Academy Status for local schools?

[Geoffrey Settle]

A couple of High Schools are pushing for Academy status - what do you think?

[Peter T]

Just another fad.

 

Have they re-invented the three R's yet?

The current education climate is down to the interference of different Governments fixing things that aren't broken. :evil: :evil:

[silverlady54]

I think it's a good thing if it gives the schools more control of money to run the school as they think best plus having the power to hire the best staff and fire the poor ones. It's better than being restricted by council policy and never being able to spend money on much needed improvements.

[observer]

..... and "the best" schools get bigger as their reputation grows, to the point where you'll need to bus the kids in; while the sink schools die on the vine. What happened to the idea that ALL schools should provide the same HIGH standard?!

[Dizzy]

I think that's the problem Obs, they AREN'T providing the same standards and seems to me that the schools want to break free from council control (if you can call it 'control' that is )

[silverlady54]

I agree, Dizzy.

 

If the 'sink' schools are the ones still in council control, that says more about the council and their education policies than the schools which flourish when controlling their own budget and curriculum.

[observer]

As you should be aware SL: the "better schools" will flourish in the articulate "middle class" areas, where pushy parents will make sure that the benefits of the education they've enjoyed are recycled through their sprogs. Conversly, the "sink schools" will exist in sink estates, where ignorance, apathy and hopelessness are likewise recycled from generation to generation. Thus, as throughout history, we'll get an education system based on the wealth and education of parents, that (with few exceptions), reinforces a social strata and prohibits social mobility. Something that this Government has also reinforced through it's imposition of student fees for University. IF, the politicians really want to achieve social mobility, all impediments to it need to be removed and equal opportunity should mean just that.

[asperity]

Easier said than done Obs. Comprehensives were supposed to solve all equality problems but haven't. There are good comprehensives as well as bad ones.

[observer]

Agreed, and I have no problem with some form of streaming based on ability and the aptitude of the student. As with the NHS, Education has been the plaything of politicians for eons, changing from one trendy dogma to the next, over the years. We need, for the future prosperity of the Country to get the best out of ALL of our students, in order to stay ahead of the global competition.

[Bazj]

As you should be aware SL: the "better schools" will flourish in the articulate "middle class" areas, where pushy parents will make sure that the benefits of the education they've enjoyed are recycled through their sprogs. Conversly, the "sink schools" will exist in sink estates, where ignorance, apathy and hopelessness are likewise recycled from generation to generation. Thus, as throughout history, we'll get an education system based on the wealth and education of parents, that (with few exceptions), reinforces a social strata and prohibits social mobility. Something that this Government has also reinforced through it's imposition of student fees for University. IF, the politicians really want to achieve social mobility, all impediments to it need to be removed and equal opportunity should mean just that.

 

I wouldn't agree with that statement Obs..... Stockton Heath Primary (In posh area with quite well off parents) has been in special measures twice now..... Bewsey Primary School (on a Council Estate and home to many scallys and unemployed people) has not been in special measures since 2009 and was so for only one year.....

[observer]

Your talking "primary" Baz; which, while important in establishing the basic three "R's", isn't really the area that these new "accademies" are being set up to deal with - basically, they are an abandonment of a high universal standard of education for ALL based on equal oportunity and ability, and a retreat to elitism based on means.

[Bazj]

But I believe we should have the Grammar schools back and stream kids on their ability not treat everyone as equals academically.

 

When I was at primary school, bright kids had the chance to pass the 11 plus and go on to the grammar school with the expectation that they would go on to University. Boteler had a very good record of sending kids to Oxford and Cambridge and other good, proper Universities. These kids then would likely turn out to be the high end top earners (A lad I went to Boteler with from Orford ended up as one of the top accountants at Coca Cola.....)

 

The kids who didn't pass went to the comprehensives and then on to technical college or got an apprenticeship and learned how to make things and repair things and fit things...... people we don't have today because all kids are told they are good enough to go to university when that just isn't the case.

 

We need to be more forceful with these kids and tell them that they aren't clever enough to go to university and not to waste £9k a year but to go and learn a proper job and stop us importing labour from abroad that we don't need.

 

Personally I was rebelling against my mum and dad and their expectations that I should be as clever as my sister (10 years older, teacher, two degrees etc....)I left school at 16 and worked at Paddington House Hotel and then I ended up as an electrician (industrial type, working on big factory projects)not the job I should have taken.....If I had listened to my dad when I was 18, I would have been a copper. I would be retiring next year having done 30 years and looking forward to getting a proper job!!

[silverlady54]

As you should be aware SL: the "better schools" will flourish in the articulate "middle class" areas, where pushy parents will make sure that the benefits of the education they've enjoyed are recycled through their sprogs. Conversly, the "sink schools" will exist in sink estates, where ignorance, apathy and hopelessness are likewise recycled from generation to generation. Thus, as throughout history, we'll get an education system based on the wealth and education of parents, that (with few exceptions), reinforces a social strata and prohibits social mobility. Something that this Government has also reinforced through it's imposition of student fees for University. IF, the politicians really want to achieve social mobility, all impediments to it need to be removed and equal opportunity should mean just that.

