School choice and academic selection can go together

In their latest bulletin Reform argue that the education system in the Netherlands show that school choice and academic selection can go together.

In the Netherlands children are assessed either through a test or by teacher assessment. Just over 20% are then taught in a separate, academically orientated institution, about 3% are taught in vocationally orientated institution, while the majority go to a school that offer both academic and vocational courses.

It is this breadth that makes the Dutch system so admired. In 2004 55% of children took vocational courses from the age of 15, a sharp contrast with the UK.

There is also considerable diversity of provision. Two thirds of secondary schools in the Netherlands are run by independent organisations and are funded by the taxpayer through parental choice.

As they look to the Netherlands David Cameron and David Willetts are right to recognise the benefits of school choice, but they must not ignore the academic selection which is central to the success of Dutch education.

To read Professor James Tooley's paper for Reform on school choice in the Netherlands and to read of their other education policies please click here.

Andrew Burkinshaw

Comments

[TomTom]

This is getting ridiculous. The Netherlands is a small compact little country with a population of 16 million with no major city having a population above 1 million

I cannot name an internationally renowned Dutch University or Scientist and note that Imperial College, London holds the European record for Nobel Prizes.

The Netherlands is remarkable for being mediocre and boring and suffering a mammoth exodus of professionals to Australia, USA, Canada etc to escape.

We have had this routine for decades - copy Sweden, copy the Dutch, copy USA and every time the population is force-fitted into something designed for a different society.

The Germans introduced Gesamtschule (Comprehensives) to copy Britain which in turn imported gibberish about the US High School. The states with comprehensives in Germany, Bremen, Berlin, NRW, Hesse, NS are the basket cases with high unemployment and collapsing school discipline.

Because each State sets its own Abitur students from Bremen cannot study in Bavaria because noone will accept their Abitur as valid; and the bulk of German high-tech business is in Baden-Wuerttemberg or Bavaria where selective schooling gives them the highest overall test scores in the OECD Pisa Study.

Germany is attempting to create Elite Universities like Harvard or MIT or Oxford or Imperial.....and finds it needs competitive secondary schools with an elite culture.

[ThatcherBoy]

All good stuff, except this intervention is two days too late...

[Bradford]

From September 2007 all White schools will be legally obliged to twin with Ethnic Minority Schools and arrange joint events, exchanges etc.

Maybe these legal obligations will need to be factored into grand schemes. In Bradford we have no difficulties - we have 120.000 Muslims so we have enough to go round our White schools.....but in areas like Kent and Devon and in Dorset there might be legal difficulties since schools which do not comply may be closed by Ofsted.

[ThePrince]

Yes the dutch system is good but it requires massive investment, I think it is much better to look at Hong Kong. HK has some of the highest educational standards in the world yet does not invest european sums of money and does not have selective schools. Instead it uses what effectively is DC and Willets proposed policies to drive up standards, socially mobility and aspiration by the bucket load and all in the context of a low tax and spend economy.

[Denis Cooper]

I though this debate was over, Cameron having decided that new schools would not be allowed to select pupils according to their academic ability, full stop.

According to their dramatic skills, yes; sporting abilities, yes; religion, yes; even special disabilities, yes; but according to academic ability, no, definitely not.

[realcon]

Yep - a mix of schools is what's wanted. Some academically selective, others not. Combine this with vouchers covering both state and private sectors and we will really see what works. Such an approach allows both selection of schools and selection of by schools.

[Mark Wadsworth]

What Denis says.

[Oberin Houston]

the issue of selection is a tricky one, and I think should always be in context. For small specialist schools where exceptional children can have their talents focused on thats good. But in mainsteram education with larger schools, streaming is a better way of ensuring that everyone can maximise the benefits for their education.

In the past, those who were not academically minded had a strong respected and really good apprentiship schemes to go into (British heavy industry, construction and manufacturing). Part of the social meltdown in the northern cities has been the dissapearence of these jobs and opportunities. Our modern education system NEEDS to change to meet the new reality. Bringing back grammars are not the answer. We need to change the education system so that those that (say) might have become a skilled welder, can attend schools that will equip them to start skilled careers without attending university or being superior academically.

[Oberon Houston]

Name fixed.

