f4f3 | (no subject)

(no subject)

The league tables for Scottish schools have just been published. I realise that league tables are a blunt instrument for measuring performance, but I thought I’d have a peek at how my old school, All Saints in Glasgow, was doing.

The results depressed me, showing just how bad the exam results were compared to the city’s norm. Then I looked at the results for the private schools in Glasgow, and I stopped being depressed and started being furious instead.

Leaving aside the morality of private education, the results demonstrate just what can be achieved by throwing money at education.
2 out of 3 pupils getting five or more highers (the Scottish A Level) against 1 in 20
97% of pupils going on to university against an average of 32% or worse.
More than half of the pupils at my old school are poor enough to qualify fro free school meals – how many of their children will end up the same?

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

the results demonstrate just what can be achieved by throwing money at education.

I'm not sure about that. The results may demonstrate what can be achieved by restricting the intake to kids from wealthy homes and chucking out anyone who causes trouble.

True, the element of selection can't be ignored. But wealthy kids aren't necessarily clever kids - money is being thrown at their education by their parents (and presumably not only money, but support and interest - even if only to ensure a return on their investment)and that is creating better results. If we, through the State, were throwing an equal amount of money at the problem we could afford more teachers, and a coherent plan for dealing with excluded children.
And once we'd got the teacher pupil ratio to where it is in the private sector, we could start arguing about the educational methods used, and comprehensive v. grammar, and selection, and all the other issues that affect teaching to a lesser extent than class sizes.
Reducing complex issues to sound bites is dangerous, but for education mine would be:
More Teachers: Smaller Classes

I don't disagree with you. My instant remedy would be close half the universities and use the money for early childhood and primary education, especially in poorer areas.

I'm not sure that throwing money at secondary education would help much since there are socially determined differenes in average performance that are already apparent. It's noteworthy that in the south of England some state schools produce results as good as private schools. Surprise, surprise, they have relatively wealthy catchment areas.

We're in violent agreement :-)

I'd say that "socially determined differences" should be read as "financially determined differences" though - more teachers in the socially deprived areas would bring up results.

On a different note, you need to check out this: http://www.livejournal.com/users/rhionnach/20861.html.

Unless you are already reading my f-list on a regular basis, in which case I say to you, get a life.

I'll give it a thought,, but I am a bit of a Byronic outsider in Glasgow Faandom.

Popped over to see if you survived the weekend :P

Oh, I had a cunning escape plan for Friday night, which I'll relate today if I get the chance, and also my extremely mixed feelings on being an officially safe guy...

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only