Exceptionally long words, incredibly varied vocabulary and evidence of actual life experience in a coursework essay all boils down to one thing; a pushy parent. I think it’s safe to say that each of us had a (thick) friend who achieved brilliant coursework marks, despite the fact that they rarely showed any sign of competence in lessons. Their homework-hounding parents have a lot to answer for. I had friends who admitted that their parents literally did their work for them, or did complete re-writes. It was pretty infuriating for an independent scholar such as myself, though I knew they’d fail their exams in the end.
These mollycoddling parents have now, however, been granted with powers to ‘control’ schools, in a new Labour incentive to radically transform education (coincidentally just before the next general election). The government have promised that parents will be able to vote to sack leaders of their child’s school, and subsequently opt for a university or business to run it instead.
On the surface, this policy sounds pretty good. Receiving feedback from parents who have dealt with schools over a lengthy period of time should, in theory, lead to improved standards. Poor leadership can be challenged and if necessary removed.
But who will pick up the pieces of these failing schools? Up until now, Bradford and Hull colleges, Sunderland University and the University of Chester have been granted leadership of certain primary schools; the holy trinity of education, I’m sure you’ll agree. Educational institutions aside, there are many company directors who are jumping onto the academy bandwagon. One such man is Lord Philip Harris: director of national chain Carpet Right and an executive of student favourite Matalan.
Now, I’m all for improving school standards and boosting our country’s employability. But why we do we need to sell schools in the same way we would football clubs? Just because someone is rich and can run a business well, it doesn’t mean they are qualified to manage a school. Or a football club in fact – just look at Portsmouth. It takes years of educational training in order to become a teacher, and yet more experience to become a Head Teacher. So why would parents elect a carpet salesman over a qualified professional? Their children may get a free school-wide carpet fitting or a job lot of new interactive whiteboards, but not necessarily a superior education. Leaving power in the hands of these people may keep pushy parents happy for a short while, but if their children remain without motivation, it’s a vicious circle which cannot be combated by entrepreneurial leaders.
You’re right. There are plenty of things wrong with the UK education system, bien entendu, but putting schools in the hands of a 3rd party is a recipe for disaster. Just look at those that get sponsorship from faith foundations and tech creationism/intelligent design in the science lab.
Firstly, concentrate on better numeracy and native language skills with more emphasis placed on modern languages and sex education. Just my two cents.
Of course the question could be asked why a teacher with no real world experience should be put in charge of a school in a non-teaching role, managing a work force of a hundred and a budget of millions. Surely a successful businessman with wealth of experience of both is better suited to that role.
Is the ‘independent scholar’ writer of this flawed article aware of where she got the brains that allowed her to independently complete her coursework? Maybe genes from her parents? Maybe her parents lack of input has led her to become the sort of person that would call her own friends ‘thick’ and begrudge someone who had to rely on their parents for help. If she’s so clever and knew her friends would fail their exams why not offer help? I look forward to more of her banal ignorant views next week.
Bill Nye, I think you’re missing the point. Riley isn’t protesting against parents helping their children but the way some parents do their work for them and how if under the new proposals people like this and succesful businessmen would take charge of schools and if they are qualified to make these decisions.
Also, by attacking the individual with comments like “Maybe her parents lack of input has led her to become the sort of person that would call her own friends ‘thick’..” suggests that you also have negative expiriences that are the foundation of your ‘ignorant views’.
I understand that my criticisms were not of the point this article is making, but rather of writer’s attitude in the first paragraph. Sorry you didn’t realise that.
My comment on her parent’s possible lack of interest is a criticism in the same way she criticises less intelligent people for relying on their parents to help them. Yes I understand this is of course cheating, but the point I make questions the difference between exploiting your parent’s knowledge directly by having them help you, or indirectly by using intelligence that may have been inherited genetically.
The writer chose to have her criticisms of ‘mollycoddling parents’ published online, I chose to point out the lines of cheating and parental influence may not be as clear cut as she thinks, hardly an ignorant view.
But Mr Nye, by insulting the author you’re simply peddling to the cause that you claim to be against.