[Ralph Lucas]

Fine, but to get to the Dutch system, should that be our objective, we have to start from where we are. We know how to create excellent selective schools - but where in England are these wonderful schools that 75% of Dutch kids go to? To make a stable transition to a Dutch system, we would need to establish lots of such school first - and Academies seem a pretty good model to me.

[John]

I've just been listening to the World at One show and the David Willetts interview.

This put an additional dimension on it which I hadn't considered.

Willetts was asked whether those counties and towns that currently have Grammar Schools would be allowed to build additional Grammmar Schools to cope with significant increase in population Willetts would not answer the question. The weak old argument of 'I don't know about individual cases'

I take this to mean

'It's something he didn't consider that will go down like a lead balloon if I say NO but I can't say yes because its against the policy'

Then down the road the answer will be 'No New Grammar Schools'

This probably means that competition for Grammar School places will increase and fewer of the top group academically will be able to attend Grammar Schools further limiting the aspirations of children in those areas (Bucks, Kent, Lincolnshire etc).

The Kent marginals for one could stay in Labour Hands if thats the case.

I have so far remained fairly neutral on the actual policy but this is one implication too far for me. This policy is just as badly thought through as it has been badly presented.

It should now be changed so that a door is left open for new Grammar Schools to be built IF there is demand.

Willetts should fall on his sword for this dogs breakfast!

Cameron should listen, learn a little humility and allow people to choose locally.

As he said on 'Today' he may be the leader but many of us are not the lemmings he thinks we are and will not be led blindly over the cliff to a socialist future!

This is really becoming irritating now!

[malcolm]

'Academies seem a pretty good model to me'- Ralph Lucas. Why Ralph?

[Michael McGowan]

Indeed, Malcolm. In the Sunday Times, Minette Marrin was quite supportive of the no more grammar schools position but clearly had no confidence in academies being the answer. Nor do I: they are just rebranded comps under another name and I do not believe that Willetts and Cameron will be able to make setting within them stick.

[Mark Fulford]

Malcolm -- what's your objection to academies?

[Oberon Houston]

Mark,

Malcolm answered this question I asked on the Grassroots power thread, I also replied.

[Scotty]

This is getting ridiculous, between the today programme, the telegraph and Conhom this is just getting hysterical and over something which has not been a policy for the party for 30 years!
14 threads on the same subject in a week.
We never opened ONE grammar in 18 years in power, and now some people want to make it into a fight with the leadership because they dared to emphasis this and went further by saying that grammar schools today do not achieve what they were intended to. But now this seems to be turning into a vehicle for some who would like a HIGH NOON moment with the leadership who were ELECTED by the grass roots at the risk of all the hard work we have all achieved in the last 18 months.
I like this site and find it very useful, but I have not and neither has the Conservative party membership elected this site to become the spokesperson or representative of our views on any issue of policy with the leadership of the party. I do not want to see a sweeping generalisation made of the grass root views including mine to humble Team Cameron. That would not do anything other than weaken him in the eyes of the electorate and would be political suicide.
I want a Conservative government and I don't want that risked over a type of school which all but disappeared because of its unpopularity 30/40 years ago, especially when it is aimed at helping a few and the most able few at that rather than the many.

[TomTOm]

We never opened ONE grammar in 18 years in power,

https://www.scotland.gov.uk/news/releas98_1/pr1127.htm

The trust is calling for the scheme - set up by the Conservatives in 1980 but abolished by Labour in 1997 - to be reinstated.

State and private schools need to learn from each other
Professor Geoff Whitty
Institute of Education

The study found that, on average, children on the Assisted Places Scheme gained the equivalent of 8.9 GCSEs at A* to C grade.

For state pupils the figure was 7.7, while for children whose parents paid full independent school fees it was 9.2.

More than a third of assisted place holders went on to an "elite" university, compared with less than one in 10 from state schools.

Sutton Trust chairman Sir Peter Lampl said: "This research shows clearly that there is a very strong case for opening up top independent day schools to talented pupils from non-privileged backgrounds, so that they too can benefit from the academic and social advantages a private education brings."

Professor Geoff Whitty, director of the Institute of Education and co-author of the report, said: "The Assisted Places Scheme clearly benefited many of the individuals who took part in it, but by no means all of them.

