Yes, I know the arguments about indoctrination on the taxpayers\’ shilling but:
The academic superiority of faith schools was underlined today as they dominated top positions in new league tables for 11-year-olds.
Two thirds of the 250 primaries in England achieving "perfect" test results were Church of England, Roman Catholic or Jewish schools.
Despite making up just a third of schools nationally, faith schools increased their hold on the top places from 44 per cent two years ago to 66 per cent in 2007. Last night, they hailed the results as a testament to good teaching and discipline.
Is it possible that at least some of the hatred from people like Polly T is that they actually do teach pupils better ? Thus showing up the rest of the comprehensive system?
Something of an indicment of the current way of doing things, don\’t you think?
Sex education lessons are so poor that most teenagers have no idea about sexually transmitted diseases or pregnancy, according to new research published today.
I understand about the problems with teaching 20% of them to read: it\’s not, after all, a natural activity. \’Ritin\’ is also a bit odd.
But you\’ve got to have a really bad education system if you can\’t teach teenagers to fuck properly.
A quarter of graduates do not have full-time jobs more than three years after getting their degrees, according to government figures.
The Higher Education Statistics Agency, which examined the career progression of 24,000 people, also found that 20 per cent of those who were employed were not working in graduate occupations.
So too many are getting a degree then.
It\’s time to end faith and grammar schools that damage children\’s chances and limit most parents\’ choices.
It is absolutely the time to remove the limits on most parent\’s choices. Of course, we shouldn\’t do that by the method you advocate, which is that pupils are assigned to a school, rather, we should work the other way around. We should maximise parents\’ choices by slapping a voucher on the back of every kid and letting parents choose as they wish.
As they do in Sweden.
Yes, I understand Labour\’s (perhaps "the left\’s" is better) hatred of private schools, I can even get my head around the dislike of Grammars (a single competetive exam at 11 years old might not be the very best way of predicting future academic success, for example) but this is astonishing:
However, the Department for Children, Schools and Families insisted that grammar schools left poor children behind. "The Government has never been in favour of academic selection and never will be," said a spokesman.
That\’s vastly stronger and as such near insane. Not even selection within schools? A math prodigy is to be taught the same syllabus as someone who will never be more than marginally numerate? If we are to have no academic selection at all then I guess that means the end of special needs education, doesn\’t it? The end of schools specialising in the arts? Stage schools and the like?
Am I reading too much into that one phrase or are they really that barkingly egalitarian?
Something that slightly puzzles me here:
Labour is set to reignite the political row over selective education by making it easier for disaffected parents to force the closure of their local grammar schools.
Jim Knight, the schools minister, has instructed officials to look at how to simplify the balloting process by which schools can be forced to drop selection under a 1998 law.
Why is there no mention of being able to have a ballot to enforce selection? Is it simply because the article doesn\’t mention it? Or is it not actually possible to ask for such a ballot. And if the latter, why not?
So surprising, eh?
Sending children home from school to allow teachers to train is a waste of time, a leading academic says.
Pupils in England lose about a week of schooling every year as staff take "inset" days to brush up on the latest teaching techniques and Government reforms.
But research claims there is "depressingly little evidence" that it has any effect on teaching standards.
So teaching teachers the latest trendy educational nonsense doesn\’t improve teaching. Fancy that!
That is, I believe, what we were promised a decade ago, isn\’t it? So the first lines of two stories in The Telegraph today:
Private schools could lose their multi-million pound tax-breaks unless they help state-educated pupils get into universities such as Oxford and Cambridge, it was disclosed yesterday.
The number of failing schools has soared by almost a fifth this year, new figures showed yesterday.
None of those failing schools, as far as I can see, are in the private sector.
So, is it joined up thinking to remove subsidy friom what works and to spend more on what does not?
All are, as David Friedman finds out, living the Lake Woebegon Way.