Where next for our children's education?
| 15:02 UK
time, Tuesday, 14 September 2010
Yesterday I attended a lively evening Ìý- a debateÌýat the ,Ìýorganised as part ofÌýthe ´óÏó´«Ã½ Two School Season,Ìýin which a panel of four experts fielded questions from a packed audience of teachers, educationalists and the odd parent.Ìý
The one word I did not understand from the experts was scalable.Ìý
The educationalists seemed to be trying to use the word to mean that an experimental system found to be successful in one school should be scaled to a large number of schools and institutions.
I can see the attraction of that, but it did not seem - to me at least - to fit in with the rest of the debate. Ìý
The rest of the debate seemed to agree that not all children respond in the same way to the same educational approach. ÌýFurthermore, the panel agreed that the best teachers are those with a passion for their subject and who can transmit that enthusiasm to Ìýtheir pupils.
So even the experts seemed to be calling for an education system in which we have passionate, inspirational teachers, each of whom tackles a range of topics in ways that work for that teacher and the students in the classroom at the time.
Not much to argue with there.Ìý
To me, a system which recruits, trains and retains passionate, inspirational teachers is a kind of utopia. But I don't see how it is scalable. Those teachers are individuals teaching in their own individual way.
, one of the country's leading super-heads, amid a vast number of insightful and perceptive comments on the practicalities of engaging children and their parents, said he was looking for scalable solutions which will help to engage the 30 - 40 percent of children who currently do not get a good deal out of the existing school system.
The main thrust of educational thinking, it seems, is on those children whose parents had a bad time at school and who have transmitted that bad impression of school and education on to their children.
Quite right too. Those of us who are intensely interested in the education our children receive won't have too many problems within the school system. On the contrary, our input, energy and efforts will bolster the schools which our own children attend.
, deputy director of the Institute of Education,Ìýoffered some astonishing statistics.Ìý
Take two children aged 22 months; one in the top 10 percent of cognitive ability and one in the bottom ten percent. According to Prof Wiliam, if the second child comes from a family where the parents are interested while the first child does not, Ìýthen the less intelligent child will be out-performing the more intelligent one by the age of 7.
Sir William Atkinson used this and his own vast experience to say the answer to engaging those 40 percent of students who currently get a raw deal from the education system, is to engage the families.Ìý
Bring in the families, help them learn to read and write; help them get some qualifications and try to reverse the bad experiences of school they suffered during their own formative years.Ìý
Prof Wiliam said it all: Unskilled jobs are disappearing at a rate of 400 jobs every day. Employment opportunities for the unskilled and unqualified are drying up, and fast.Ìý
So the panel welcomed experiments in education, including Free Schools and other radical ideas. The one note of caution was that the consequences of failed educational experiments can be very high for the children involved.Ìý
Prof Wiliam warned that the barriers to entry for potential new heads should be high and that only those with a Ìýrecord of successful innovation should be allowed to set up their own school.
So, to summarise, the debate concluded that a good education system needs to have support from parents; teachers need to be passionate, inspirational and adapt their teaching approach to each individual pupil and the training and on-going professional development should emphasise the process of teaching and conveying understanding, rather than specific techniques for achieving that.Ìý
Not really rocket science, but fantastically difficult to achieve in an under-resourced nationally-planned education system.
To find out more about the debate, take a look at the website.
David Shaw is a member of the ´óÏó´«Ã½ Parent Panel.
Comment number 1.
At 27th Sep 2010, keeffeeley wrote:This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.
Complain about this comment (Comment number 1)