New Statesman article on schools

[UnquietDad]

very interesting

Shows how the perception of state schools is skewed in the media, sometimes deliberately, by journalists and writers anxious to reinforce their own "choice".

(Who are all these writers who send their children private? None I know can afford it...)

Seems a bizarre way to storm a protest. The DM, oh-my. Must be something in the water at the NS these days..

I agree that many journalists resort to hysterical exaggeration when it comes to justifying their hypocrisy in choosing private education for the offspring. Having said that, I found the statistic released last week that 10,000 A level candidates in the independent sector get 3 A's at A level compared to 7,500 across the entire comprehensive system quie shocking.

Even more shocking when you consider that they will have a greater number of 'hard subjects' than the state schools.
Given the amount of money the gvt chucks at useless initiatives like the inevitable big ticket failing IT projects/millenium domes etc, have always found it weird that they don't try , just once, to chuck money at education. Tony Blair had a massive mandate -he could have completely overhauled state eduction rather than just tinkering about with dumbing down exams, but then I guess his kids were in selective school (by religion) so maybe he saw no burning need

And Fiona Millar is the biggest hypocrite of all - if her hubby had not been cooking up dodgy dossiers to take us all into an uttely pointless invasion of Iraq to safeguard American interests, and Tony Blair's post-Pm career,there's another big chunk of money that could have gone into education.

I suppose my view of FM is coloured by a radio interview I heard with her some years ago. She went on about sending her children to a failing school and how she and other parents were mobilised into sorting out the school, curriculum, activities etc doing all bar taking it over completely from the LEA.

Fine, as I've said, if you have limitless amounts of time and a partner who is an expert lobbyist but that isn't open to most of us. I think that is the point.

All state education could be good if every school had the resources and parental support/knowhow/clout that FM and her media friends were able to provide. If I'm unhappy with my catchment school I'm unlikely to get an article published in the papers or be invited to talk about it on Woman's Hour!

Oh for gawds sake. FM and AC are where they are because they worked hard to get there and like them or not, they're obviously rather good at what they do. So stop moaning and do something rather than moan about people who do. At least FM's passionate and works to change things that matter. She's a bit on the smug side for my taste, but she obviously believes in what she does and says and acts accordingly, so how can you have a go at that?!
Tony Blair, Iraq, well yes obviously that you can have a go at

Choosyfloosy, you are absolutely spot on with your nepotism mapping system.

Stephen Ball's insightful book "Education PLC" does something similar, in order to explain why the same couple of dozen non-elected non-accountable people seem to dominate state maintained education in this country, and the associated debate.

Why shouldn't a 'non elected, non accountable' person write an article for a magaz

I don't see it stopping Rachel Johnson, Christina Lamb, Will Self etc. It's only their OPINION. You don't have to agree with it. I think it is interesting to read different (non elected) people's perspective on education and at least AC and FM have actually used the state system for their three children, even if they have had to put a lot of extra work into making it successful, which is more than many other parents in politics, media etc.

As for the nepotism, well that is rife in practically every walk of life, not just education. Twas always thus, I am afraid.

Oops, should be 'magazine', obviously.

Message withdrawn

I think I need to qualify what I said a bit more. My concerns are that there is a sort of murky world in existence, in which a limited number of key people who have known each other a long time circulate at will, and consequently have undue influence over policy and other people's lives, as well as access to big pots of public money on occasion (eg the Promethean whiteboard tycoon and certain PFI contractors). Frankly half the time I think they probably don't even realise they are doing it.

My personal feeling is that if the debate was opened up a bit, and became a bit more democratic, it would be healthier, and I have published myself on this. Having said all that, the situation here is nothing like as bad as it is in France, where it really is jobs for the boys (or their female counterparts) at the highest levels, from what I can see. Once you go to the Polytechnique you seem to be sorted for life as far as top jobs, sinecures and favours are concerned.

Does that make my argument a bit clearer?

Yes, BoffinMum! (although I did fundamentally realise what you were saying in the first place....)

Agree with Pruners too. I am always googling people to see their background, education, 'connections' after I have read something as it does sway one's perception of their 'opinion'.

Message withdrawn

I am not sure it is off the debate, Pruners, because it's important to be able to locate a person within the wider debate in order to evaluate where they are coming from. That's just taking an intellectual interest in things. I do think it is helpful when people declare their hands.

For example, if I am writing about independent schooling I generally point out that I attended one, but also state primary schools, and also taught in both sectors. Then people can decide for themselves how my arguments fit into the bigger picture. I think that's reasonable enough.

I would feel awkward having attended a renowned selective state school myself and not being crystal clear about how this might have opened doors for me, enabling me to contribute to public life (naming no names, of course).

"it's nothing but intellectual snobbery to want to know the provenance of one's opinion-givers. (I have seen this said on MN a few times.)"

