Solving the crisis in state education

[judetheobscure]

Thought I'd start a new thread as the state vs private thread is soooo long; and wanted to focus more on possible solutions.

So, fwiw, here are some ideas (aimed at secondary level):

Abolish private schools
Abolish "religious" schools
Abolish grammar schools, foundation schools, CTCs (are they still called this) and any other form of "specialist" school.

Create across-the-board comprehensive system.

Insist on setting. No mixed-ability classes for academic subjects. Allow plenty of opportunity to move "up" and "down" the sets.

Have units within the schools for problem pupils. Remove them from classes as soon as they become disruptive.

Problem pupils who don't improve and who don't have parents that support the school to be sent to boarding schools. (Not necessarily boarding schools for disruptive pupils but normal boarding schools.)

Restrict higher education to top 20%(ish).
Bring back apprenticeships. (Where's a plumber when you need one).
Money saved on universities can go to restoring student grant and better funding for schools.

Train more teachers and train them better. Don't allow teacher training institutions to spend 90% of the course on educational debates and "gender issues" etc. Classroom management and subject specific skills are far more important.

Anything I've missed (tongue-in-cheek)

Robinw, the grand total of what I'm saying is that the state funds x% of the total, then x% of the students are accepted by the usual LEA guidelines.

Why are you arguing against that? With regards to these guidelines, some RC/ C of E children would be included (by the sibling thing or proximity), so it's not like it's atheists above all else. Uh, so badly worded. And Robin, from what you've said, it seems your diocese is doing this already, so it wouldn't affect you.

No, Jimjams, religious discrimination doesn't matter on where you live. The schools have a list of criteria, one of which depends on religion. Ask for the list. If any of the criteria depend on religion, yes, it's biased. Just because you got in doesn't mean it's not.

Yeah, the property thing sucks. And religious discrimination and catchment areas are two different issues. (I feel compelled to remind you that I'm an American...)

Claireandrich, I'd love to talk to you about internet access issues in school. There was one person once I knew that had it set up well (time consuming and for a primary, but well). Anyway, favourite topic of mine. I've got some ideas which are probably completely unworkable, but I want to know: [email protected] .

(just previewed and none of that makes real sense. 4 minutes to my birthday, though. Sorry for the drunken posting.. I alway hate to do it this way-- no numbers, argh!)

IME religious schools actually vary as much as any other type. Some do very well by their pupils and some don't. Some are very diverse in terms of intake and some are not for a huge variety of reasons. However, what does sometimes happen is that in mixed ethnic/social areas a religious school with a good reputation, especially if Catholic, becomes a white (and possibly also middle class) ghetto. This is because the more popular a school is the more strictly they will have to apply the admissions criteria, top of which in a religious school will usually be practising at the relevant church. Certainly there are likely to be very few Asians in any church and local black communities may sometimes worship in different churches from the ones attached to schools. So in effect if not principle it is easy for religious schools to become more monochrome than others in terms of pupil intake.

Mind you, as many people have pointed out lower down, this can happen with community schools too, what with the savvy rich all moving next door to the best schools.

I am not too sober either, so am not going to even attempt to follow all this discussion about church schools.

My son goes to a church school for the same reasons robinw states. In my son's application I deleberately did not say we were devout christians - I said we valued the sense of community that the church engendered. This is especially because we have no family nearby. I go to church and like going, but don't feel 100% christian.

I would be happy to pay extra per year to fund state education. Not a lot of money but some. As a voluntary aided school, I see my son's school is not quite private or state. If family church attendance is a requisite for allowing children into a church school, how about making it requiste for the whole of the child's time at school? I know lots of parents at our school stop attending church once their youngest child is in school. I think this is really not on. But.... if a parent refuses to attend church, what canm their child do? and a church school would have to be very hard hearted to permanently exclude their child from school if their parents stopped attending church.

I have been speaking to my husband about this disussion. He thinks I am a communist this is coming from someone who regularly sold the socialst worker and helped picket Wapping in his youth. Anyway, he says anyone can afford private eduction, it just means you have to work very hard. If you choose not to, you settle for state education. I am not (and have never been) extremely left wing, but I disagree.

Happy Birthday JJ

And I think you should be known as Red Tiger from now on, Tigermoth!

Oh you flatter me, scummymummy!

Jimjams - I may be remembering an earlier thread wrongly, but does your ds have a Statement? Becasue if so then that would be why you had no trouble getting him into the school of your choice - I believe that legally a school HAS to accept any child with a Statement who applies before anyone else is considered.

