Forum menu
Michael Gove cuts £100m from ALL Sixth Form colleges whilst £62m spent on just NINE 16-19 Free Schools.
[url= http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/exclusive-alevel-courses-closed-as-michael-gove-cuts-100m-from-sixthform-colleges-9102755.html ]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/exclusive-alevel-courses-closed-as-michael-gove-cuts-100m-from-sixthform-colleges-9102755.html[/url]
[i]The college leaders are also incensed that the Govern ment has spent £62m setting up nine new free schools, offering education for 16 to 19-year-olds, which between them have just 1,557 pupils - less than the average number enrolled in just one sixth-form college. They estimate that the Government is spending more than £39,616 for every student at the free schools, compared to just £4,000 on those at sixth-form colleges[/i]
I reckon at £40k/student there's a good chance of a good outcome for those 1557 pupils.
Lets' hope the same level of funding is rolled out to all after it's established that spending 10 times as much money generally helps produce better outcomes, eh.
I reckon at £40k/student there's a good chance of a good outcome for those 1557 pupils.
In the spirit of evenhandedness, the sort of analytical ability seen in that article (read before) is not doing the anti-govers many favours. Those numbers only stack up if they pulled the place down again after the first year. 'Setting up' means constructing buildings etc etc that will hopefully be there a shed load longer than one cohort of students so those numbers are meaningless. They are trying to compare setting up colleges from bare earth at £40K per place with the annual maintenance of an existing college at £4K per place - apples and pears. This does not mean I don't think the idea is bobbins!
Lets' hope the same level of funding is rolled out to all after it's established that spending 10 times as much money generally helps produce better outcomes, eh.
If only it was that simple. The one experiment that we have all been watching over the past 50 years or so, is the "lets spend more" approach. The results have hardly been that impressive. Not that this defends the specific policy noted above - it doesn't - but spending does not guarantee results. That is established.
[i]the "lets spend more" approach[/i]
Given the comparisons being made with the private sector maybe we should try the 'let's spend enough' approach?
Public funding per pupil has never matched private and yet there's a constistent approach by Gove (and others before him) to suggest that it's teachers or the syllabus that are at the heart of the problem.
If primary school class sizes were halved, secondary schools had selective entry and funding was set as level with the private sector then that would, without doubt, deliver a result on a par (adjusted for various social and 'pre-school' environmental issues).
Yes, all teachers need to be reflective and understand what best practice is and this is a contributory factor in pupil and school success but it's not the biggest issue.
Perhaps it's a combination of issues?
Many of the simple private v public state comparisons are flawed anyway.
But as the OECD analysis showed today, the poorest 10% in Shanghai perform as well, if not better than, the most privileged 20% in UK and US. As I have said many times, money does not buy you academic success.
[i]money does not buy you academic success. [/i]
no, it's as much down to parental commitment and pupil motivation as an adequately funded school and competent teaching.
The issue of funding always leaves the state system playing catch up when it comes to facilities and, most importantly, the time a teacher can spend with each individual child.
The thing is, there has been a huge improvement in teaching and standards; there's simply no comparison between the experience I had at school and that of my children. I also think I received a much better education than many in my parents' generation, and they had better than their parents.
[quote it's [s]as much [/s] more down to parental commitment and pupil motivation
The rest helps though !
Many of the simple private v public state comparisons are flawed anyway.
But as the OECD analysis showed today, the poorest 10% in Shanghai perform as well, if not better than, the most privileged 20% in UK and US. As I have said many times, money does not buy you academic success.
but not anywahere near as flawed as comparing Uk and Shanghai
Yes, good job none of us do it AA isn't it?!?! We'll be comparing the UK and Sweden next. Blimey!
there has been a huge improvement in teaching and standards; there's simply no comparison between the experience I had at school and that of my children.
Really? How are you measuring that?
So whats your point THM. If increasing funding to the same level as the private schools wouldnt help what is the problem. I can be pretty confident in saying the teachers are no better but the support per pupil is much lower. How does the state sector improve on this with no new funding.
Oh and at least sweden is in europe but then taking your view point that schools within the uk cannot be compared I suppose your right in your world. You're wrong in saying Uk schools cannot be compared though.