"It also took some of the brightest pupils away from the maintained sector.

"State and private schools need to learn from each other and to work more closely together."

Schools Minister Lord Adonis said there would be no return to the Assisted Places Scheme.

He added: "We do not think it right for the government to pay for parents to go private, but rather invest in improving state schools, including academies managed independently within the state system and open to all on a fair basis."

Shadow Education Secretary David Willetts said: "We are not proposing any return to that scheme.

"But we do need to look at ways of breaking down the barriers between private and state education."

"But we do need to look at ways of breaking down the barriers between private and state education."

Ergo...public schools will become Academies.....

[Oberon Houston]

Scotty, I think there is two aspects to this, firstly the policy side, which I have found very interesting. The other is the "High Noon" stuff, and I'm with you on that

(and I agree, Tim, please be very careful about banding the champion of the grassroots stuff, despite the temptation for publicity and pushing pet project.

[Matt Wright]

Well we are only coming full circle to what was said in the first place (although perhaps a bit clumsily at times).

Matt

[DAVID VINTER]

Why do you allow very contraversial views to be published and then let the writers not have the courage to use their own name?

[William MacDougall]

Scotty writes that restoring Grammar Schools "has not been a policy for the party for 30 years!". On the contrary our excellent education manifesto in 2001 said that every school in the country could have as much selection as it wanted. 2005 was more vague but also allowed increased selection. The new policy reverses this and not only would make more selection illegal, but also argues the case for destroying the few surviving Grammars. The abhorrent new policy says that only wealthy children should benefit from selective education (in independent schools). This U-Turn is a step too far for many in the Party.

[Oberon Houston]

William,

We did worse that Michael Foot in those elections. What a vote winner.

[John Leonard]

And so it goes on.........

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6681873.stm

[Bob B]

TomTom: "I cannot name an internationally renowned Dutch University or Scientist and note that Imperial College, London holds the European record for Nobel Prizes. The Netherlands is remarkable for being mediocre and boring and suffering a mammoth exodus of professionals to Australia, USA, Canada etc to escape."

How about these Nobel Laureates?

Physics
(1902) Pieter Zeeman and Hendrik Lorenz
(1910) Johannes Diderik van der Waals
(1913) Heike Kamerlingh Onnes
(1953) Frederik Zernike
(1984) Simon van der Meer
(1999) Geradus 't Hooft and Martinus Veltman

Economics
Jan Tinbergen (1969)
Tjalling Koopmans (1975)

I've always thought it a pity that HM Treasury evidently overlooked Tinbergen: On the Theory of Economic Policy (1952) in the mid 1980s or it would not have embarked on a policy course of setting one policy intrument - interest rates - both to keep the Pound competitive against the Deutschmark and also to curb inflation without appreciating that lower interest rates would be needed for the first and higher rates for the second policy objective.

The eventual outcome of the confusion was the unstable inflationary boom of the late 1980s in Britain and then the debacle over trying to keep the Pound in the European Exchange Rate Mechanism.

According to Eurostat, the per capita GDP of the Netherlands at purchasing power parities is higher than that of Britain. According to Figure 2 in this official source, Labour Productivity in the Netherlands is higher than even the United States:
http://www.ssda.org.uk/pdf/strat-evidence.pdf

Seems to me that the Dutch must have been doing something right.

[Oberon Houston]

John Leonard: No surprises there. Tebbit is well and truly living in a bitter backwards looking world. When will he realise that the world turns?

[malcolm]

Scotty, the fact tht we haven't done something for 30 years does not make it wrong.
Oberon, do you really think we lost an election because of our education policy? Personally I think we will be risking quite a lot if we have to fight an election based on a Blairite gimmick that has no track record of success.If D avid Cameron and David Willetts try to sell this policy as badly as they have in the past week then we will not be able to count on Education being the Conservative vote winner that it could and should be.

[malcolm]

Oh and no response from Ralph Lucas. What a suprise!

[Andrew Lilico]

Oberon, our education policies were irrelevant to our 2001

[Scotty]

"Scotty, the fact tht we haven't done something for 30 years does not make it wrong."
Malcolm, it is not about being wrong but the fact that it was deeply unpopular and divisive. I think we forget why they went and also why the Conservative party never brought them back. I think that some in the party forget that need the majority to be with us on a policy and that is why it is correct to build an education system built round improving every child's education and school life.