If I am remembering wrongly then that can't be the reason.

bossykate asked the question why do church
schools perform well? I can't answer this queastion generally, but I think I know why our church school performs well - it is small, everyone knows one another, we have a very hands on head, small rules re uniform etc are strictly enforced so bigger rules re behaviour are easier to apply.

So IMO It is not the religious thing that makes the school a good one - it is the sense of close community.

Do you think it's reasonable for um, ok:
x = percentage of overall funding provided by state
y = percentage of students admitted by normal LEA basis (disregarding for the moment any school that has admissions based on academic basis)

Well, thought this would be more complicated but:
x=y

I'm not being facetious. If my husband were up, we could phrase it much much better.

Sorry. Words always fail me. (or more correctly, I always fail words) I'm 32 now! I miss my last birthday. It was a good one.

happy birthday, jj. I am not sure what your equation means but please put that down to my 'relaxed' brain. We have been out tonight.

Yes that sounds good to me, JJ. Might solve my current school woes, anyway!

ScummyMummy, what was your name before? I can't keep track of the changes and yours and SueDonims have always bugged me. I knew what they were at the time, but forget now. Please? ChanelNo5? (says the old person obsessed with continuity)

I think JJ means that when funding for a school comes wholly from a church then fair enough for them to apply only religious criteria to select pupils. But if a proportion of the funding comes from the Local Authority then a proportion of the pupil intake should be selected according to the Local Authority criteria- usually distance from the school.
I like this idea because then my boys might well have school places! They don't at the moment because we are heathens who don't live next door to a community school. (I've got a thread on it somewhere.) It's not fair. wah wah wah

Bring me more whisky! Ok, calvados will do...

Scummy, and that was what I was going to ask about as you had talked about the troubles you're having with the twins.

I don't want to fund discriminitory education. Of course, as an American living in Switzerland, it's easy not to.

I've got no local representation which bugs me, but as my husband reminds me, I knew what I was getting into.

God, I've got an opinion on everything.
(apologies for the lack of sense, feel free to ask late tomorrow..)

Oh! Here's a good link: nevermind. I'm in my husband's acct.

I've always been ScummyMummy apart from a brief strop as Okapi. And once I had athletes foot and changed my name to Rottenfoot for one post and lovely Winnie advised tea tree oil! Apart from that I haven't changed my name at all as far as I remember.

Suedonim was once Chairmum.

Since I'm in danger of losing this link (due to my ineptness):
nice ideas

So who was ChanelNo5? Why are you drinking whiskey before calvados? I thought Calvados was the fancy stuff. And I was thinking of your kids, ScummyMummy, in the whole discussion. You'd think they'd want to convert us damn heathens. Joke, people.

I agree with Tigermoth that church schools in general are better because they have more of a sense of community. From what has been said here it sounds as though children at church schools have parents who have made positive decisions about their preferences. The parents have to either be actively involved with the church or they are interested enough in their child's education to apply to that school on other criteria. (Mind you, from what people have said about London - do all parents there have to choose a school or do they just get a place allocated at their nearest school anyway, if they don't make that application??) I do think community is at the base of all this. Education affects everyone, whether or not they have children; it affects our future, our prosperity, our happiness, in short, it affects society.

JJ, so you had all the gin!!! I only had tonic. Hope you have a ~~~Happy birthday~~~
Sue (AKA Chairmum)

message withdrawn

Oakmaiden- currently being statemented. Although we were offered the place before they knew he was SEN (and they are a different LEA so probably wouldn't apply anyway). I don't think it makes any difference- if there is no space you can't name the school on the statement if you see what I mean (this is happening to a friend of mine atm). Although people in the LEA have ducked the question when I've tried to ask them directly. I have ordered the SEN code of practice- so I will have a look in there.

Mind you Oakmaiden still think we'll end up home edding at some stage

JJ what I'm saying though- is that once you move to a less populated area then the selection criteria becomes irrelevant. If a school has 28 or 29 in a class then they can take another child whatever their religion and wherever they live, so discrimination doesn't really exist. The guidelines are there becuase they have to have criteria drawn up in case there are too many children, but if there are never too many then it never becomes discriminatory.

So for example I think ds1's school goes
Churchgoers living in the area with sibling
churchgoers in the area
non-churchgoers in the area
churgoers out of the area with siblings at the school
non-churchgoers out of area with siblings
non-churchgoers out of area without siblings

we're in the last category.

I think robinw makes a good point as well. Religious school in the UK (especially c of e) are very different to those in the states. So despite being a church school RE still has to be taught in the same way as a non-church school. A lot of church schools are little village schools- where the church set up the school back in the Victorian times. They have always been effectively community schools, rather than religious schools, as when they were set up everyone went to church anyway.

