Discussion in 'Politics & The Economy' started by BISHI, Aug 10, 2012.
All that article does is ooze the typical arrogance of the educational establishment. The quote "an [educational] institution that is more than capable of making its own marks, if given the chance" betrays the belief that those in education should be "left alone" (a quote from an alleged teacher on these very forums) to determine the educational framework by which our children our educated.
Sorry but the educational system is in dire straits and lacks credibility with employers and needs real change. Gove has upset many in the education world by implementing such changes - but for that he deserves praise.
That alleged teacher was probably me and the statement still stands. The education system is a bloody mess not because of teachers but because of constant goal post moving by politicians, politicians without the first clue about how to teach children . If you want your kids taught by ' unqualified ' youngsters or unemployed squaddies then more power to your and your kids elbow. Would you be happy on the front line with untrained soldiers ..?
No it wasn't, it was someone else who will remain nameless. I didn't realise you were a teacher - still, whilst I may not always agree with content, your posts are well thought out and articulate so it doesn't surprise me.
BISHI, this country has many excellent teachers and nobody is suggesting they aren't doing a good job. Nor is anyone suggesting that politicians do have a "clue about how to teach children" - but what they do have is an awareness of what society at large wants as the output from the educational system. Politicians know that employers - and wider society - want people who can read, write, do basic maths, have an understanding about our country and the world, understand other cultures/religions etc etc. The current educational system is not delivering that hence why we have constant moving of the "goal posts".
I think the big problem currently is that - perhaps due to a weariness of change - the educational establishment tends to stomp its feet and complain about ANY change. Indeed in an interview on Radio 4 a few weeks ago the anti-change Teaching Union rep was asked by the interviewer what changes they did actively support - and he really could not answer. The output is not right - something needs to change.
No, education is no longer about teaching children but about jumping through hoops to meet targets, generate data and get ahead in league tables - this is a situation brought about by successive government, students are being taught to pass tests and not to become citizens. It is a bloody mess but Gove is not the person to do it. Rosen is a respected educationalists and ex children's laureate, who's opinion are you going to trust more..?
If you gave me an option between Michael Gove and Postman Pat, it still wouldn't cause me more than a heart beat to decide Pat wins hands down.
In fact, it was Pats cat that had been run over and subsequently stuffed, I'd still not pick Gove, since a fictional stuffed dead animal has got to have more charisma and common sense than Gove, or most politicians to be brutally honest.
As far as I am aware, Gove was a Journalist before becoming an MP. It doesn't even look like he finished his degree course in English since nowhere can I find reference to a qualification.
Why on earth would anyone in their right mind want someone with absolutley NO expertise in education to be making important and significant changes to our school system ?
Politicians should stick to making decisions about a rough overall direction to what they would like to see leaving the people who actually understand what ever subject or field at hand have to propose with that in mind.
And I've just heard that the PM has jumped on the olympic bandwagon and announced he wants to see a competitive curriculum in primary schools - just like the sports partnership scheme he pulled funding for as soon as he got into power....
Exactly: in teaching, like many other public sectors, the amount of time actually spent at the work face has been eroded by an obsession from above to generate increasing amounts of paperwork to prove the latest initiative is working.
The problem is by the time the profession had got its head around each initiative and have wasted all that time generating the requisite data- the whole thing gets scrapped and a new politically motivated initiative put in place. It's madness ..!
Has anyone really got an answer to this ?
Once kids can read, write and do basic Maths then they are pretty well tooled up for learning. Idealists will say we should teach them various subjects to expand their horizons, but it's wasted if the kids don't have that need to inquire into things. What generally happens is that their own interests are not matched to the education system. I met a motorcycle mechanic the other day, he was in his 50 s and had a great business. His whole life had been spent trying to avoid school and he had always wanted to work with cars and bikes. It's no good forcing kids to endure subjects and rigid timescales of school life when they don't want it. Instead it just turns into disruption. This guy would have been better learning his trade and getting his basic education at the same place.
