MacManiac wrote:
As a former school headmaster I am appalled about the recent policy which has been announced, seemingly having been drafted on the back of an envelope after a night at the pub. What on earth are the government thinking about?
I'll put my cards on the table. I have voted Conservative since 1969, when I became eligible to vote. My schooling in the late 1950s and 1960s was at a time when there was a seeming rush to abolish successful schools (grammar schools and then in the 1970s Direct Grant Schools). It appeared that the establishment wished to embrace the "lowest common denominator" in education. Lower the bar and all would be successful. In the 1960s there were both 'O' levels for the more academic and later CSEs for the less academic. 'A' levels and university were designed for the top 10% or perhaps the top 15% of the population.
It was not the best system but it was far, far better than the gallop to comprehensive education that followed. All would be equal and there would be no privileges. What utter rubbish. Schools became selective by post code and the middle classes did whatever needed to be done to escape their children being entombed in some "bog standard" comprehensive. You just need to look at the catchment area of Holland Park School in London to see what the inevitable results of this became.
Public schools became more expensive but it did not seem to matter to the aspiring middle classes who wanted what they considered to be the best for their children. When I left Winchester College in 1969 the fees were £640 a year. By the time my younger brother joined the school the following year the fees were £640 a term. Inflation. Ye Gods. Grammar schools became rarer and then the demise of the Direct Grant schools. Those in prosperous areas became fully independent and those in poorer areas had to become comprehensive. So in those areas where they were most needed, they disappeared.
In the late 1970s someone came up with the bright idea (in my opinion) to give a voucher to the value of their child's education. I believe it was calculated that to educate a child in the state sector was something like £9600 a year and it only cost about £9800 a year for the independent sector. Equality at a stroke. Every parent would have a voucher to choose the school of their choice (subject to entry requirements for the more academic schools) and those schools that were unpopular would wither and die, whilst the more successful and popular schools would thrive and expand.
There might have been all sorts of teething troubles in the early years, but here was equality for all. No state funding of schools at all, just market forces deciding the fate of schools. It never happened but I see the idea being suggested in the letters' column of newspapers today.
To remove charitable status from independent schools would be a disaster. The schools would adjust by cancelling all the bursaries and scholarships they currently offer to less advantaged children and become even more financially exclusive. Thousands of children (perhaps more than that) would be priced out of the independent sector and add to the pressure on the state sector. It must also be remembered that all of these parents pay their taxes to support state education, and then pay again out of taxed income to pay fees (and at the same time this reduces the pressure on state schools) and the government wants to tax these schools again in the name of equality.
I hatched a plan at my school (one of the leading schools in the South-east of England) to provide scholarships and bursaries to pupils currently in state primary schools. If I remember correctly there were to be nine places offered in every year and the criterion was to be that the successful children would benefit the school and would be benefited by the school in equal measure. When I took this to the governors (and it would cost tens of thousands of pounds every year) they were incredulous but finally agreed it. The benefit to the school and the locality was enormous.
And so ... Theresa May ... get a grip and perhaps you might care to read a book by Melanie Phillips called "All Must Have Prizes" and you might find out what is wrong with the state sector of education. Thanks heavens I don't vote in UK elections any more. There is not one party I could vote for.
I agree that no political party is 'up to scratch'.
As an ex-grammar pupil I agree with the basics of your post.
Education has been going down hill for nearly fifty years.
Putting pupils in classes of mixed abilities only restricts the academics ..... and does little for those of lesser mental abilities (who would be more attuned to working with their hands rather than their brains only)
This is not fair to any pupil. It does not give a 'level playing field'. The idea of not letting anyone feel that they are 'failure' is, in itself, a failure. They will possibly encounter 'failure' in later life ... and will not know how to cope with it.
There are many 'brainy academics' who would be useless when given a manual task to perform. They are not 'superior' ... just 'of different capability'. We need different occupations, manual & academic, between us, to thrive.
All pupils should be given the facilities to 'shine' in their capabilities. Grammar and Technical Schools would be more appropriate.
Private schools ? O.K. ... but they should be overseen by the same Educational Authority. They do not always have a better standard than some in the public sector. However the benefit the pupils have there seems to be in later life ( i.e. Who you know ... not what you know/do not know ... just subject to your finances and 'connections' ). That 'preferential treatment' must also be addressed.
Only one more amendment ... Remove all religious studies ...They can be studied in the privacy of there own homes. Religion does not mix with politics or education ( A mixture of which is the source of war).