It's a very simple one - money alone doesn't guarantee success, There are lots of factors involved.
Such as? Especially interested in those that ccan be improved without investment.
It's a very simple one - money alone doesn't guarantee success
It is bloody useful though.
There are lots of factors involved.
Yup, like being able to select pupils based on ability. Although the biggest single determining factor in a childs educational performance is the attitude and support of the parents.
As an aside my new favourite Goveism was when he was critical of the holiday companies increasing prices during periods of high demand. So that's a Tory Minister who doesn't like free market economics.
there has been a huge improvement in teaching and standards; there's simply no comparison between the experience I had at school and that of my children.
Really? How are you measuring that?
Subjectively, I can see what they're doing and I remember what I did. Objectively, the achievements of my kids' cohorts outweigh those of mine.
The secondary school I attended recently got 63% getting 5A*-C (inc English and maths), but was half that (without English and maths) when I attended in the early 90s. My eldest starts there in September.
My brother is a teacher as was my mother, I would say my brother works a lot harder than my mother ever did, I do think teaching has changed from that era. The nostalgia that many view the past with is just completely ridiculous.
Many employers also seem to have forgotten that they used to train people to do jobs, now they take none of the responsibility and just whinge and moan blaming everyone else. It is just normal Torie boy entitlement, they whine on and on about other sections of society's entitlements, but then demand far more than anyone else.
I'm not reading through all the posts to see if it's been mentioned yet but has anyone brought up his wife yet? Sarah Vine, Daily Mail writer....
She's a thoroughly odious character and spreads hate and conflict through her daily mail filth and twitter hate campaigns. they are so well made for each other.
According to a UKCES report, employers who recruit school leavers think they're reasonably well-prepared for work:
[url= http://www.ukces.org.uk/news/Press-releases/2014/Jan/SKILLS-SHORTAGES-ACCELERATE ]Only a minority of business are prepared to give education leavers their first job, but when they do, they find their new recruits are generally well-prepared for work.[/url]
If we're all rubbish teachers, it must be a really easy job.
If anyone fancies taking my 'Environmental Sustainability in the Construction Industry' lesson in a minute feel free.
I've got a lovely class of half asleep disinterested 16yr olds waiting for you 🙂
It is just normal Torie boy entitlement, they whine on and on about other sections of society's entitlements, but then demand far more than anyone else.
Really? So how about making it much easier for heads to sack poor performing teachers and introducing rigorous and regular testing to teachers. Those Tory boys Ed Balls and Tristram Hunt hide their political allegiances well. The guardian was commenting on the merits of Hunt's ideas yesterday just as the good old progressive NUT described them as
"Utterly pointless....another unnecessary hurdle.....bureaucratic nightmare...."
Quelle surprise. Change, us??? Bloody disgrace to have unqualified teachers and bloody disgrace to introduce better qualifications and training, In fact, it's just a bloody disgrace. So MSP is that the usual [s]tory[/s] NUT whining?
"Bind their kings in chains, and their nobles in fetters of iron.."
One part of the King James authorised I'm more than happy to bring back, if we can extend it to ministers who aren't actually nobility (yet).
(Ninja Spelling Edit :-))
I see buttons have been pushed. 🙂
Something else that's being missed around the CE is most of the nice middle class children taking it have been extensively coached at the parents expense to do it (in my experience). I'm not sure how this translates into improving standards in neglected, deprived areas but hey, Gove's just the ideas man, it's those lazy teachers that need to get on with the 'doing'..
Yeah, thanks for that.Time for teachers to join in.They wouldn't know how to work their arse off, other than polishing a seat with it.
Those 20 years breaking my back as a tradesman on site, giving me the knowledge and experience to pass on to learners felt really easy and not at all like hard work. 😕
Glad it was appreciated by some.
It's a common wailing of right-wingers when times are tough. "Why isn't it easier for me to sack someone?"
Those 20 years breaking my back as a tradesman on site, giving me the knowledge and experience to pass on to learners felt really easy and not at all like hard work.
