[a dense loner]

this is fantastic, if someone doesn't agree with any point someone comes back with a counter argument that will effectively end up saying germany has more marshmallows than us, and they're not even in the top 6. its quite obvious what petes saying people don't need to respond to the nth degree and it was quite obvious what i said without being told waoh there we better hold back on the hundreds of academics comparing the ratings of education systems around the world. being told you're the problem if you don't believe all teachers are amazing is quite frankly rude and funny.

[chris j]

And by the way, one little comparison I'd like to point to is that we've been rated as having the 6th best education system in the world.

Fuck me, how did they work that one out?! Given the tales over the last 20 years of universities having to dumb down 1st year maths and science courses to cope with school leavers having a lower and lower grasp of the subject, the unbelievable grade inflation every year in GCSEs / A-levels , the complaints from employers about how hard it is to find young people that can read, write and add up, etc etc we must have been head and shoulders above the rest of the world 20 years ago! If we're that good then the rest of the world must be really fucked!

[petejh]

My apologies for misinterpreting your use of 'regard'.

If by regard you therefore mean its quality you presumably think the UK education system is crap and teachers are for the most part not doing an important job*, whilst the NHS is very good then, and that privatising it would improve the quality of the educational system.

Not crap - again don't put words in my mouth. Rather I think that it isn't as good as it could be if it were run differently - in my opinion privately. And I do not believe teachers have 'an unimportant job' - rather I get the impression that there might be too many of them who aren't very good teachers. But it seems that to question teachers' ability is heresy and instead it must all be fault of the system, no?

but are you happy to see the NHS that you hold in high regard privatised too?

I've already posted above that I don't think the NHS should be privatised whilst I think the education system should be privatised.

Sam seems to have addressed that with the ranking of educational systems in countries around the world (although personally I disagree with ranking and think its disingenuous and prefer to see funnel plots for institutional comparison).

Sam is being very disingenuous to use that report, and especially to keep mentioning the ranking table. I hope he doesn't teach statistics - they aren't my strong point but a brief reading of the report is enough to confirm that the UK's ranking of 'number 6' is nothing more than a very vague stab in the dark - the UK sits within a larger group of countries all within a statistically 'fuzzy cloud' - the ranking table is not something to be seriously used as justification for or against anything but psychomansam has latched onto it like it proves we're in one of the champion's league positions of education systems. Critical thinking? I think not.
If you take the time to read through the Pearson Report and cross reference some sources you'll be able to make up your own mind. Slackers I'd be very interested to hear your honest opinion of that ranking table, and what weight you'd give to it, after reading about the data that went into to creating it. Especially as it's being used to predicate Sam's argument that our current education system should be left alone.

[psychomansam]

And by the way, one little comparison I'd like to point to is that we've been rated as having the 6th best education system in the world.

Fuck me, how did they work that one out?! Given the tales over the last 20 years of universities having to dumb down 1st year maths and science courses to cope with school leavers having a lower and lower grasp of the subject, the unbelievable grade inflation every year in GCSEs / A-levels , the complaints from employers about how hard it is to find young people that can read, write and add up, etc etc we must have been head and shoulders above the rest of the world 20 years ago! If we're that good then the rest of the world must be really fucked!

One response to think about is that we used to send the top 10% of students to university. Labour aimed for 50% and that's about where we're at now. It's perfectly possible that the top fifth of this group is brighter than the old 10% were, but universities are now also having to accomodate the bottom fifth as well, who we can fairly safely assume to be less bright, at least at maths for instance, than the top 10% are or ever were.

[a dense loner]

whats that a response to sam?

[psychomansam]

And I do not believe teachers have 'an unimportant job' - rather I get the impression that there might be too many of them who aren't very good teachers. But it seems that to question teachers' ability is heresy and instead it must all be fault of the system, no?

It's not heresy, but where's your evidence? Intuition? Personal experience from a state school? Third hand stories? My experience is first-hand of dozens of teachers in around 20 state schools and I'd be happy to share it, if you're interested.

Sam's argument that our current education system should be left alone.

Talk about putting words in mouths. I said early I'm not even against privatisation in principle, just against doing it badly (which admittedly includes anything this government is likely to come up with).
More to the point, the claim that I, or teachers in general, or educational charities, or academics in the field, don't think education should change is the sort of drivel I expect to hear from the Daily Fail. We all think it should change. We've all got ideas. They're based on experience, evidence, international comparisons and perhaps intuition - something I respect in the very experienced and very educated occasionally. We could put forwards hundreds of suggestions. And our changes would be a hell of a lot more successful than Gove's.

