Current Affairs 2017 General Election

[roydo]

Having worked in schools under both Labour and Tory governments, I can honestly say that Labour had a much more coherent, systematic and financially committed approach to education that the conservatives.

The Tories really do seem to completely shun expertise and available wisdom and just make it up as they go along. It's been a six year car crash so far with little respite in view, even if we don't go down the ludicrous grammar school route.

Just know my own experience mate, as a pupil, and then a parent. Kids went to the same school as me.

Well one did.

Local comp, terrific teachers, think its an academy thing now, (not sure what that actually means), and my lad came through it pretty well educated and reasonably sound.

Said it before, the aim of state schools should be to emulate the private ones. Make spending £0000s on education for the few that do, a waste of money. My lad got an education akin to that the "finest" private gaffs in Bristol could provide. And my town aint anything that great. But somehow, for 40 years, the local comp has churned out a few generations of pretty sound kids.

Over to you, cos it beats me.

 

[JonS]

Having worked in schools under both Labour and Tory governments, I can honestly say that Labour had a much more coherent, systematic and financially committed approach to education that the conservatives.

The Tories really do seem to completely shun expertise and available wisdom and just make it up as they go along. It's been a six year car crash so far with little respite in view, even if we don't go down the ludicrous grammar school route.

Tell us more mate -I'm always interested in what people who have witnessed things at first hand have to say.

Also if you can remove any agit prop bias or sloganeering from what you tell us and just stick to the facts that would help.

I probably will agree with you and am genuinely interested in knowing more

 

[flibbyflob]

If Labour lose this GE embarrassingly which people are adamant will happen, then Corbyn does deserve blame but so do a lot of others in the party. Something that won't happen

It is a whole party thing as the backstabbing and sniping that has gone on since the last election has made them unelectable and they would be at present even if they had managed to oust Corbyn last summer. Whatever happens we have to hope that once this election is over the party can regroup and get behind the leader whoever that may be and actually be a relevant opposition to the government. If they don't we are stuck with a Tory government for a long long time.

 

[tsubaki]

It is a whole party thing as the backstabbing and sniping that has gone on since the last election has made them unelectable and they would be at present even if they had managed to oust Corbyn last summer. Whatever happens we have to hope that once this election is over the party can regroup and get behind the leader whoever that may be and actually be a relevant opposition to the government. If they don't we are stuck with a Tory government for a long long time.

Zero chance of that happening.

 

[Seanjd]

Tell us more mate -I'm always interested in what people who have witnessed things at first hand have to say.

Also if you can remove any agit prop bias or sloganeering from what you tell us and just stick to the facts that would help.

I probably will agree with you and am genuinely interested in knowing more

Tories absolutely love school competition. From introducing league tables, to their latest testing failures and the introduction of free schools and sponsored academies - they want a 'best and the rest' system, because they believe that schools which produce poor results and therefore end up as 'requires improvement' or 'unsatisfactory' are just worse schools. That is totally false, and the Conservatives don't, and never have, taken socio-economic factors into account. They don't care where the school is, or how many children are on pupil premium (disadvantaged pupils). They don't care how many children in that school live in poverty or have mental health issues. Low test scores? Special measures it is.

This government have just finished their assessment 'shake up'. They have made value added data invalid, as in the gap closed between when children enter school and then leave, and favour raw data instead. They purposely threw thousands of schools into teaching purgatory with their absolutely unnecessary introduction of 'assessment without levels' - teachers genuinely don't know where their children are at at the moment without them taking a stupid new government test. Education in this country at this moment in time is a shambles. This is without, as @Clint Planet said, even mentioning grammar schools, which will only make the problem ten times worse.

 

[Seanjd]

Just know my own experience mate, as a pupil, and then a parent. Kids went to the same school as me.

Well one did.

Local comp, terrific teachers, think its an academy thing now, (not sure what that actually means), and my lad came through it pretty well educated and reasonably sound.

Said it before, the aim of state schools should be to emulate the private ones. Make spending £0000s on education for the few that do, a waste of money. My lad got an education akin to that the "finest" private gaffs in Bristol could provide. And my town aint anything that great. But somehow, for 40 years, the local comp has churned out a few generations of pretty sound kids.

Over to you, cos it beats me.

But I think you're misunderstanding why private schools are prestigious and cost so much.

Firstly, they generally get better results because of the types of children who attend (generally more parental engagement, better resources at home etc).

Small class sizes may have some impact on their learning, and the schools are probably better equipped for fewer children.

However, and I am passionate about this, the teaching in those schools is no better than most schools up and down this country. The reason private school children succeed is because of the status of the private school, and what it means in this country to have attended a private school. It is usually an instant pedigree stamp to employers - this kid comes from a successful family because they have paid thousands for them to go to private school.

The connections are unrivalled. I have no doubt in my mind that if I went to Eton I would probably have a better paying job due to the ties and connections I made along the way. The tutors there have an active role in getting you into jobs reserved for children of that status.

Essentially, the private school system is unfair because after children leave, they have a better chance of a well paid job and a 'successful' life.

 

[Tubey]

But I think you're misunderstanding why private schools are prestigious and cost so much.

Firstly, they generally get better results because of the types of children who attend (generally more parental engagement, better resources at home etc).