[malcolm]

Deeply unpopular and divisive- Scotty really? If that was the case in the 1960's after 40 years of the failure of comprehensive education I doubt it would be unpopular today.
I would remind you Scotty that every single local referendum to abolish Grammar schools in areas where they exist has failed. If they were really unpopular the councils of Kent, Bucks, Lincolnshie etc would have abolished them or been thrown out of office. Equally Loyalist MPs like Key and Robertson who have Grammar Schools in their constituencies have announced their opposition to these plans. I think you have absolutely no evidence that your assertion is true and plenty that it isn't.

[Mark Fulford]

Malcolm answered this question I asked on the Grassroots power thread...

Oh God, you mean I've got to trawl through that lot to find the answer! Thanks Oberon ;-)

[Chips of Brookfield.]

We are twinned with one of these Dutch schools - they are state run, but charge fees for some the lessons (for example being taught subjects such as science in English) and they also have to buy textbooks and equipment in some lessons. They are also dominated by the children of middle-class professionals who can pay for these things. Holland-England is an apples and pears comparison and even if you wanted to go "Dutch" in terms of education we would need to convince parents that they need to pay for resources and support teachers in the way that Dutch parents do.

[Richard Carey]

Oh God, you mean I've got to trawl through that lot to find the answer! Thanks Oberon ;-)

I have some sympathy for you, Mark - it doesn't all make edifiying reading, I'm afraid! While there have been moments of genuine insight that might be used to fine-tune policy in future, mostly I have just been thinking about locking some of these people inside one of these threads and setting fire to it...

Perhaps I'm just suffering education-row-groundhog-day fatigue. It is now a pointless debate - it's policy, and the leadership (rightly) aren't going to back down. Please let's get back to business and at least get stuck in to the best way *we* can sell the policy substance Willetts presented to the people that really matter - the wider electorate.

Or maybe my first idea was the better one...

[Bob B]

"I would remind you Scotty that every single local referendum to abolish Grammar schools in areas where they exist has failed. If they were really unpopular the councils of Kent, Bucks, Lincolnshie etc would have abolished them or been thrown out of office."

The London borough of Sutton has a cluster of outstanding, maintained selective schools, some of which have been achieving better A-level results than Eton in recent years [*]. No one is compelled to apply for entrance at 11 to any of the schools and no one is compelled to take the entrance exams. Due to the Greenwich judgement, entry to these selective schools is not restricted to children of local residents:

"It was back in 1989 that what has become known throughout the education world as 'the Greenwich judgement' established that local education authority-maintained schools may not give priority to children simply because they live in the council’s geographical area."
http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/doc.asp?doc=12440&cat=1581

The consequence of the judgement is that pupils in these local maintained, selective schools commute daily from a wide swathe of south London while many pupils with local residence attend local comprehensive schools either by preference or because they did not pass the entry exams to the selective schools.

The educational outcome of this mix is that for the last ten years and more, the borough has consistently been at or near the top of the league table for the 148 Local Education Authorities in England based on average attainment in the GCSE exams:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6250433.stm

If one policy aim in schooling is to achieve the best average score in the GCSE exams then, on the evidence, the Sutton mix of maintained selective schools and comprehensive schools has been the most successful recipe.

[*] Enrolments in private schools are booming and it has to be admitted that more selective maintained academic (grammar) schools would dampen the enrolment boom in private schools. However, it has long been a firmly held Conservative principle that state spending should not crowd out private sector business opportunities. No family spending thousands a year on sending siblings to private sector schools will welcome the value of the family's expensive investment being undercut by the maintained (non-fee paying) grammar schools, especially when these achieve better A-levels for university entry than highly prestigious and costly private schools:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6250419.stm

[Ian McKellar]

I write as a father of a Year 5 Grammar School Daughter and a Primary Year 6 who is about to go to a Girl's Secondary Modern and who himself went to a Senior Secondary School (i.e. a Scottish Grammar School).