Here's a thought: I think there should be more pupil autonomy in education in general. I'm impressed, for instance, by schools that run along the lines of deliberative democracies.
One particular idea is that I think there should be more pupil choice in year 9. It's a crucial mid-pubescent year in which they're no longer sweet but not-yet responsible (they take GCSE 'options' from year 10). Allow them a degree of choice in this year. For instance, schools like mine which use 100 minute periods could increase the number of subjects, making some of them 50 minutes, although there would be lots of practical ways of realising it.

Pupils could also get a degree of autonomy over curriculum. KS3 curriculum varies from school to school and there's no reason pupils couldn't be involved in designing or selecting it.

I also think pie-slicing of city school districts is helpful and that further measures should be taken to prevent school-based urban drift.

I also condone students repeating years if they're really not capable of moving up(currently this isn't funded).

I also condone further intervention in early stages literacy.

As for more radical ideas, I discussed in another thread how I suggested turning all schools into state schools with top streams funded by voluntary parent donations, access to these streams being on merit alone.


You could argue with any or all of these if you want. That's irrelevant. What's relevant is that I want change, I want improvements, I want evolution and progress just like (almost) every other teacher. Yes, sometimes I wish the government would fuck off and let us consolidate for a bit, but that's a valid wish in the current context. As to the quality of my ideas, well I've only been in teaching for a few years and I've done very little research into underlying theory - many have a lot more experience and are a lot more informed and educated than I am. Most of them could do a better job than Gove.

[psychomansam]

whats that a response to sam?

universities having to dumb down.

As for complaints about finding people who can read and write, well we all complain about it at times, but actually the good old days don't exist. Back in the day the assumption was that there were those who could and those who couldn't. Now the assumption is that everyone can and, well, we're not quite there yet. Also, I might suggest that the bar does get raised. We are now constantly surrounded by a variety of forms of text, language, literature everywhere we go. You can't even order a coffee at times without being literate in American slang

Just think of illiteracy the same way you think of crime. The media says it's booming and we're in crisis. The evidence says it's on a long-term trend of decline.

[Johnny Brown]

I do not believe teachers have 'an unimportant job' - rather I get the impression that there might be too many of them who aren't very good teachers

No idea how true this is, though I do hear stories of bad teachers existing and being hard to get rid of.

But if it is true, then the problem is surely that its not a very attractive occupation? And the strikes are about avoiding making it even less attractive?

[psychomansam]

I do not believe teachers have 'an unimportant job' - rather I get the impression that there might be too many of them who aren't very good teachers

No idea how true this is, though I do hear stories of bad teachers existing and being hard to get rid of.

But if it is true, then the problem is surely that its not a very attractive occupation? And the strikes are about avoiding making it even less attractive?

My experience is that it's about 1 or 2 percent. There are ways of dealing with them, but sometimes it should happen quicker. Whether this should be support, improvement etc or firing is another matter - and the answer is probably a bit of both. On the other hand Gove's 'reforms' punitively effect the majority of teachers. Being an average teacher is virtually a crime. Personally I'm proud of it.

[petejh]

They must be confusing it with the health service   

When I used to live in Canmore the school kids would get bussed to Lake Louise and and Sunshine ski hills for their afternoon PE. Life is good growing up out there for sure.

[Baron]

What would a privatised school do differently to a state school, apart from where their funding came from, to make it better? And better by whose standards? To paraphrase an earlier post - who's steering the ship?

Mr Gove is driven entirely by political ideology when, as Education Secretary, his focus should be children.

Speaking as a primary school teacher of 8 years (in 4 different year groups across FS, KS1 and KS2) here's what I would do to make schools happy and enriched environments in which all children feel valued, achieve well and experience success:

1. Cap classes at 20 pupils
2. Put a full time teaching assistant in every class

Ask any primary school teacher about the impact these actions would have in their class and watch their faces.

Teachers are striking as experienced professionals who believe the reforms of Mr Gove with impact negatively on the education and lives of children, your children, in their care.

And the holidays? We're not paid for anyway.

[mrjonathanr]

I wrote a long post then deleted it. Here's the nub.

If there was more choice I think most of us could afford to pay for a better service than the state is currently providing.

A privatised system is an abrogation of responsibility, and will lead to perverse outcomes.

Which the taxpayer will pay for, but not control.  Independent schools are not the model.  Academies are.

Taxpayer- funded.  Non-accountable (except to shareholders).  Exempt from legislation, including lessons being taught by qualified staff.