I work with an ex-Para (multiple Northern Ireland tours, plus both Iraq wars) who'd disagree with teachers not knowing hard work, too.
It's a common wailing of right-wingers when times are tough. "Why isn't it easier for me to sack someone?"
The thing is, competency procedures to get rid of crap teachers exist, and they're used. It's only people who believe what they read in the papers who think they don't.
Sadly, they've been used to get rid of loads of experienced (expensive) teachers and replace them with (cheap) NQTs.
I know and how on earth did those right wingers (the ones whose ideas I referred to) end up in high office in the Labour Party. It beggars belief deadly doesn't it?
Still in the NUTs own fact (sic) sheets it does note that, "spending on education was important but less so than other factors" and that, “The bottom line is that the quality of a school system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers.”
So they (NUT) should be all in favour of regular testing and training for teachers!!
The [?] education secretary [? ?] said regular re-licensing of teachers would allow the worst ones to be sacked whilst helping others to receive more training and development.
Fill in the blanks yourself! Clue, the first ? begins with S and ends with W.
Problem is if you sack teachers you have to employ more and good teachers are very thin on the ground.
So THM you must have missed my question on the last page. Can you give me some examples of how to improve schools and close the state private gap that wont need extra investment?
“The bottom line is that the quality of a school system cannot exceed the quality of its teachers.”So they (NUT) should be all in favour of regular testing and training for teachers!!
Well that's one interpretation of that statement however you do appear to be assuming that the quality of the school system is being limited by it's teachers which is not what that statement says.
I dunno thm, you're directing that at me like I'm a fan of the Labour Party or something? What are you on about?
Make teaching harder will just make the massive losses of trained teachers from the system worse.
I think we spend 75% of our budget on salaries; probably more now as we've had our budget cut and have attempted to make as many savings as possible through non-staff cuts, though we've not been replacing people who leave.
As a result of the budget cuts, each member of teaching staff has one extra hour of contact time per week, and our average class size is up. Will this increase or decrease standards?
Actually, I'd be interested in knowing how many hours contact time a teacher in an independent school has each week, and what class sizes.
Not at all. I am not attacking teachers. Why would I?
I am surprised that the body who claims to be protecting teachers (their tagline) is immediately against the labour party's proposals though. Surprised? That's the wrong word really. 😉
Hello THM. Any chance you could answer the question you keep ignoring?
The thing is, competency procedures to get rid of crap teachers exist, and they're used. It's only people who believe what they read in the papers who think they don't.
So sounds like Tristram Hunt will be just as bad a Gove then. These bloody politicians.......when will THEY learn?
THM, for what it's worth your posts are incredibly hard to follow. You've used !! and everything. Perhaps slow down
As with our students AA, it's often better to let people do their own independent research first. It's not beyond the imagination of anyone in the profession to identify way of improvement that do not require added investment. Globally, people achieve considerable success with considerably fewer monetary resources. Money helps, yes, but as the NUT say (since you may not believe me) it's less important than other factors.
Such as? You seem to be struggling here.
C'mon AA you don't spoon feed your students do you?
I am surprised that the body who claims to be protecting teachers (their tagline) is immediately against the labour party's proposals though.
You're surprised that a union is against proposals that will make their members' working conditions poorer?
If all you're going to do is constantly test them, spoon-feeding's all you'll have time for...
It's not beyond the imagination of anyone in the profession to identify way of improvement that do not require added investment.
Here you go:
* Reduced testing - this'll save money;
* Fewer inspections - this'll save money;
* Scrap the free schools policy - this'll save money;
* Fewer changes of curriculum - this'll save money;
* No pointless schemes to register/licence teachers - this'll save money.
I've heard that before on here pondo....
Well mike, When you listen to right wingers 😉 like Tristram Hunt saying
"If you're not a motivated teacher - passionate about your subject, passionate about being in the classroom - then you shouldn't really be in this profession."So if you're not willing to engage in relicensing to update your skills then you really shouldn't be in the classroom," he added.
Perhaps I should feel some sympathy for the NUTs views?
Edit for x post. Well that rules out both Tories and labour then mike. How do the lib Dems stack up?