I am wary of private schools although my natural instinct is to live and let live but I believe that 40 years of comprehensive education has not bettered many children(this despite a drastic reduction is examination standards) and equally important has not helped this country. I accept the argument that for many, selection at 11 may not be correct and there is merit in looking at some flexibility at least up to the age of 13/14- maybe middle schools did have some merit?

Yes we should consider the reintroduction of Grammar Schools in some areas- Surrey springs to mind and I can recall at the old Swinton College in the early 70s the bitterness expressed by Conservative Activists against their Conservative County Council because as one expressed it that too many Tory County Councillors sent their children to private schools so the selective argument did not concern them. We should remember that still in many areas selection by house price

The question is will City Academies be any better? First of all the majority of our children go to school in large towns not cities. From a Party Political point of view, there are few of our target seats in cities. Were David Willits be prepared to advocate a policy for education in large towns (and I include many of the Mets in this), then the City Academy Road might not be chosen. Rural areas lend themselves to some form on Comprehensives but large towns are different. Indeed it should be asked how much of the Cameronian agenda is determined by the dreadful situation in London to the detriment of the rest of England.

This leads to the question, do we need for instance 50% of school leavers going to University or is the Labour Agenda now that of Comprehensive Universities. The Country needs plumbers, its needs electricians, its need mechanics; it needs competent and ambitious shop assistants – we don’t need sociologists, golf course managers or media consultants in such numbers. Will City Academies correctly address this challenge? Probably not! We have a problem particularly with the education of boys- in their society being clever is not sexy or macho. That’s where Grammar Schools are needed. The academic boy needs an environment to develop his abilities away from that of a comprehensive that often is not so much anti-learning but in many ways sees itself in the vanguard of a counter renaissance.

[Annabel Herriott]

You know Richard, we should badger Tim into a rule that states that vexatious posts/trolling, downright barking posts have the posters real name attached. I think that some real debate may follow, not the cerebrally fossilised arguments that we have suffered on the various education threads. Grammars are OK for the bright all rounders. Period. On a bell curve, not being any good at math, you would need to tell me where this cohort would be placed.

[Richard Carey]

The question is will City Academies be any better? First of all the majority of our children go to school in large towns not cities. From a Party Political point of view, there are few of our target seats in cities.

I've specifically restrained from referring to City Academies in my posts on these threads, Ian, because of exactly the situation that you propose. I agree with you that the same situations exist in medium to large towns, to a greater or lesser extent, and that given the stated evidence base supporting the Academy formula then it should be possible to apply that with a little variation to those different scenarios.

There is plenty of time to continue to expand on the detail of this policy (including sorting out anomalies in the nomenclature), and I would certainly hope to see your point addressed.

I think your point regarding more vocational education (and the status often unfortunately accorded it by Government) is also well made. On this point I am also encouraged by some of the work done by the Shadow Education team, and in particular (yes, I would say this, wouldn't I...!) my own MP John Hayes.

[Scotty]

Malcolm, I am sure life would be much easier for Gordon Brown, David Cameron or their predecessors if they just had to worry about the parents of children attending 160 selected schools in a few constituencies. I am equally sure that this would not be such a hit with all the other MP's or prospective candidates right across the country. With everything wrong with the present system there is no way that 70% of parents are going to vote for the other 30% of children to have a more selective education further undermining their own kids already poor provision. I will never understand this sentimental hangup with grammar schools because I know that streaming and setting can be just as successful in all schools for all children.
That is why no leader whether they are Labour or Conservative will advocate their return. Gordon Brown will not be the return to real Labour that some in his party hope because he needs more than their support to stay in power, David Cameron would be doing the opposite by supporting the return of grammar schools because it really would send out a message that we are the party of the few not the many. With the mountain we have to climb we can't afford that luxury and he knows it.
This issue has been very divisive even among posters on this site who normally tend to agree on the general policy direction of the leadership, I am sure that the same people would be equally divided on this no matter who was in charge.

[Richard Carey]

You know Richard, we should badger Tim into a rule that states that vexatious posts/trolling, downright barking posts have the posters real name attached.

I've generally resisted compulsory registration for this site, Annabel - it is always tempting when things get heated, but perhaps we all (myself included) just need to factor in the pseudonyms when deciding how to weight a controversial post. Maybe we're all adult enough to take how someone posts when weighing what they've posted. However, whenever I see this site's commenters quoted in the media it does make me stop and think again.