Surely not! On the contrary, it dislays intellectual rigor if you research your sources.
It is entirely pertinent to the argument to know that this article was written by the DP and DD of central figures in the Labour Party which claimed that 'education, education, education' was a priority. Such DP/DD might, possibly, put a certain gloss on their reporting of how well their colleagues are meeting their promises.

PS Choosy: I love your hotel-guide-style colour coding.

Message withdrawn

I'm with Boffinmum on this.

But ...

Yes, I think people should offer opinions and also opinion based on their experience. Experience may often bring up stuff that hasn't made it's way into research or top-level opinion, things that are below the radar but are incredibly valid. And in an ideal world, that would be alongside more in-depth, contextual INFORMATION.

Thing is, that's not the situation we have.

In fact, most of us hear about ideas through the newspapers. Necessarily, newspapers are filled with articles by people who write directly and well. There is very little space given to contextual, well-researched information.

That's a shame - but it is certainly where newspapers are these days.

So, it would be fine if the Fiona's of this world were putting in their tuppence-worth alongside articles that laid out government policy on this or that issue, along with an outline of research into this area and maybe even thoughtful pieces on what areas should, possibly, be areas to be addressed in future.

Sadly, what we get is articles which are little more than propaganda for this or that hackneyed position, foreclosing real debate and, yes, tiresomely nepotisitc.

Also a very important point here is that London schools are improving faster than schools out of London, as they have received significantly enhanced funding over the years through various initiatives (eg Excellence in Cities, London Challenge) which was basically denied schools in many other parts of the country. The people writing in our newspapers and magazines are predominantly London based and use London schools, and views of educational provision nationally are therefore skewed accordingly.

Cherryblossoms, I think you've hit the nail on the head here. It is the absence of balanced and well researched pieces, and the dominance of opinion pieces, that appears to be stifling debate.

It is always very interesting to read different angles on topical issues: the professor or researcher, the experienced person from the coalface, the end user or recipient, and the editorial overview. However all too often we are denied this spectrum of diversity and sometimes our policies go around in circles as a consequence.

Boffinmum - since you're online at the moment ...

I'llconfess I've been thinking about this a fair bit. I know from other of your posts that you work in education, at a research level.

You're almost certainly not going to get a job writing a column in the newspapers, but would anything stop you form, every now and again, flagging up a link to an interesting piece of research, say in the "Education" section here? you wouldn't have to comment on it, unless you wanted to.

It's just that I know I find it depressing that my life cuts me off from ideas at that sort of level, and that being cut off isn't helped at all by modern media, and I suppose "specialization" (whatever that is).

But, I, like so many mn-ers, are really interested in issues around education.

Maybe you could see it as a public service? I do realise it would be a hassle. And maybe no-one but me is interested.

Fwiw the thing that I am most interested in at the moment is black boys/working class boys and education. Just because I visited an "outstanding" school recently, where the higher streams were predominantly white and the lower streams were predominantly black. That upset me and I'd love some sort of array of tools to think about it.

I don't know, maybe it's a mad idea.

But you see, I'm interested already in what you've said about the level of funding directed towards London schools.

Message withdrawn

But, getting back to the original piece and it being London-centric, most of the arguments against state schools DO tend to be from London parents because they argue the state/private debate is different in London (which I believe, to a certain extent). I am not in London BTW.

And there can't be many people who read the New Statesman who don't realise who Fiona Millar and Melissa Benn are, so they are hardly pulling the wool over anyone's eyes. It's when these articles get published in the wider press I suppose that it will give a 'skewed' view. I still maintain, in this PARTICULAR instance, they are just re-dressing the balance a bit in the never ending media obsession with the direness of a state education.

Have just finished reading this thread and I am in agreement with Boffinmum and Cherryblossoms.

I feel a sense of unease at the number of articles on education written by people in the media based on their own personal experience. Yes, these people have the right to express their opinion. But, presenting it as a universal fact is narrowminded. For example, FM may well have extracted an excellent education, from the state, for her children, well lucky her!!! By implication she seems to be saying that any parent who fails to do the same (or gives up and goes private) is somehow letting our state education system down.

Well, I am massively flattered to be asked, and one of the things I am supposed to do is to disseminate research findings in a usable form to the tax payers who fund it, so why not here?

OK, the academic book you need to read if you are interested in London education is here. This is the most up to date and comprehensive text on the subject. Tim Brighouse was involved in editing it. The chapter on comprehensive schooling and school choice is stuffed full of info related to what FM writes about, but in much more depth.

The London Education Research Unit website is here and that has various research digests, as well as being reasonably easy to browse.

Rural and suburban education has not been looked at much since the 1960s or thereabouts. The debates then were to do with whether the countryside needs its own curriculum, and whether small schools should be closed on grounds of cost-effectiveness. The former debate has been superseded by globalisation IMO, and the latter still rumbles on, especially in Scotland. It's probably time for one of us to start a major research project into all this, but research funding is so tight at the moment it probably won't happen for a while.

In terms of black working class underachievement, I'll have a quick think about that and post again in a minute.