First of all I’d like to apologise for not blogging much recently, I’ve been travelling a lot and trying to get all my essays and presentations done for Humboldt, which is taking twice as long because they’re all in German!
During the holidays I’ve been talking to people in Sweden and Germany about schooling. I find it a really easy political topic to engage young people on because it’s a common and recent experience and a lot of us are concerned by the state of flux the system is tumbling into.
New Labour introduced a lot of initiatives and revolutionised the school system in many ways. These changes were not always popular with parents and teachers but the central aim of each one was greater equality. The general coalition push for the re-introduction of grammar schools and the sponsoring of free schools does not have the same aim and will not produce positive results.
Germany has had a 4-tier system in place for several decades, in which 10-year-old children are separated into achievement-based groups and sent to either a Gymnasium, Realschule, Hauptschule or Forderschule. Those who try to sell such systems as meritocracies overlook the real input and output of pupils, and the uncomfortable statistics that show that selection hits the most vulnerable hardest.
The PISA Study (Programme for International Student Assessment) was first carried out by the OECD in 2000 and showed Germany to have a highly unequal and unfair system, with bright non-native speakers of German being relegated to the Forderschule, which is essentially a school for the mentally disabled rather than those of another nationality. As British studies have shown, bright students from poor families lose out in the current system to averagely gifted children from rich families, because the parents themselves are often more highly educated, better informed, and more driven.
In Sweden independent schools set up by groups of parents resorted to television advertising to drum up interest. This was very successful in a many areas, but produced the unfortunate result that state schools had to spend taxpayers’ money on running expensive advertising campaigns in order to be able to compete.
We don’t need to worry about the high achievers, but the children who fall through the cracks. Becoming resigned to a low social strata so early in life is damaging and leads to serious consequences later in life.
Suzy
Good to finally have you back Suzy. But wholeheartedly agree here. If there were any such system, or even the old 11+ exam system here in the UK still I know I personally at that age would not have passed the exam. You can’t make a proper assessed judgement on a child at that age, many go on academically go either way in high school despite their results at SATS. I wouldn’t totally not worry about the high achievers, many of whom can get bored and start to not bother, but totally agree the focus should be on those middle to very low falling the cracks low.
-_- Must. Restrain. Self!!!! lol
You’re very welcome to comment Dan, it’s always good to get some balance ^^
And thanks Max :~) I know what you’re saying about the high achievers because they can get bored, but I still don’t think they need to be in separate schools. My comprehensive had loads of schemes for stretching people, for example after school classes for able Year 9 students to push them on their SATS.
Oh don’t worry, I’m against grammar, private schools etc.
Okay well in the interests of cordial debate I will give a few points regarding the other side of the argument. There are many things that Labour did in Education that I agree with, the extra investment and introduction of tuition fees to name a few, however their record is FAR from perfect in this area. For example;
*1 in every 3 pupils now leaves primary school with woefully inadequate reading and writing skills causing problems in junior schooling
*In 2004 it was reported that B grades at GCSE maths were being given for marks of just 17% while A grades were being awarded for marks of 45%
*A study by Coventry University revealed, in 2004, that GCSE’s had been so dumbed down under Labour since 1997 that an A* at maths GCSE was only just equal to a grade E at ‘O’ level GCE
* A recent international study showed that Britain had slipped significantly down the international league table in education since 1997 when Labour came to power. The study found that in reading Britain dropped from 7th in 2000 to to 17th in 2007, behind countries including Estonia and Liechtenstein. In maths, pupils fell from eighth to 24th – placing them well below the international average.
* In 2005 when New Labour hailed its achievements with a 96% pass rate at ‘A’ Level – the CBI commented that the scandal was the sheer number of school leavers now leaving school unable to read or write properly
* Whilst as I said I agree with the introduction of tuition fees brought in by New Labour for England and Wales, I was disgusted by the fact the legislation excluded Scotland. It means that the average student leaving University carried debts of £12,000 minimum. These Tuition fees were carried through parliament using the votes of Scottish Labour MPs whose own education policies are decided by the Scottish Parliament and although they can now force laws upon England they have no say in Scotland on education. This is a massive imbalance that needs to be addressed.
So yes Labour have some achievements in education however their record is extremely patchy in this area and arguably they have dumbed it down considerably in order to massage the figures and improve their image. The argument is, as was common throughout the Labour years, they were more concerned with image than reality and they sold our childrens education down the river in the process.