And as Robinw says they still have to follow national curriculum so ys they teach evolution.

The High school my DS is at is Voluntary Aided ie majority of Governors appointed by Diocese. Set up by church as a "proper denominational choice for... Christian families". Admissions policy is 50% "Church familes"/ 50% "neighbourhood". Over-subscription policy is:
Church places
a) families regularly attending C of E Parishes (no distance limit)
b) families attending other Christian denominations within 6 mile radius of school (provided they are supported in their application by Minister or Priest)
c) families of those currently attending C of E Primary within 6 miles of the school (provided they are also willing to support the school's Christian values)
These places will be restricted by distance if the total number of places applied for exceeds 120 (240 places available).
Remaining places reserved for
d) those with a special need (designated for deaf & physical disability). For those with siblings already at the school, and
e) for the remaining places, those who live closest to the school.

In practice, there are usually spare "Church" places, which then get allocated on a "neighbourhood" basis. The nearest feeder Primary is C of E anyway, so children applying from that school are more-or-less guaranteed a place, and the Head told me that you are also guaranteed a place (whether you fit the criteria or not) if you already have a child at the school. HOWEVER, you MUST put the school down as first choice on the transfer from primary form... the school fills up on first choices. Caused problems this year for those waiting for 11+ results, unless you were 100% sure your child would/wouldn't pass.

robinw - you say start teaching them more interesting things so they don't risk missing the lesson - if only it was that easy! I spend hours (and I mean hours) planning, preparing and research lessons to get these children engaged. The the majority I do succeed. But there are some who will NEVER be happy. The children I was talking about were GCSE students - they CHOSE the subject. We have to follow a syllabus which is primarily coursework - exam board set. They know this when the choose it. I have no choice but to get them to do courseowrk. Soem just want to play on the net - simply not possible or appropriate but when I say no, they aren't impressed. I have actually been physically hurt in such an instance last year. I asked a 13 year old boy to do his work - he was being distracting, not working, etc. He refused so I repeated myself and gave him his first verbal warning. He stood up and threw his chair at my stomach - I was 7 months pregnant at the time. He then walked out the room and put his fist threw 2 windows. He was expelled for 2 days and I got no apology. I still teach him. How do I engage pupils who don't even want to be in school, let alone my subject? Sorry this has got rambling and a bit off the point - topic still gets me heated as I felt I shoud have had more managerial support in this case.

The water issue isn't for me to decide. Set by the Head ultimately. General ICT rule for most schools is no food and drink in computer rooms. No spare room for a corner for drinking as I can only just fit my omputers in as it is.

JJ and Oakmaiden, it's actually worse than it appears.

The church is required to provide only 10% of external maintenance costs - a pitifully small proportion of the school budget. But in many cases, including our local church school, they don't even do that - they charge it to the parents.

We made it clear when applying and at our interview with the head that we had chosen the school despite, not because of, its religious affiliation. But they sent us a standard acceptance letter which included the following:-

'If you wish to accept the place, please complete and return the slip below by Friday Nov 22 2002 or the place will be offered to someone else. I would like to emphasise that this is a Church school and that, in accepting a place here, you are undertaking a Christian commitment...'

The acceptance slip contained two statements: one that we wanted to accept the place and the second that we agreed to contribute £42 annually towards the Southwark Board of Education Diocesan Fund. But there was only space for us to sign once, at the bottom. It looked as though acceptance of the place was contingent on agreeing to make the contribution.

We wrote to the head asking her to confirm that the contribution was voluntary. Instead she sent us a sheaf of leaflets. Buried in there was the truth - the contribution is voluntary - but also other grossly misleading statements, eg:-

'...the costly business of building and major maintenance work is largely paid for by the Southwark Diocesan Board of Education...'

Admission criteria are, in order of priority:-

Children of families who are included in the electoral roll of St J's church;
Children of families who can produce a minister's letter confirming membership of another church in the area;
siblings of children at the school;
nearness of the school to home.

This is clearly discriminatory and gives the governors (a majority of whom are appointed by the church) an influence wildly out of proportion with their financial contribution. As someone rightly said, the fact that we got in doesn't make it any less unfair (we live opposite).

What is more worrying is the current proposals to increase the church's scope for discriminating against staff on religious grounds.

We want our dd, an only child, to go to the local school with her neighbours rather than travel out of area. But their dishonesty over this parental contribution has caused us serious misgivings.

message withdrawn

Robinw, we found out easily by searching on Google and comparing lots of school brochures.

message withdrawn