What do we think about the Tories proposed education policy?

[faraday]

here

This is just one article I read- there will be links here and in The Guardian on the same subject.

The bones of it seems to be that the Tories will effectively give parents 'vouchers' to spend where they want, school-wise, 'good' schools will be allowed to expand, and poorer DCs will get higher value 'vouchers' thus making those DCs more attractive to a school.

Can you see a 'middle-class backlash'?

Can we REALLY follow a Swedish model seeing as our societies are so very different?

"In france I think teachers are placed in schools and don't have much choice."

As far as I understand it (I am no expert) there's a sort of points system. At the outset, a teacher has extra points if he/she has extra qualifications; he/she accumulates points over the years, for working in very hard schools etc. The more points a teacher has, the more say he/she has over where he/she works.

Headteachers in France are not teachers' managers . This is a very complex area! There are no heads of department or indeed any hierarchy within the school.

The only reason I can find to say I would be concerned about the idea of random palcements is the effect it would have on mature entrants (probably me next year) who simply couldn't pack up and move anywhere due to family.

OTOH I'd far rather teach in a 'failing' school than another- matches my work experience to date and TBH i'm the right, beleive ion the child but be damned streetwise type.

Ah, but faraday 'a fair slab of parents' does imply a lot says she pickily..
I can't see how it's demeaning though. Let's face it, if your experience of your own education is pretty woeful, then understandably you're going to approach your child's school with a slight chip on your shoulder. + I don't think most parents who've had that experience are buying into the victim buy-out, more the 'well my education was crap, so I don't expect it's changed'. So yes, absolutely I think it's crucial to meet those parents with open arms and a genuine bend over backwards intent to show you're that the school's doing its best by each child. Seems common sensical to me to break a cycle. Also it's the approach I (+ I'd guess you too) would expect - feeling able to approach the school and as though you're being listened to? So why not make sure all parents feel that way. It's pretty basic to a good school if you ask me.

• you mentioning that mother I mentioned and saying she obviously cares, is absolutely the point I was trying to make - that it's rare to find a parent who doesn't, no matter how lacking their parenting skills could be argued to be. I was using that as an example to contradict those on here implying that a whole heap of parents don't give a stuff about education. I simply don't think that's the case. All parents care, so somewhere we're going wrong and losing them along the way. There are very few who don't give a stuff.

I don't see what's wrong with paying to move into a good catchment area. We needed to buy a house. We look around. We choose one in nice area near nice school. We scrimp. We do without quite a few things to pay mortgage.
Why is that unfair? Anyone you care to speak to round here has bought a house here because of the reputation of the local school. And these people aren't particularly well off. Just keen to give their children the best chance.

I could have bought a house in the next town. I would have had a house twice the size and a pile of extra cash each month. But then I would have to accept that along with that choice came the school with the dubious honour of having the most pregnant pupils in the country and bad drug problems.

ooh, fircone- where are you? I recall a while ago (I THINK) that you live in the Th. catchment, from another thread?

Anyway, fwiw I do broadly agree with much that is being said here. I am also aware that we may come across as a bunch of nimbys BUT as much as anything I feel that the needs of an under-educated, neglected and possibly aggressive and angry DC from an impoverished background are WAY different to those of my DC and 'making us all equal' by expecting me to tolerate MY DC's education being disrupted if not ruined by the presence of a poorly socialised DC (or several) doesn't really do it for me!

I genuinely salute your optimism, smee, that openly embracing the parent(s??) would demonstrably alter that DC's educational outcome. Possibly. But it's my belief that what you REALLY need is a social policy that encourages employment to the point of compulsion; demands that child support IS paid; supports adoption of the most vulnerable DCs; compulsory parenting classes- and generally makes the idea of a casually conceived child a lot less attractive. If all that means throwing shed loads of money at teenaged girls in socially deprived areas in order to open their eyes to better options, so be it.