 

I disagree. It has been proven that with the right head, staff and the right discipline in place, schools can be successful regardless of the area they are in and the pupils are only too aware and appreciative of the difference when high standards are expected and enforced. This should be the norm.

 

Equality of opportunity should be there for all pupils but equally, not all pupils are suitable for academia so apprenticeships and good technical training should be available too.

[Peter T]

Silverlady, you have hit on the key word that is at the root of all problems. "DISCIPLINE".

 

Teachers are no longer allowed to enforce discipline, so at those schools where parents/kids rule the roost, education won't improve.

 

obs, Baz and you are all correct in most of what you say. and until the people in charge STOP trying to win votes by trying to please everyone, nothing will change.

[observer]

Think we're more or less on the same page here: Baz - You don't necessarilly have to have seperate schools and an 11+; streaming can be provided within one school based on aptitude tests and teacher assessments. Equal opportunity is just that, the opportunity to begin at the same start line, not to then follow identical pathways, however, this is most difficult when kids start with advantages or disadvantages created by their home enviroment. SL - I agree, the quality of a school is determined by the people in it, not the building or it's location; however, do "the best teachers" volunteer to teach in areas with "challenging" students, when they can get the same or better pay for an easier life, in areas where parents are sufficiently educated to realise the value of education, providing a positive home enviroment for their kids to aspire?

[silverlady54]

I think that those teachers who are challenged to offer the highest standards in their subject by their head teacher, and encouraged to expect high standards from all their pupils are the ones who can succeed anywhere. This is where the schools who can work independently of the Council in the way they recruit their staff will attract teachers who have a passion for teaching. These are also the schools where there is a 'zero tolerance' policy for bad behaviour which is effectively implemented.

 

Where teachers are forced to teach subjects they have no advanced knowledge of, simply because the school cannot afford to employ specialist subject teachers, there is already a problem before the teacher begins.

[observer]

... and where is the dicipline? In this moden PC world, where kids have "rights" (and know it) and the ultimate sanction is expulsion (which is what the hard cases want) - only the less challenging and more motivated pupils will remain. Which brings us right back to this independent accadamy idea - which, by definition, will exclude the dross; thus ensuring thatr we don't educate ALL kids to the high standards demanded by a modern competative economy. As an aside: just heard an anecdote about a girl who left Uni with a fine arts degree; she's now working as a cleaner - but presumably a very good cleaner!

[Carmina Fothergill]

Definitely a bad thing, but how bad depends on who the school gets sold to.

 

Selling our children's education to the highest bidder has got to be a bad thing regardless.

 

If the worst happens, your children's education gets put into the hands of fundamentalists who are more interested in indoctrinating kids than educating them - as has happened in several schools in Britain already. It needs to be stressed these aren't the old church schools we used to have, but slick, American-

style fundamentalist institutions based on propaganda and misinformation. It's beyond belief that this is even a question in this country. We would never have had an absurd situation like this at one time. The fact that most British people are unaware of what's involved and are consequently completely unprepared for it makes this even more dangerous.

[observer]

"Faith Schools" - yet another Bliarite experiment.

[silverlady54]

I think you'll find that Faith schools have been around a lot longer than Tony Blair!

[observer]

Since before Tudor times indeed - but my point was, that Bliar positively promoted their expansion, another example of his myopia.

[silverlady54]

You are entitled to your view of course, but at one time, all schools had daily prayers and based their education on Christian teaching and morals. In my opinion, it was when these were allowed to stop that the emphasis on self first and lack of any moral guidance and teaching began to spread, leading us to where we are today. A majority of today's young teachers had no moral guidance so how can they teach it? That is why you see more teachers in court accused of seducing their pupils and they don't think they have done anything wrong.

[observer]

Don't think there is a direct correlation between "morality" and "religion" - after all, how many Catholic and other Priests have abused children?! Morality can be inculcated in the young, without the need for mysticism.

[Peter T]

Silverlady. I see where you are coming from with your comment, but sadly I believe we are well past that point as the Churches have been useless in guidance for the last 50 odd years.

To give schools "individual" religious lessons will cause problems for the future. ie do we want the problems that Ireland have?

 

Unless I have the wrong end of the stick?

[Dizzy]

We're well past the point anyway. As of August (ie now) there are already over 1000's academies with another 1400+ waiting to see if they are approved.

 

The timeschale from applying to being approved if sucessful can be as short as 3 to 4 months.

 

Only high achieving schools with good results and ofsted reports could apply but now a growing number of less high achieving schools are also applying to become academies by 'joining up' with current outstanding schools in 'multi-academy chains'.

 

What I don't understand is how the governors etc decide to apply. What happens if ALL parents who have kids at a school don't want it to change to an accademy ?

 

I wonder what they will all do in 2, 5, 10+ years or so when they reaslise that maybe it wasn't such a good idea after all.... of course it could go the other way and be the best thing that ever happened to the education system... who knows