You talk like the child is the consumer. He's the commodity.

[Jaspersharpe]

But free schools will bring choice and competitiveness to what should obviously be an open market.

What could possibly go wrong...

http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/education-24360100

[tomtom]

Was chatting to friends wife this eve - who's a teacher...

Pay per performance sounds like a joke.. she has a colleague who specialises in teaching the worst performing kids in the school (theres an acronym for that I've forgotten) and consequently has one of the toughest jobs in the school.. he'll end up getting paid less than everyone else as a result...

Her husband (a colleague) is a governer of a local primary thats just converted to Academy status - because it was the lesser of evils looking towards the future. Sounds like a nightmare - and full of hurdles/trip ups...

MrsTT is a probation officer. Thats being privatised with 80% of their staff moving to pay per results outside contracters. It (for want of a better word) sounds like a complete fuck up.

I despair. Watching Cameron and his entourage on the news tonight made me feel as sick as during the Thatcher years.

[AJM]

It has to be said I find it slightly surreal coming from a private sector background where performance management and rewards are standard, watching people argue that getting more money for doing a better job is a bad thing...

For me at least the only difficulty with that would be setting the right measures, so that tomtoms friend doesn't get penalised for dealing with difficult kids but instead is only penalised if he does it badly.

[dave]

So how would you measure if he does it badly?

[a dense loner]

there must be academics out there who can measure it surely?

[a dense loner]

and mrjonathanmr whats an abrogation? is there any point in writing that? it seems like you went straight to the dictionary or whatever that other thingies called. the teachers i had, on the whole, weren't very good. my own opinion of course thats why i turned out thick as fuck

[dave]

there must be academics out there who can measure it surely?

Ok but can anyone even agree on what "it" is? Everyone agrees that exam results are a pretty blunt instrument for measuring a schools performance, and figures are prone to massaging. So what else you gonna measure a teacher on? And how are you going to isolate the work of the teacher from the work and support that parents give at home, which is arguably as important as what happens in school (arguably more important in many cases)?

Anyway, performance related pay already exists in teaching, in that pay scale progression is depending on annual appraisals, and is also a myth that you can't sack shit teachers, because I've seen shit teachers got rid of by savvy heads, no problem.

[Somebody's Fool]

and mrjonathanmr whats an abrogation?

It's like a repudiation.

According to the thingie.

[a dense loner]

and mrjonathanmr whats an abrogation?

It's like a repudiation.

According to the thingie.

well why didn't he just say so?

"it" is nothing, it doesn't exist.

it's hard tho not impossible to sack anybody in a well-regulated profession/industry. you can't get good people across the board since people are different

[tomtom]

there must be academics out there who can measure it surely?

Its done on the performance of their class (via exams). So if you're the dunce specialist (very un PC..) then you are on a hiding to nothing. Apparently its in the OFSTED criteria that those less able students should be able to perform as well as the able (I am told).

And throw into this some geo-socio factors. Schools in a bad area have alot more issues to deal with (behavioural, attendence etc..) so it may be harder for them to get as good grades. Teachers get paid less, making it less attractive to the better teachers who you probably want teaching there in order to get the grades up.

Bonkers.

Nothing wrong with Perf related pay - in the right context. Sales yes. Teaching - I dont know.. Probation service? Police? what next.. army? Fire service? Bouldering wall employees? The problem is with the criteria and regulation of Perf related pay.. just like privatisation - it can work if regulated correctly - but getting that regulation right is not always straightforward, is it Railtrack.... (OFWAT, OFGEM, OFCOM etc..)

[chris j]

Its done on the performance of their class (via exams).

That's quite retarded without a starting measurement to get a 'value added' coefficient.

[/stating the obvious]

[AJM]

So how would you measure if he does it badly?

You set objectives and then measure how people perform against them. If the person is dealing with difficult kids then their objective is less stretching than the teacher who teaches the top set because the same amount of teacher effort should obtain different results from the two scenarios. Ditto if you're in a top achieving school then your targets should be more stretching than in a low achieving school to reflect the fact that the surrounding environment is more supportive of kids doing well so the same level of teaching talent should achieve better results.

[AJM]

Anyway, performance related pay already exists in teaching, in that pay scale progression is depending on annual appraisals, and is also a myth that you can't sack shit teachers, because I've seen shit teachers got rid of by savvy heads, no problem.

I've just noticed this. If it already exists, then your question to me is surely redundant because people are already measuring teachers performance for appraisals...?