I am not suggesting that ever school drop- out is the result of an irresponsible teenage pregnancy, or that every teenage pregnancy will result in an ASBO'ed lout but the statistics do somewhat support that idea.

fircone - there's nothing wrong with it, but spare a thought for the folks who are perhaps less well qualified and less well paid than you and can only afford a teeny house in 'the next town', non?
or those in council housing who don;t have as much choice as buyers?
should their kids have as good a chance as yours or not?

Reading this thread, and various links, and discussing this thread with SIL who is a teacher, I've just learned a few facts about comprehensive schools which seem quite shocking to me.

Firstly it is next to impossible permanently to exclude someone. SIL's school managed to permanently exclude four in the last five years (two for an assault which sounded more like attempted murder to me and two for arson - nice and symmetrical)

Secondly most classes apart from English Maths and Science are taught in mixed ability classes. So there is very little escape for children who DO want to learn from children who are disruptive. The present government is very keen on social inclusion, and doesn't fund pupil referral units.

Thirdly, it really does depend on how good the teachers are as to whether or not they can cope with mixed ability classes. It seems that in these classes, most teachers end up teaching to those children just below average ability and don't cope well with children at either end of the ability spectrum.

You probably knew all this stuff.

for the record, lots of kids do just fine in the local state system..

Faraday, good on you for having such strong opinions, but am mighty glad I don't live there. Forced employment, forced adoption, blimey...
It's not about money imo, though of course that helps. It's simply about seeing all children as individuals who deserve respect and a good education. If you respect people, that's returned in spades iyswim. Trouble is the more we divide our system by all running to the so called 'good' schools, the greater that divide becomes. After all if your child's school is seen as a sink school it's almost self fulfilling, especially if you had a bad education yourself as you'll understandably expect not a lot. But I honestly do believe that most children and most parents are okay and all start with hope. Scratch the surface and people are sound - children especially, no matter what their background. It's the system that's not. I think we'll probably have to agree to differ on the solution though

yes 'just fine'

5 A-Cs just fine

but is that all they are capable of? or is there potential not realised?

well having a ds(15) who has one year of gcses left i have to have hope

though i'm working to help him achieve a degree without debt

I like the idea of children from less well-off backgrounds being made more attractive to schools - seems quite elegant to me. But, as the Badger says, it's hard to see how this is going to work in practice: surely it would have to be phased in, for a start? Over-subscribed schools aren't going to be able to take all the children who want to go there from a standing start. And will catchment areas/selection by distance be done away with entirely?

Plus, if the Tories are going pursue social mobility (laudible aim IMO) and attack state-school 'opportunity hoarder' parents, can we assume they'll also be attacking those who send their DCs to independents? (Somehow I suspect not.)

But I don't hate it, as an idea.

OK, smee, we will but I will pick up a thing: 'forced adoption'. Not advocating that, just it's an option we have been hell bent in not exploring thus DCs are left in hellish home environments because 'the family must be kept together at all costs'. Incidentally, a thing which is changing post Baby P.

I like the idea that we're all essentially good people, but I'm not entirely sure about the 'respect' agenda- I believe that there are times that 'respect' SHOULD be automatic, like in a classroom where a DC SHOULD respect the teacher BECAUSE they ARE the teacher. I think once you start 'negotiating' that concept, the grey areas that- imo!- lead to that Victim Mentality. See how the term 'respect' has been trashed by the hoodie gangs? How twisted and misguided and evil it can all become.

Finally, it IS instructive how many of the parents of whom we speak, when questioned about their own educational experience, can do no better than to tell us 'It was all borin', like. They made us do like work'n'stuff and they didn show me any respect so me and my mate bunked off the last year'..... It would take MILLIONS to work out THAT disaffectation and the educational budget is limited.

Ah right, I see it's tied in to allowing any Tom, Dick or Harrietta to start a school of their own if they don't fancy St Asbo's. This sort of thing makes me a bit nervous.

Yes, policywonk, like I said earlier (but I don't expect everyone to wade thru 4 pages of this!) I'd feel a lot differently if these policy makers where making decisions that would affect their OWN DCs but they aren't. They'll all be private and those who aren't will be in grammar having been expensively prepped, but those politicians will wear their State Education Badge with pride.