I have, however, just happened across this quote from Nick Ramsay AM, who now holds David Davies' old Welsh Assembly seat in Monmouth which I think we'd all be well advised to remember here in the light of the last week or so:

"A Conservative trait is that you try to do what works, not what some political dogma directs".

[Scotty]

"However, whenever I see this site's commenters quoted in the media it does make me stop and think again."
On that note Richard, you might find this link useful, one or two people have commented already about the lack of balance shown including Dizzy thinks.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/news/archives/2007/05/22/cameron_v_the_tory_blogosphere.html

[Scotty]

Apologies try this instead and go to Blog: Cameron v the blogosphere.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/

[Richard Carey]

Agreed, Scotty - I saw that coverage a little earlier this evening. It's a fact of political life that you will get selectively quoted, and one that I think we're getting better at recognising in the day-to-day political rough-and-tumble. Blog comments are unfortunately prone, almost by their very nature, to being taken without surrounding context.

Another growing pain as the blogosphere grows up, perhaps, but one I'm sure we'll all get our heads round sooner or later.

With regard to the quote from the DizzyThinks blog, you're absolutely right, of course - reading Dizzy's post gives an entirely different story from the isolated quote! We may be new media, but we're by no means immune to the same old tactics of the MSM when they want to ramp a story...

[Richard Carey]

By the way, Scotty, if you have difficulty in posting links to webpages as you did above, the Ed has provided a handy guide here.

[TomTOm]

I will never understand this sentimental hangup with grammar schools because I know that streaming and setting can be just as successful in all schools for all children.

Since this preserves the catchment area it reinforces class privilege through house prices and postcode lottery.

Obviously The Lyons Report with its proposal to levy Council Tax on property attributes will have to impose large Council Tax increases on houses near good schools to provide resources for poorer areas where poore schools are located......a 50%-100% Council Tax Premium for proximity to good schools might be a starter.

It is typical hypocrisy though to suggest that Primrose Hill should have a streamed neighbourhood comprehensive....and so should Peckham......

[Roger Helmer]

We are arguing the merits of one system against another. Let's get more radical. Let's have NO SYSTEM. Let's allow parents and teachers and governors to set their own standards and admission criteria. Let's limit the role of the state to funding public education, and get government out of the business of managing and delivering it. Same goes for health, by the way. We have overwhelming evidence that the state is appallingly bad at delivering public services, so why do we keep letting them do it?

[TomTom]

Let's limit the role of the state to funding public education,

That's the law in your logic. We no longer control The State, the State has decided to control us with our own money

[TomTom]

That's the flaw in your logic

[Traditional Tory]

A Conservative trait is that you try to do what works, not what some political dogma directs.

Tendentious nonsense. What 'works' can only be judged in the context of what a politician is in the long term trying to achieve.

For example, if you are trying to achieve academic excellence rather than a lowest common denominator egalitarianism, grammar schools work better than comprehensives. From a socialist (or Cameroon) point of view, the reverse is the case.

Conservatism is not a vapid, dishonest doctrine based upon shifting sands; it is a position of principle rooted in the dictum that custom is the great guide in human life.

But try telling that to Dave...

[TomTom]

One thing they might recall is that Grammar Schools started in the era of Edward VI and were usually attached to The Cathedral or Parish Church. Administration of The Realm was in the hands of the Church because it had the literate ones versed in Latin....and Grammar Schools taught Latin Grammar.

They did not charge fees unlike the other schools used by the merchant and landowning classes which became "public schools" so Shakespeare could get his education and exposure to classical literature and grammar

The separation of the Office of Lord Chancellor from that of being a Churchman to being a Lawyer marked the emergence of that Secular Religion of Legalism

The Industrial Schools in the Victorian era were designed to develop clerks....

The 1870 Act permitted Local Authorities to use ratepayers money for schools....and the Salisbury Government created Board Schools so local authorities could run their own schoools alongside Church Schools.

Now everuone wants a standardised plan, a template for uniformity and obedience to the centre.

This is the alien nature of education in Britain - centralised control and from Kenneth Baker centralised control of the Curriculum for the first time in English history.

