| |
Author
|
Topic: Disadvantaged children? (Read 361 times)
|
Rich
REALIST
King
Posts: 11442
I know what I know.
|
Whilst listening to "PM" on radio 4, Peter Donaldson announced that over 160 schools wish to opt out of local authority control and become " academies" I am not sure how a seat of learning can differentiate between an academy and a school? nonetheless, a dogooder immediately declared that "disadvantaged" children would suffer.
This got me thinking, putting aside, disabled, autistic, educationally subnormal etc, this leaves a core of children whom all have equal opportunities to be educated for free, in India children as young as 10 are working 12 hour days for a pittance.
My question really centres on the adjective "disadvantaged" for my money, the word should be substituted with can't be fxxxxxg bothered.
Your thoughts and comments are welcome but will not change my mind.
Rich. |
I'm a rambler, I'm a gambler, I'm a long way from home,
and if you don't like me then leave me alone,
I eat when I'm hungry, I drink when I'm dry,
If the "moonshine" don't get me I'll live till I die.
|
|
|
|
|
Richard Lionheart
Queen
Posts: 1846
The truth is the truth. Tough.
|
Well, weve been here before. Remember the Tories 'Grant Maintained' status? It was in reality a disaster.
First of all, its a seriusly bad idea to give parents any power in running schools. Thats because there view of the world only extend the max of five years there little johnny might be there, and so the long term benefit of the school does not enter into there thinking. Once there little johnny has moved on, they dont give a toss if in the process of giving there little johnny all the best opportunities, they have sold the playing field off, blown all the budget on IT and massively overpaid a bunch of useless teacher to motivate them.
I worked in the LEA at the time all this went on, when GM status was abolished, we went back into those school who had been GM to assess what the situation was. What we saw was, in a lot of cases, a bloody shambles.We saw headmasters with offices like the main board room at Exxon Oil, whilst the IT suite was running on 5 year old machines and falling to bits. We saw a total lack of long term planning, and several schools had to be bailed out because they had made such a pigs ear of managing the money (and the GM schools got more money than the LEA school as a bribe), that they didnt have enough to renew anything else. I saw one primary school who had spent thousands and thousands on a new building housing a library that made the Smithsonian Institute look like a village branch library, but the rest of the school buildings were falling apart. I also saw vast luxurious reception areas, totally unnecessary and over the top, but no money to open and run the swimming pool.
SO Academies are ok, as long as they are run by people with a 20 year view of the school. But letting parents have a hand in it is an unmitigated disaster. |
It's my opinion and no, before you ask, I am not going to post "evidence" because there usually isn't any, or you can go and find it for yourself. Why should I do your research?
Remember, never trust a moslem - Muslims can lie for Allah ―Surah 5:89, Surah 2:225, Surah 16: 106.
|
|
|
Old Git
King
Posts: 10284
I say it as I see it
|
I am just glad that my kids are well out of the state education system its pot luck if you have a decent school you can get your kids into in many parts of the country, it is also almost impossible to sack bad Teachers allegedly only a handful have been removed for years and years they just change schools |
The only time the world beats a path to your door is when you are in the bathroom.
|
|
|
Gus
King
Posts: 4394
You are what you is
|
As i have said many a time,,," you do not need an intelligent , thinking workforce,,,it is detrimental to a government " ,, you need thickies to pull wool over peoples eyes. |
a ship arriving to late to save a drowning witch
|
|
|
Sweet Pea
King
Posts: 14915
Secular Humanist
|
Rich, I may have some of this wrong but I think it runs this way:
State schools are largely supoprted by govt funds which are filtered down through the LEA to be spent on what the LEA see as priority spending.
In return schools are allocated a catchment area from which they MUST take all applications (I know about appeals etc and parental choice...in actual fact it is very limited).
Academies are different in that htey are financially suported by business and industry and who have seats on the Board of Governors. The schools still have to follow the state currriculum but hey do not have to take every child in the catchment area. (with a keen eye on their reputation both negative (too selective) and too liberal (not good League Table results).
If parents stop sending their children to thr academies the businesses pay out a lot of support for a little return. ie every computer costs relatively more etc. so they are reliant on results to encourage parents to send their kids there. So they are at more liberty to manoeuvre the intake than state schools.
Make of it what you will...I can only hope that the state uses the money they now do not have to spend on the schools and turns it towards the struggling state sector. That would be a nice surprise. But I don't hink it is a question merely of miney. The problems in poorer areas do not start at teh school gates...it is a huge washing machine of social deprivation, family feklessness and instability and an eaasy choice between a thoughtful response and an aggressive one...it is hard to be any less than as hard as the next person in order to survive. The problems in poorere areas are so entangled and old and basic to human nature as to be impossible to solve IMO. You can only chip away at the edges when you see a possibility. But that shouldn't be at the expense of other kids who are not involved in such a world. (which was the fundamental problem with state education during the last 20 years). |
Secular Humanist
|
|
|
Rich
REALIST
King
Posts: 11442
I know what I know.
|
Rich, I may have some of this wrong but I think it runs this way:
State schools are largely supoprted by govt funds which are filtered down through the LEA to be spent on what the LEA see as priority spending.