Well surely the Tories aren't going to attack indepdendent school parents. I do applaud the fact that may be they are trying to make things fairer, but I really, really don't understand how this voucher system is meant to work (dense emoticon).

Perhaps Michael Gove could come on a webchat and explain it, and explain how he is going to sell it to Tory voters( a fair few of which, I would imagine, do not use nor understand the state system.)

This isn't designed to appeal to dyed-in-the-wool Tory voters whose dc will go / are going private.
They will get a quiet assurance that the private system won't be medddled with, and then the main aim will be to woo pinko liberal lefties who feel let down by the hash Labour seem to have made of education.

If you say so Mrs Badger......

sorry, got my cynic hat on there

put it this way, if I was Michael Gove it's sure as hell what I'd be trying to do...

who has been in charge of education for so long, can they let someone who knows what they're doing run it for a change

Yes, we should get Gove on to explain.

Yes I expect they will leave private schools alone but not be kind enough to bring back assisted places or grammar schools.

They will tinker further with state education, bringing in private companies to "help" (saving gov money but not improving education) knowing their own darlings won't be affected as they can send them privately.

I don't want any child in the country to go to a sink school but I would like to send my children to a school that is not oversized, doesn't have major discipline issues or bullying, and where there is ability setting for individual subjects.

At the moment I have a good comp on the doorstep which apart from being on the large size appears to offer a very good education and attracts people who are wealthy enough to afford private due to being such a good school. We are not wealthy and live in a small house and have stayed living here for the schools. I will be so cross if some kind of lottery is introduced and my children are unable to go to the good comp 10 mins walk away or its funding is cut due to being in an affluent area.

Why do the political parties have it in for ordinary well educated people who pay their taxes and just want to live in a pleasant area and for their children to have a good education. They should leave the good schools alone and focus their efforts on making the not so good schools better.

I know you're being sarcastic when you mention 'not kind enough to bring back assisted places or grammar schools'- but thing is I have a real issue with private schools creaming off the BRIGHT but poorer kids. THEY aren't the issue, it's the vast mass of average (that being the definition!) and perhaps a little below average who do inhabit the sink state schools and estates whose life prospects need enhancing.

But I believe the simple fact is that no amount of money (realistically speaking) will improve this situation IF a critical mass of those DCs aren't 'school ready' or supported at home. The 'solution' the tories seek is to force 'good' schools to take on those DCs and assume that the 'goodness' will rub off on them- rather than accept another likely scenario- that if sufficient numbers of 'difficult/behaviorally challenged/and not so clever DCs 'hit' a 'good' school in one go, that school will soon cease to be a 'good' school- I stated earlier (3 pages ago?!) that a school is its Governing body, its Head teacher, its teachers, its pupils and the parents. Upset any part of that balance to any extent and the whole chemistry changes.

I think Michael Gove is quite interesting because he does at least have some personal experience of the 'one size fits all' not working (he has talked about being adopted and his schooling experiences).

Whilst I have, in the past, been really impressed by the arguments against grammar schools, I do now think that they were the best thing for children who are academically bright.

The trouble is now, there are so few of them that they are now full of either children from m/c areas (mine included) or from private prep schools. So the system doesn't work. In the timescale since my older DCs attended and my youngest started (I have big age gaps!) the proportion of private school entrants has massively increased. At least when the oldest went, the majority were from 'ordinary' primary schools. My youngest is in a class with the vast majority having been privately educated prior to their admission to the GS.

If someone could bring in a system with many more grammar schools but whereby those who do not gain places at a GS are not 'written off' and are given an equally decent education which is not so academic, then that would be OK wouldn't it?

I wonder if one could make it work the other way round to the old assisted place scheme - offer dim struggling poor kids access to the less academically pushy independent schools (and there are lots - where else do dim rich kids go?) so they get the benefit of small class sizes, individual attention, wider curriculum choices wrt sport drama etc while reducing the burden on the state sector?