As well as starving the NHS, Education has been starved by this government too.

Parts of it were ronib, but catchments generally included areas of deprivation. It was a combination of reasonable funding, a supportive county council and a positive ethos around education that attracted good candidates.

Mamie that’s encouraging. Although London and the south east is over populated and that impacts on provision.

It also just had infant / junior / primary and comprehensive schools. I worked in another authority which had grammar and two sorts of middle schools where you could change schools at 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12 and 13.

What has the long-term impact of the London Challenge been? Have they been able to sustain the improvements?

Mamie Case look at study 5 The London Challenge by The King’s Fund available online. There might be more studies.

I think pragmatic solutions rather than a continued dogmatic ideological approach is preferable to improve educational outcomes in the years ahead.

Are preferable…

Yes I read that ronib, but I was wondering more about the measured impact post 2014.

I think you can have pragmatic initiatives governed by educational principles. I once worked with a cluster of small rural schools grouped together to share expertise and resources. The educational principle was to raise standards.
It worked well for pupils and teachers and standards improved.

You know the reason that private schools give out scholarships is so that their results are high and this attracts more potential pupils. They don’t do it because they are altruistic. It benefits the pupil but it also well and truly benefits the school. Here we have the nasty situation where if a pupil doesn’t live up to his scholarship he/ she can be asked to leave or pay full fees. Not nice and a lot of pressure on those kids.

ronib

MaizieD private schools offer bursaries and scholarships to children admittedly of academic, sporting or artistic ability. Working class children can benefit from funding too .
Rather than increase fees for parents by 20 per cent by imposing vat on school fees, I would rather see private schools expanding the number of assisted places to enable wider social bands to attend.
Bright children are not the sole province of the upper and middle classes. I think every child deserves an education regardless of social class origins.
I know of one child from a poor economic background who was academically gifted ending up with a double first from Oxford. His only mistake was to become a lawyer when he wanted to teach.
Seems to me that high performance State funded schools can be even more exclusive in their intake than private schools. There are many barriers to entry and they don’t offer a level playing field.
There are also a number of State funded boarding schools in England which offer a very good standard of education. So this might help children who have a limited choice of adequate local schools.
I think we suffer from not caring enough about children and have too long mouthed a limited left wing ideology without regard for individual circumstances.

Twaddle, ronib. Utter twaddle.

It's still elitist and divisive however you want to dress it up.

MaizieD no more twaddle than what is happening now. State schools can be equally divisive and elitist.

MaizieD top state secondary schools

1. Queen Elizabeth Barnet
2. Henrietta Barnet
3. Wilson’s School Wallington
4. Tiffin Girls
5. St Olave’s Grammar
6. Pate’s Grammar
7. Reading School
8. Altrincham Grammat
9. Colchester Royal

And if Keir Starmer persists in his educational policies, the small private schools will empty out into these schools.

In fact the more I think the worse it gets. The old dogma surrounding privilege and public schools is so engrained in our thinking that it’s impossible to think any other way.

The State itself is the key driver to social inequalities in education and therefore society. The State has not reformed schools in any meaningful sense. We have a complete hotpotch . We don’t have a fully comprehensive system nor even a standardised infant primary system.

The State needs a limited supply of the well educated middle class hence the continuation of the top academic schools.

Complete shambles

nanna8

You know the reason that private schools give out scholarships is so that their results are high and this attracts more potential pupils. They don’t do it because they are altruistic. It benefits the pupil but it also well and truly benefits the school. Here we have the nasty situation where if a pupil doesn’t live up to his scholarship he/ she can be asked to leave or pay full fees. Not nice and a lot of pressure on those kids.

Okay so a new arrangement needs to be constructed if public schools want to keep vat free.

All I know is that some clever poor children do thrive in the right academic environment.

Fanny, I’m not sure why my post was quoted when you mention degrees. I am not saying that TAs are unqualified- quite the reverse. When teachers’ help was left to whichever mums were free to go in it was far more likely that children would be taught by people with no qualifications than it is now. A lot of the time it won’t matter whether they are qualified or not anyway - my point was that many of them gossiped and felt that they were more invested in the school than other parents.

ronib

In fact the more I think the worse it gets. The old dogma surrounding privilege and public schools is so engrained in our thinking that it’s impossible to think any other way.