Those that have more enquiring minds will often get it batted out of them. The system does not have any flexibility. What modern education is doing to kids is to teach them not to think, to jump through hoops and be a good little member of the state.
One size doesn't fit all. If we really did allow children to learn and encourage proper free thinking it would change the country for good. Those in power don't want that to happen, so we will always get this sanitised, state approved system which tries to turn out clones like a factory.
Have you got Pink Floyd's "The Wall" playing in the background?
We need more apprenticeship style qualifications. We are woefully short of carpenters,electricians and plumbers etc and this gap has been filled by eastern Europeans . What we have is a generation of school leavers going into further education , getting into debt and leaving with degrees that won't get many of them a job. They are now talking about 'raising the age of participation ' whereby young people will be required to be in education, regardless of ability, up to the age of 18. Those with special needs will be expected to stay in education up to 25. Now with cuts in social care left right and centre and college places in decline I suspect schools will be expected to absorb these changes without any appropriate levels of funding. I can see that this may be a good thing if appropriate funds are put in ( most FE colleges I have seen were little more than youth clubs keeping kids off the streets) but it will take significant money and reorganisation to facilitate this and I suspect this is more about cooking unemployment figures than giving our young people a real chance in the workplace . And you watch, just as us teachers get things in place the bloody goal posts will move yet again...!
I reckon Gove looks very like 'teacher'.
teachers are best placed to decide how the system cam be improved for the better, after all they are in the front line.As its is they dont even get consulted about all the changes that have been made
I'm sorry Squiffy, but I refuse to accept that LGS hasn't investigated the facts properly before making such a definitive statement...
Does anyone actually no the reason why are education system is wrong ? I mean a definitive answer to what isn't happening that should be happening ? The only one I can find is that he class divide is growing wider, that poor kids don't do as well as rich kids. I'm not even sure how this 'not doing as well as' is arrived at.?
The implication is the rich thick kids do better than poor bright kids, but how do you begin to define 'bright'. Some kids just lack confidence even if they are incredibly gifted. Also rich parents have to advantage of being able to send their kids to expensive private schools, the kids network with other rich kids and their parents usually have a hand in getting them onto the success ladder despite any lack of intelligence. Bright, confident poor kids also break barriers, they don't need to be particularly gifted intellectually to become successful.
Anyone think we have lost track of what exactly we are trying to educate children for ? I mean, is a politician like Boris successful? how about Alan Sugar ? Or Damian Hurst ? What about the porter in a hospital that cares for the patients he transports, or the Fireman saving people from fires, maybe it's Daly Thompson. I mean what the hell does success look like ?
Going to University or passing exams isn't actually success. I know loads of people who passed and went nowhere and many who got no exams at all and are running high performance businesses. I know promising sportsmen that are now couch potatoes.
I think we need to grasp what the measure of success looks like.
No, teachers are not best placed to decide.
However, many teachers may have valuable input and are far more likely to a better grasp of the issues and consequencies of policy than an unqualified, inexperienced MP like Gove.
The best placed to decide are those that have both the experience or at least a solid understanding of the implications of front line consquencies as well as expertise in the theories, applications and management of teaching on a wider scale.
There are quite a few individuals and groups that have spent their own educations and careers in the study of teaching and educational practicies. In other words, those that write the books used to teach the teachers.
I'd just like to point out over half a million construction workers have been made unemployed since the recession began in 2008,we are not short of tradesmen in this country...The country has recently been pulled back into recession due large drop in the construction sector,and now the olympics has come to a close expect more redundancies to follow....
Not only that but wages in some areas of the country have been reduced by as much as 60%....So flooding construction with young kids is not the answer...
Not only that there are zero benefits and few prospects in construction,no,pension,very poor working conditions,tight deadlines,non payment or fiddling payments and wages is common place,aggressive managment techniques,bullying,physical and mental....
Non of my children will ever work in construction......