In return schools are allocated a catchment area from which they MUST take all applications (I know about appeals etc and parental choice...in actual fact it is very limited).
Academies are different in that htey are financially suported by business and industry and who have seats on the Board of Governors. The schools still have to follow the state currriculum but hey do not have to take every child in the catchment area. (with a keen eye on their reputation both negative (too selective) and too liberal (not good League Table results).
If parents stop sending their children to thr academies the businesses pay out a lot of support for a little return. ie every computer costs relatively more etc. so they are reliant on results to encourage parents to send their kids there. So they are at more liberty to manoeuvre the intake than state schools.
Make of it what you will...I can only hope that the state uses the money they now do not have to spend on the schools and turns it towards the struggling state sector. That would be a nice surprise. But I don't hink it is a question merely of miney. The problems in poorer areas do not start at teh school gates...it is a huge washing machine of social deprivation, family feklessness and instability and an eaasy choice between a thoughtful response and an aggressive one...it is hard to be any less than as hard as the next person in order to survive. The problems in poorere areas are so entangled and old and basic to human nature as to be impossible to solve IMO. You can only chip away at the edges when you see a possibility. But that shouldn't be at the expense of other kids who are not involved in such a world. (which was the fundamental problem with state education during the last 20 years).
Fair comment, but at the end of the day, I am not overly enthused with the educational regime at present, basically, the 3 R's are the most important, and that ethos has been set aside for political correctness and wooly minded loony left thinking, personally, I despair.
Rich. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Old Git
King
Posts: 10284
I say it as I see it
|
But the frightening bit is that they are potential future leaders, as I said, I despair.
Rich.
I think most of them will be a burden on the taxpayers for the rest of their lives stupid cannon fodder for the far right and left, and yes I despair too we are the laughing stock of Europe again |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: August 01, 2010, 11:54:59 by Old Git »
|
|
|
|
|
johnofgwent
King
Posts: 9748
|
Academies are different in that htey are financially suported by business and industry and who have seats on the Board of Governors. The schools still have to follow the state currriculum but hey do not have to take every child in the catchment area. (with a keen eye on their reputation both negative (too selective) and too liberal (not good League Table results).
And what happens when the academy's benefactor has a dislike for Darwin, Moses, Jesus or Mohammed - or all of them
Interesting take on the fact that over a third of those academies are faith based and will be able to use their academy status to deny access to the non faithful in a way they would not if they were not an academy .... http://www.secularism.org.uk/122257.html
And this is a good one, and one of blair's chum's is the fund provider for it http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/may/30/politics.schools |
--
The true test of one's political belief comes when the tax demand caused by their implementation lands on your doormat.
|
|
|
Sweet Pea
King
Posts: 14915
Secular Humanist
|
But the frightening bit is that they are potential future leaders, as I said, I despair.
Rich.
No they aren't. Kids from privately educated backgrounds will be (and always have beeen) our future leaders. |
|
|
|
|
Sweet Pea
King
Posts: 14915
Secular Humanist
|
And what happens when the academy's benefactor has a dislike for Darwin, Moses, Jesus or Mohammed - or all of them Interesting take on the fact that over a third of those academies are faith based and will be able to use their academy status to deny access to the non faithful in a way they would not if they were not an academy .... http://www.secularism.org.uk/122257.htmlAnd this is a good one, and one of blair's chum's is the fund provider for it http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/may/30/politics.schools
As I said above, they ALL have to follow the National Currriculum and take the national exams. |
|
|
|
|
Rich
REALIST
King
Posts: 11442
I know what I know.
|
As I said above, they ALL have to follow the National Currriculum and take the national exams.
And we know what the main employers think of that.
Rich. |
|
|
|
|
Bella102
Bishop
Posts: 218
Free Speaker
|
No they aren't. Kids from privately educated backgrounds will be (and always have beeen) our future leaders.
Having worked in a private school, yes they are on the same cirriculum, the difference is there are far less children in the classes, so obviously they get more one on one time with the Master, They have such a varied after school activities, and i found one noticable thing, that the Masters really wanted to be there and envolved themselves.
I do feel that there has to be those that lead and those that work (lol)
Sorry if this is back tracking, but i do feel there is child poverty in this country, (in relation to OUR country, not those in the 3rd world) I guess its down to the parents of the children, and what their priorites are, and of course circumstances do bring them to poverty. |
"Treat others as you want to be treated"
|
|
|
|
|
![[Valid RSS]](http://ukdebate.co.uk/forums/Themes/Blue-White/images/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed"){kind=small}