The State itself is the key driver to social inequalities in education and therefore society. The State has not reformed schools in any meaningful sense. We have a complete hotpotch . We don’t have a fully comprehensive system nor even a standardised infant primary system.

The State needs a limited supply of the well educated middle class hence the continuation of the top academic schools.

Complete shambles

I would say quite a few of us have no problem thinking there is another way ronib.
I don't think it is dogma to think that a fully comprehensive system based on local catchment with excellent resources and quality of teaching can do just as well if not better (a look at the progress data in grammar schools can be quite revealing).
Other countries manage it.

Oh, no, Doodledog I wasn’t disagreeing or debating anything;
I was just carrying on from your point about the change of expectations. I understood what you were saying and agree.

I became a TA just at the time when the role of the TA was really changing; they wanted people with an academic background, and they wanted to put them through training.

And then it culminated in the development of the role of the HTLA, which was a bit of a dog’s dinner and a way to exploit TAs (if you ask me!)

All I know is that some clever poor children do thrive in the right academic environment.

Of course they do. Others less so, if they stand out for being the poor one who can’t afford the luxuries on offer, or who talks differently or all the other things that set them apart from the average-but-rich kids at the school. Or of course they can change, so they no longer fit in at home.

As we all know, it’s not just education that is bought by school fees. It is initiation into the middle class for those outside it, and protection from the working class for those within.

If all pupils were taught together class wouldn’t vanish, but it wouldn’t be perpetuated in schools as it is now.

All I know is that some clever poor children do thrive in the right academic environment

It may astonish you to know this, ronib, but some 'clever poor children' flourish in state schools, too.

Have a look at this. The wikipedia entry for the current Chancellor of the University of Durham

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiona_Hill_(presidential_advisor)

You're in cloud cuckoo land if you think that offering an infinitesimal percentage of 'poor' children a few places at private schools is going to make the slightest bit of difference to ironing out inequalities in education in the UK.

Doodledog you have missed my point. This country does not have a fully functioning comprehensive state system. The State itself is perpetuating inequalities in its provision of education.

That is exactly my point, ronib.

Do you think that that perpetuation would continue if the people responsible for education had no choice but to send their own children to a partially-functioning comprehensive school?

Mamie

ronib

In fact the more I think the worse it gets. The old dogma surrounding privilege and public schools is so engrained in our thinking that it’s impossible to think any other way.

The State itself is the key driver to social inequalities in education and therefore society. The State has not reformed schools in any meaningful sense. We have a complete hotpotch . We don’t have a fully comprehensive system nor even a standardised infant primary system.

The State needs a limited supply of the well educated middle class hence the continuation of the top academic schools.

Complete shambles

I would say quite a few of us have no problem thinking there is another way ronib.
I don't think it is dogma to think that a fully comprehensive system based on local catchment with excellent resources and quality of teaching can do just as well if not better (a look at the progress data in grammar schools can be quite revealing).
Other countries manage it.

Yes they do. And it is entirely a POLITICAL choice. Other countries where the belief is that a good education for all is the kep to a countries future, jobs but also peace and equality. And NO, those are not left-wing- it is just common sense.

Having a poorly educated workforce causes so many social problems, and real issues with finding the right people for a modern society.

MaizieD

^All I know is that some clever poor children do thrive in the right academic environment^

It may astonish you to know this, ronib, but some 'clever poor children' flourish in state schools, too.

Have a look at this. The wikipedia entry for the current Chancellor of the University of Durham

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiona_Hill_(presidential_advisor)

You're in cloud cuckoo land if you think that offering an infinitesimal percentage of 'poor' children a few places at private schools is going to make the slightest bit of difference to ironing out inequalities in education in the UK.

I f and I don’t think you will agree, each child was given a voucher for education that voucher could be offset against the cost of a place at an independent school which might offer more parental choice or go to pay for a place at a State school.

Fiona Hill is a success story but there are even harder family scenarios where some children overcome almost impossible obstacles and still emerge half in tact.
I still think you have not fully understand the inherent inequalities in our current State system.

Understood

I still think you have not fully understand the inherent inequalities in our current State system.

I think you don't know how very patronising you sound.