I never mentioned construction - I particularly specified electricians and plumbers, jobs filled in recent years by poles and other eastern Europeans. I just hope if you can afford to send your kids to college that they can find a job relevant to their qualification. I know degree qualified people working as waiters and kitchen porters.. !
What do you think plumbing and electrical work is if its not construction!
Upto a 1000 people are applying for one gas service post,there is very little work for the currently qualified skilled tradesmen out there.....
There never was a shortage it was a myth....
Apparently it was not a myth, however a deluge of quick qualifications appears to have more than filled the gap with many under qualified people.
A familiar sounding story..!
This happened in the 70s and 80s to. They were called 3 month wonders. Yet we had to have a four year apprenticeship. I really believe that for specific trade tasks 3 months intensive training is sufficient. This is why part P was brought in for electricians covering domestic installations. The think the 4 year apprenticeship was a hangover from days when companies would teach the youngsters everything they needed to know about a trade which required far more skill than it currently does. These days we hardly ever do lead work on underground cables and joiners fitting out houses don't need to know the complexities of cabinet making. These days 4 years should be sufficient to turn someone into a reasonable design engineer with a good grounding in the hands on trade.
I think this flexibility of trades is very necessary and would be a great way of getting people back into work in different areas. We could have free education for everyone who wanted to change careers. Instead of all the protectionism surrounding some trades and professions it would allow rapid training for those who wanted to find alternative work. For instance take house conveyancing, you don't need a solicitor that has been through years of university to enact the simple transfer of property, even doctors and dentists could have further division of labour so that simple stuff such as check ups, small fillings, cleaning would be done by a far less qualified person than say an orthodontists who does root canals and cosmetic work. This I think is why the Polish are doing so well, they have a low cost of living and therefore a fully trained tradesman can easily compete with our current system, I don't think that's an issue as it maintains competition, but citizens of this country should be able to compete by using a greater division of labour to at least get on equal terms.
Our problem is that the protectionism around trade and professions tries to limit the number of people employed in order to keep wages high, it then uses trade bodies to ensure minimum rates are charged by insisting on certain protocols and costs. This kills competition and leaves a huge barrier for anyone who wants a change of career. This flexibility and free training would be a great way to get many people off low paid work, or those who have lots of skills in a redundant field back into work in something they enjoy.
It has to be accepted that there will always be low paid unskilled jobs that are open to those best suited to those type of jobs and a minimum wage should not be a barrier to that. What we don't need is slavery in any area, or those with potential ending up working in places that do not give them any satisfaction.
Teachers do get consulted - just liek any other profession/industry - and have ample opportunity to influence the direction politicians take. The trouble is most seem happier to rant and rave rather than partake constructively. And I think half the trouble is that, despite many teachers being 'liberals' with things that don't impact upon them, they are ultra-conservative when it comes to their own terms and conditions. A perfect example...
Boris Johnson recently commented that school children should do 2 hours sport per day which was met with typically intransigent responses from the educational establishment along the lines of "re-allocating 10 hours of study time to sport would have a devasting impact upon other subjects". It doesn't even occur to these people to think along the lines of extending the school day by having that sport after 3pm. Think of the potential benefits of that (children off the street in the afternoon, fitter children, less childcare issues for working parents etc etc).
Nightmare. 2 hours of sport, nothing fills me with greater dread than being forced into sports. Boris probably liked it because he wasn't very bright. It's quite strange but kids can get all the activity they need without forced participation. It's not education at all. All this guff about Olympians being role models and inspirations. Jesus they won a race, stand on a stage grasping a bit of junk on a ribbon, as a contribution to human and social progress they figure at the level of any entertainer. It's another role model for the glamour lovers and celebrity wannabes, no more and no less important than x factor. Sports, it might be a surprise but not everyone enjoys them.
Oops. Your slip is showing.
Didn't expect that from you. :-( shame.
It wouldn't have to be organised sport as such, it could be any form of excercise, but I take your point
Separate names with a comma.