The merger of Examination Boards to create private companies like ETS Princeton able to sell privatised standard tests - all this plus consumer-oriented education created havoc. Then Major took Polytechnics and CATs and made them Universities destroying part-time education, block release and day release.

[Richard Carey]

Conservatism is not a vapid, dishonest doctrine based upon shifting sands; it is a position of principle rooted in the dictum that custom is the great guide in human life.

That's fine as far as it goes, but I fear that for many that "position of principle" becomes "let's keep doing the same things over again - after all, we did them in the past, so they must be right". Who was it that said that the definition of insanity was to do the same thing over and over and expect a different result?

I don't want us to look backwards - of course knowing what worked in the past is useful, but so is knowing why it won't work in the same way today.

Elections frequently come down to being about one party talking about the past and another looking forward enthusiastically to future progress. Which one do you want to be, Traditional Tory?

[Bill]

I do not want to contradict TomTom but my school (which was a grammar school) was founded in the reign of Edward IV.

[Bob B]

I appreciate worries expressed here and elsewhere about centralised control of a national curriculum for schools but there are valid reasons for continuing concerns about some well-documented failings of our education system:

"Some 26 million adults lack maths or English skill levels expected of school-leavers. . . An estimated 5.2 million adults have worse literacy than that expected of 11 year olds, while 14.9 million have numeracy skills below this level."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4095153.stm

"A multi-billion pound adult literacy and numeracy strategy has done little to improve standards, a report says. The Department for Education and Skills (DfES) looks likely to spend nearly £6bn on the Skills For Life programme. But the House of Commons public accounts committee says the first few years of the scheme have provided 'little evidence of improvements'."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4641470.stm

"One third of employers have to give their staff remedial lessons in basic English and maths, a survey suggests. Managers said staff needed to be able to use correct spelling and grammar and should be competent in simple mental arithmetic without a calculator. One in five employers said non-graduate recruits of all ages struggled with literacy or numeracy, the Confederation of British Industry poll found."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/5263812.stm

"The government appears to have failed to achieve its already delayed target of ensuring that 85% of 11-year-olds leave primary school with adequate maths and English skills by 2006.

"The number of pupils leaving primary school with the required, level 4 English skills has risen by just 1%, to 80%, in English and by 1%, to 77%, in maths, according to the 40 local education authorities - out of 150 approached - who responded to a survey for the Independent."
http://education.guardian.co.uk/primaryeducation/story/0,,1839716,00.html

"Academics have challenged ministers’ claims of improved pupil performance in national tests and GCSEs.

"Government research obtained by The TES compares the results of pupils in England with teenagers in other countries. The findings weaken ministers’ claims that pupils are getting better at English, maths and science. . . The analysis found evidence that pupils who had achieved average results in key stage 3 tests in English, maths and science and GCSEs performed worse in the 2003 tests than those in 2000."
Times Educational Supplement 18 August 2006
http://www.tes.co.uk/2270700

"Last year [2004], a report from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) revealed that Britain came seventh from bottom in a league table of staying-on rates for 19 countries. Only Mexico and Turkey had significantly lower rates of participation for this age group. Italy, New Zealand, Portugal and Slovakia have marginally lower rates."
http://education.guardian.co.uk/gcses/story/0,16086,1555547,00.html

"Figures last year showed 47% of 17-30 year-old women had gone into higher education by 2004, compared to 37% of young men. And last year, 57% of first degree graduates were women."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/6314055.stm

[Denis Cooper]

"... if you are trying to achieve academic excellence rather than a lowest common denominator egalitarianism, grammar schools work better than comprehensives."

But not all schools should try to achieve academic excellence, because not all pupils are suited to the pursuit of academic excellence, and if a school sought
to bring pupils lacking academic aptitude to an acceptable academic standard and successfully achieved that worthwhile goal it should be applauded just as much as a school with an exceptionally good academic record.

Barring academic selection by schools not only disadvantages the academically able children, but also those lacking academic aptitude who would benefit from a school run to suit their needs.

[malcolm]

Hear, hear Dennis

[ToMTom]

I do not want to contradict TomTom but my school (which was a grammar school) was founded in the reign of Edward IV.

Posted by: Bill | May 23, 2007 at 08:58

I think that is wonderful !