Small class sizes may have some impact on their learning, and the schools are probably better equipped for fewer children.

However, and I am passionate about this, the teaching in those schools is no better than most schools up and down this country. The reason private school children succeed is because of the status of the private school, and what it means in this country to have attended a private school. It is usually an instant pedigree stamp to employers - this kid comes from a successful family because they have paid thousands for them to go to private school.

The connections are unrivalled. I have no doubt in my mind that if I went to Eton I would probably have a better paying job due to the ties and connections I made along the way. The tutors there have an active role in getting you into jobs reserved for children of that status.

Essentially, the private school system is unfair because after children leave, they have a better chance of a well paid job and a 'successful' life.

Nah sorry mate, bold bit, just not true. Like any career, the cream rises to the top, the dregs are left at the bottom.

Good teachers gravitate to good schools. I've seen both ends of the spectrum - it's chalk and cheese.

You get the odd good teacher in a 'normal' school; at the 'good' schools, you get the odd bad teacher.

 

[Tubey]

Tories absolutely love school competition. From introducing league tables, to their latest testing failures and the introduction of free schools and sponsored academies - they want a 'best and the rest' system, because they believe that schools which produce poor results and therefore end up as 'requires improvement' or 'unsatisfactory' are just worse schools. That is totally false, and the Conservatives don't, and never have, taken socio-economic factors into account. They don't care where the school is, or how many children are on pupil premium (disadvantaged pupils). They don't care how many children in that school live in poverty or have mental health issues. Low test scores? Special measures it is.

This government have just finished their assessment 'shake up'. They have made value added data invalid, as in the gap closed between when children enter school and then leave, and favour raw data instead. They purposely threw thousands of schools into teaching purgatory with their absolutely unnecessary introduction of 'assessment without levels' - teachers genuinely don't know where their children are at at the moment without them taking a stupid new government test. Education in this country at this moment in time is a shambles. This is without, as @Clint Planet said, even mentioning grammar schools, which will only make the problem ten times worse.

This bold bit, however, is totally true and rarely talked about, despite being the number one reason for poor academic performance.

 

[Seanjd]

Nah sorry mate, bold bit, just not true. Like any career, the cream rises to the top, the dregs are left at the bottom.

Good teachers gravitate to good schools. I've seen both ends of the spectrum - it's chalk and cheese.

You get the odd good teacher in a 'normal' school; at the 'good' schools, you get the odd bad teacher.

You realise that most private schools pay their staff less than state, right?

 

[Tubey]

You realise that most private schools pay their staff less than state, right?

Aye but teachers value work environments as they have a passion for the job. My mum is a teacher, for example - she isn't arsed about the pay packet really, but she detests it if she's working in a place that doesn't give her the tools to do the job to the best of her ability.

That's the problem - poor funding, combined with a systemic terrible understanding of the effects of relative poverty and resultant higher incidence rates of broken family units etc. that effect a kids education.

 

[Seanjd]

Aye but teachers value work environments as they have a passion for the job. My mum is a teacher, for example - she isn't arsed about the pay packet really, but she detests it if she's working in a place that doesn't give her the tools to do the job to the best of her ability.

That's the problem - poor funding, combined with a systemic terrible understanding of the effects of relative poverty and resultant higher incidence rates of broken family units etc. that effect a kids education.

But it is absolutely not the case that the best teachers generally end up in private schools, which is why I said that their teaching is generally no better than most decent state schools.

 

[Tubey]

But it is absolutely not the case that the best teachers generally end up in private schools, which is why I said that their teaching is generally no better than most decent state schools.

I disagree mate. Teachers have ambition like any other career, and the ambition is to teach in the best environment to accommodate their skills.

I actually don't think it's a major factor though.

Because as you say, this sort of thing is: http://www.apa.org/pi/ses/resources/publications/education.aspx

 

[Seanjd]

I disagree mate. Teachers have ambition like any other career, and the ambition is to teach in the best environment to accommodate their skills.

I actually don't think it's a major factor though.

Because as you say, this sort of thing is: http://www.apa.org/pi/ses/resources/publications/education.aspx

Ambition in teaching usually means going up, in terms of leadership etc, but I agree with you that you want to be in a school which values you, has a good track record, good resources, good head etc. I can only speak for myself but unless I wanted to take a paycut and teach mostly pretty spoiled kids in business model style teaching, then I won't be viewing private education as a step up any time soon.

Agree with social economics, but it's important to note that the reason private schools are successful is more to do with status and connections rather than the actual quality of teaching by teachers.

 

[neil999]

FFS...Zac Goldsmith running again!

 

[bring the ghost on]

Aye but teachers value work environments as they have a passion for the job.

Teachers have ambition like any other career, and the ambition is to teach in the best environment to accommodate their skills.

Ambition means different things to different people.

Your mum's idea of ambition may be to get into the nicest possible school with great results. Other teachers will actually prefer to go into a poor performing school in a rundown area and try to make a real difference to kids who need it. For example, Teach First is aimed at top performing graduates and places the people in those schools.

Neither idea of ambition is incorrect, but I think it's unfair to suggest that teachers doing great jobs in those schools are the lesser equivalent of teachers in private schools who are probably assisted by an easier working environment.