Primary school places : a solution

[aliceBB]

It's not a question of bringing all schools up to scratch per se, it's the children that go to them. If the brighest children are being creamed off to go to the local grammer school or the school with the best results many miles away, who have you got left to go to the local schools?

 

Do you think the same problem exists where primary schools are concerned?

[poppet2]

Do you think the same problem exists where primary schools are concerned?

 

Yes, which is why league tables are being published for their year 6 SATs results.

[aliceBB]

Yes, which is why league tables are being published for their year 6 SATs results.

 

Surely it is the other way round. The problem exists because they are publishing KS2 results. The sooner parents stop worshipping at the altar of bloody SATs results, the better. If they want to compare schools, they should look at their 'value added' quotients. That will tell you more about just how good schools are likely to be. Even better, they should ask to be taken round the school during a normal day (not an Open Day) and get a sense of what kind of ethos it has, the relationships within the school and what it values in its pupils.

 

I would be interested to know what parents actually want from a primary school, which is enough to make them move house, feign religious conviction, pay thousands of pounds... What does 'good' mean, in their minds? Is it the same as most primary teachers' and Heads' definitions, I wonder?

Edited April 18, 2015 by aliceBB

[Owethemnowt]

Of course all schools can be good.

 

Choose any example you wish; new cars are all good. Tins of beans are all good.

 

Sure some are 'better' than others but all are set to industry minimum standards. If only schools were actually brought up to standard by having decent buildings, grounds and facilities then the 'packaging' would be at least 'good.

 

Then, if teachers were paid a decent salary plus incentives or an actual working policy existed that attracted quality graduates into teaching, and ensured experienced high calibre teachers were prepared to work in all areas, no school would fail or under achieve.

 

But this is straying into politics. No Government for over 40 years has ever believed in, valued or rewarded teachers.

 

From being respected by all members of society they are targeted for blame. Then again the same respect has been lost largely for the Medical profession a target for attack by politicians careful to attack the doctors but not the nurses or the NHS institution which they all wish to 'improve'. A Tory improvement being to reduce numbers of doctors and promote more managers.

 

The legal profession has seen the appalling rise of 'injury' lawyers. The police has seen the introduction of uniformed community street strollers; basically powerless good hearted citizens exploited to cover the lack of actual police officers.

 

The teachers are not alone in their plight. The result is 'sink' schools; sink education and we see it in yob violence, damage to our property, unemployment amongst young people, dead end jobs for young people and lives without hope.

 

Even graduates serve burgers.

 

The population is focussed on what's in it for them. The latest bribe being more child care. Money in your pocket salves the big problems with the big society [a phrase / slogan now conveniently dropped like the earlier one where we all 'went back to basics'. More shopping at Neto I expect.]

 

It's greed that undoes us all. The selfish focus by all NIMBY's on their needs and not what society needs.

 

We actually don't have bad, unfixed hospitals. Then why should we endure bad, unfixed schools?

 

Sure, people will die suddenly if it goes badly wrong in the hospital theatre. But people will also die if it goes badly wrong in the class room.

 

It's just that a failed education leads to a slow miserable life of lack of opportunity, under achievement and ignorance. A life trapped in poverty with politicians promising jam tomorrow.

[go4it]

We actually don't have bad, unfixed hospitals. Then why should we endure bad, unfixed schools?

 

 

Hospitals are a bit like schools as it depends on the people using them.

 

Doctors / nurses / teachers all receive training and all can do their jobs. But the quality of their work depends on where they work.

 

A teacher having to deal with behaviour problems in class, without positive support from home, is going to struggle to do their job for the other pupils. A doctor or nurse, on a ward with abusive patients is going to find it difficult to keep going throughout their shift.

 

More of an issue for schools as more to do with location. People travel from far and wide to hospitals, but school intake tends to be much closer.

[aliceBB]

All true. Owethemnowt, I salute you. #24 is one of the best posts I've read on this forum.

[The Joker]

All true. Owethemnowt, I salute you. #24 is one of the best posts I've read on this forum.

 

Oh really? And what about the garbage I post? It take years of practice to condense so much nonsense into a few sentences

[charmer]

Why do you think that? 'Good' is an objective, measurable descriptor based on observable criteria.

 

Not all schools can be 'better' than the rest, or all children 'above average' (a point Michael Gove persistently failed to grasp!) but all schools they can in theory all be as good as the rest.

 

If all schools were as "good" as the rest, they would all be average.

 

Surely "good" is relative to the rest? (In the same way bad is)

[aliceBB]

If all schools were as "good" as the rest, they would all be average.

 

Surely "good" is relative to the rest? (In the same way bad is)

 

No, 'good' is only a useful descriptor in the context of primary schools if you can define what a good school is and what it is not. Otherwise, you're applying a label which means different things to different people, and hence is to be so vague as to be meaningless. Even OFSTED doesn't arbitrarily declare that is a school is 'good' or 'failing' on the basis of gut reaction. They have a list of identifiable and measurable objectives against which they judge the school's performance. You can argue with the criteria, but it is more objective, I suspect, than they way most parents judge schools.

 

Perhaps you could tell us what you think 'a good school' is or should be?

Edited April 19, 2015 by aliceBB

[skinz]

Oh really? And what about the garbage I post? It take years of practice to condense so much nonsense into a few sentences

 

And we appreciate every syllable with warm endearment..even though you're 2 strawberries short of a trifle.