these schools are from the middle to upper classes... and the grammar schools will also blather about the selective procedure being fair to working class families... but the majority of grammar school students will at least be lower middle class because they have access to opportunities, resources and support that is generally less avaliable to the working classes...

If we have any hope of taking this country out of the feudal ages, selective and private schools need to go...

Fly...
.

ps... some the revolution, you can call me Che Fly...
.

 

I'm actually in favour of this one. I think less formal uniforms would be a good idea, but I like the fact that it creates a level playing field for kids form different income brackets, and reduces competitiveness over fashion.

Yes please! Ahem.

 

The irony is that the only mainstream political party now proposing an even remotely socialist education policy is the Liberal Democrats...

New Labour and the Tories are both pandering to the greatest Thatcherite lie of all time... Choice...

You can't buy education like a pack of cornflakes... its too fucking complicated... but this whole analogy of supermarkey schools is just stupid and dangerous... and it gives parents fasle ideas...

My school is an oversubscribed school... we have more parents who want places for their children than we have availible... just in terms of physical space... in terms of pupil and staff ratios... there are parents who want their children to attend our school and will be disappointed... under the old system, you went to your local school...

But the Tories abolished that... in theory, you should be able to choose to go to any school in your location... and what has this created?... well, a real impact upon the housing market for a start... parents who can afford it are buying houses close to the schools they want their children to attend to ensure their children have the best chance of being accepted... so money rules again... want your child to attend a certain school?... buy your way into it... this is what the politicians mean by "choice"...

And don't get me started on fucking league tables shit like that....

Fly...
.

 

Well... yes and no... you can still tell the children from lower income families particularly at this time of year... the uniforms are frayed... holes in the knees... that kinda thing... the families who can't afford more than one school jumper etc... and kids have unbelievable inbuilt poverty radars... they can still find them and ridicule them...

And the fashion obsession moves into other areas... coats... trainers... even bags and pencil cases... most noticable in footwear... you gotta have the right shoes... for girls, you gotta have those ballet type shoes and wear them with just the right coloured socks... for boys, you gotta have the right make of skate shoe... so if you do have a uniform code, you gotta be ultra strict with it to have any chance of stopping "fashion bullying" as I call it...

Of course, this starts up another problem... because you then become obssessed with appearance and it become the first line of battle... then more time is given over to infringments of uniform code... and it becomes a behaviour and discipline issue... and it just takes attention from the real business of school which should be learning...

Otherwise, why shouldn't colleges and universities have uniform codes if it is so important to actual learning?...

You are a sick and depraved man... I can do you a quick slipper or do you want the full caning?...

Actually, I had a woodwork teacher who specialised in throwing fucking chissels pasts kids' heads... nutter!!!

Fly...
.

 

Yeah, I agree with all these points. Personally though, my experience was that uniform did seem to mitigate these issues, even though it didn't eliminate them entirely. Kids from poorer families seemed to get a lot more shit at comprehensives where they couldn't afford to be wearing the latest fashions. Although uniform does still leave clues, poorer kids don't stand out like sore thumbs in the same way. I'm not saying it's ideal, but I think it's the lesser of two evils. But then I gues a lot has changed since I was at school. For one, we never had many problems with uniform infringements. If a kid came in outta uniform, they were sent home. Simple as that. And most parents seemed reasonably interested in keeping their kids attending and outta trouble.

I don't think it's integral to learning. I think it helps cushion the spiteful nature of children. Hopefully, as a young adult, you've learned to judge people a little less superficially. And if you haven't, then you've probably learned not to pick on people in the playground. College and university tends to be where people start learning to express their individuality a little better, and to develop some confidence in themselves. Also, people will have an easier time of finding a peer group where they can fit in and get support.

Depends. Hands or ass?

We had a French teacher who used to lob those old wooden chalk dusters at peoples' heads. Amazing he got away with it, really.