To not understand why Katharine Birbalsingh is so controversial

I read her book years ago and liked her and thought she seemed like she really cared about kids getting a quality education.

However she's now got far to into being online and being a right wing talking head and getting attention. I remember she had a rant a while back about a John Lewis advert being non British or some nonsense.

I also don't agree with her about academies and most people in the sector don't for good reason. There are some great ones but also some absolute horror stories. I'm sure hers is great for some students but I don't think she speaks for everyone in education or should get all the attention she gets.

Jordan Peterson is a great liar. I’ll give him that.

Very true.

Because for some people maths and English don’t matter. Because for some kids passing drama is an achievement they’ve worked their arse off for.
my son passed 4 GCSE’s above a C: English language, Welsh language , catering and Music. For a child who has a moderate to severe learning disability, is mostly non-verbal and couldn’t read until he was 13? To pass any was an INCREDIBLE achievement. It was enough passes for him to be able to go into a catering course, where he is thriving and where in the last 5 years he HAS passed English and Maths GCSE’s and made huge successes in national catering competitions, been student of the year in his college and now has a place in commercial kitchen to learn French cookery. None of that would have happened if he didn’t have that pointless music gcse to get him started.

She's a horrible woman. I saw her talking about a private meeting she'd had with Bridget Phillipson the other day. She clearly does not understand the meaning of the word private.

Some PP missing the point about Jordan Peterson. Whether you personally like him or not, he is hugely divisive. Headteachers should strive to appear politically neutral in public and, at the very least, steer clear of divisive figures.

That includes figures from the left too. If she were sucking up to Owen Jones or Jeremy Corbyn that would be equally inappropriate, because they too are very divisive.

There is an horrific MH crisis in most schools at the moment

You’d be hard pushed to find much right with Jordan Peterson.

A lot of the pupils at that school are going to end up with MH / anxiety problems it sounds horrific

She is a relentless self publicist and very dogmatic.

But she puts her money where her mouth is. It's really easy to be critical of a school, it's policies etc everyone has an opinion about what schools should be doing, everyone is an expert aren't they even if their only experience is having been to school.

PP are right that what works for a school is contextual and she doesn't understand that I don't think.

She is very unpopular among the edu-twitter lot and rarely gets praised but I don't think anyone can deny that she is dedicated to her school, the pupils appreciate what the school does and they are helped to get the results they need to move successfully through to the next stage of their life.

She expects hard work, her staff work hard and they expect hard work from the pupils. If that doesn't suit, people move to a school that does.

Then your child doesn't have to go.

Many send children thrive there

I also hate the mentality she now has (oddly very similar to the victim mentality she criticises in children). She was clear she didn't want to work with Labour prior to the election, has ensured it's impossible for them to work with her since, and is now painting herself as a victim.

If she really wanted to change education in this country, she'd shape her arguments to fit her audience, and attempt to work with influential figures from all sides of the political spectrum.

The sixth form is selective. They only take grade 7 GCSE and up. That's an easy win for a start.

My DD has SEN (bright, not disruptive) and would fall apart after a day in that school.

She doesn't select.

The results are outstanding.

Jordan Peterson is great.

I don't disagree that discipline can be good in schools - most children thrive on order and consistency.

I dislike that she attributes much of the schools "success" to the discipline etc which is not the whole story.

1. kids at Michaela take an average of only 7 GCSEs, 2 less than most decent state schools. This frees up time to drill core subjects, english & maths but at the expense of breadth, and narrows opportunity for some. So actually the "high" results aren't really the result of the behaviour. Most schools could get those maths & english stats if they cut 2/3 other subjects to give the extra time.

2. Only 2.6% of michaela pupils do separate sciences at GCSE, a much lower proportion than the national average of just under 25%. This limits pupils choices later on.

3. the demographic of Michaela parents won't be replicated everywhere. Its a diverse urban area with a high proportion of students from 1st or 2nd generation immigrant families. The culture around education is strong and parents will push their kids to study. You will not get this in a sleepy, typically british dormitory town in wiltshire.

4. Michaela pushes particular, limited subject choices - for example religion over history & geography. They boost exam stats by having children for whom english is a second language, take a GCSE in their home language (see their gcse entries in persian, arabic, Spanish, chinese & gujurati, which they don't teach). Not a single entry in GCSE music, drama, graphic, technology, textiles etc.

I think her school has achieved results, so you can't fault that. I do think she challenges some shibboleths that need challenging, and I do agree with some of her points.

However, she seems to have moved on from wanting to be seen as an educationalist with a serious contribution to make; to being a reactionary talking head who seems more interested in being controversial and appearing on GB News than she is in children's welfare.

Also, her prescription for children who don't thrive under her model is a bit 'Pauline's Pens' for my liking.

This.

@ExtraOnions

Which works, if you select what children go to your school, and you make sure you have no ND kids, or SEN kids, or kids from abusive backgrounds etc etc

She has stated many times that she is unable to select.

Lots of ND students or those from a chaotic home life would likely find the school better due to good behaviour & clear expectations. SEN children prefer a calm classroom with very clear boundaries.

Many SEN kids do really well in calm, structured environments with high expectations though.

I like her. High standards and expectations for kids that the rest of the education blob would be happy to stand back and watch smash the school up.

Now you're just being silly.

…because she thinks all children are identikit images, and should all react the same way. Which works, if you select what children go to your school, and you make sure you have no ND kids, or SEN kids, or kids from abusive backgrounds etc etc

Every school could be perfect, if they didn’t admit children with higher needs.

What's the point of them doing drama if they can't pass maths + English? That's her point, she sets these kids up for their next steps in life. Kids who otherwise may not have achieved the scores they do. She clearly says many go on to study arts based subjects after GCSE but her focus is ensuring they get their 5 x GCSEs in core subjects to enable those next steps to happen.
If you had a child whose passion was music,art etc then you wouldn't send them to KBs school.
The fact Phillipson hates her immediately elevates KB in my eyes because Phillipson is the most anti-education SoS in recent times.

My headteacher visited and said it was amazing. I think the results she gets are brilliant & she has high expectations. I don't believe she is able to select her intake. She treats everyone the same regardless of background. For some children from a chaotic home life this can be the structure they need. I think strict rules lead to less opportunities for bullying & things like boys upskirting & groping girls in corridors. They are always having visitors so it's not staged.

She's incredibly sexist for a start. But of course in a 'one rule for me and another for you' so favoured of high-profile conservative women.