logo
   Web Issue 3233 August 22 2008   
spacer
SNP ministers scrap £15m Schools of Ambition project
Exclusive by ANDREW DENHOLM, Education CorrespondentMarch 05 2008

SNP ministers are to scrap a multi-million-pound schools programme set up by Labour and backed by entrepreneur Sir Tom Hunter to drive up standards in the comprehensive system.

In a change of policy that takes Scotland further away from the English city academy model, the Scottish Government will continue to fund the 52 schools on the Schools of Ambition programme until 2010, but will then wind up the £15m scheme.

Fiona Hyslop, the Education Secretary, has always opposed the initiative because it provides a benefit to selected schools, rather than the comprehensive system as a whole.

While in opposition she said: "The executive should be bringing forward plans to benefit the educational provision of all schools in Scotland."

Robbie Dinwoodie: "What price renaming the LibDems?"

The move provoked an angry backlash from Scottish Labour, which said the project had been one of the most successful educational initiatives ever undertaken in Scotland.

Rhona Brankin, the party's education spokeswoman, was particularly angered because HM Inspectorate of Education (HMIE) yesterday published a report praising the work of one of the country's first schools of ambition - St Ninian's High in Kirkintilloch.

"This is deeply disappointing and bad news for Scotland's education system. Schools of ambition have been an outstanding success in challenging and inspiring pupils at schools across Scotland most in need of transformation," she said. "St Ninian's is just one of the many examples where the programme is making a real difference."

The Schools of Ambition programme, originally intended to involve 100 failing schools, was launched in 2005 by Peter Peacock, education minister in the former Scottish Executive, as a mechanism to drive up standards in the comprehensive system.

At the time, the Labour Party in Westminster was rolling out the model of city academies, which aimed to transform education in schools with poor results by raising up to £2m from private sponsors, who were then given a major say in the curriculum and the academy's general running.

Such a move north of the border would have proved deeply controversial, but the Schools of Ambition programme was seen as an acceptable alternative.

Schools given a poor evaluation report by HMIE were automatically brought on to the scheme, but others which had already begun to transform their performance or were centres of excellence were also selected, to prevent it being seen as a scheme for failing schools.

Each school was guaranteed at least £100,000 annually over three years with the possibility of further funding from philanthropists such as Sir Tom Hunter, or from local businesses.

In return for the funding, the schools had to pledge to improve their levels of attainment, discipline and attendance, and headteachers had to take part in leadership programmes.

Each school had to identify at least one area of the curriculum where it would come to be recognised as having a particular strength, such as sport, music, the performing arts, languages or vocational studies.

The demise of the scheme received a mixed reaction from teaching unions and academics.

David Eaglesham, general secretary of the Scottish Secondary Teachers Association, said: "I am not sad it is going. We need to encourage schools to aim for the highest standard, no matter what area they are in and where they are starting from, and match that with funding."

Eric Wilkinson, professor of education at Glasgow University, said: "There were obviously positives, but overall this project was flawed because it spread resources far too thinly. What we need is a programme which is far more ambitious than this one."

However, Judith Gillespie, policy development manager with the Scottish Parent Teacher Council (SPTC) said: "If this money had been distributed between every school in Scotland, it would have made no impact and this scheme has had an impact."

A spokeswoman for the Scottish Government said: "There are no plans to continue the scheme at present, although the schools that are currently on the programme will continue to be funded. We will ensure that any positive lessons learned can benefit education as a whole."


© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Related Links

Posted by: subrosa on 12:06am Wed 5 Mar 08
This was a 'them and us' scenario. Not good for our educational reputation. It was just another tier for politicians to look good.
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 12:09am Wed 5 Mar 08
This is deeply disappointing and bad news for Scotland's education system.
- Yes Rhona it was very disappointing when you introduced it.........

Why should a selection if underperforming schools be given extra cash whilst others that are performing well under the same cost limits are not - Labour feeding the culture of mediocrity and languishing aspiration again.....

Selective Schools, Student Tuton fees, 10% Tax Rate Abolished - Labour taxing the poor to help pay for the underprivileged....

The comments from those involved in teaching says it all - another busted flush from Scottish Labour and it's misguided spending of public money......

Does anyone know if these Schools were in Labour safe seats?
Posted by: OHO, Glasgow on 12:09am Wed 5 Mar 08
I agree. This was always an ill thought through initiative and really only ever was popular at the launch because of the Tom Hunter connection.
Posted by: Thyme Kelpie on 12:33am Wed 5 Mar 08
Every school should be a school of ambition.

This scheme seemed to reward failure or lack of ambition.

Glad to see it hit the dust.
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 1:17am Wed 5 Mar 08
Fantastic!

An end to another divide and rule competition is king scheme approved by the Britain first Scotland second brigade.

Onwards and upwards!



Posted by: jonny bond, glasgow on 2:12am Wed 5 Mar 08
I cant believe the numbskulls who criticise the idea of improving some of the worst schools and also the addition of a new idea the idea of training the next group of publicly taught entrepreneurs how to make better companies that will pay the taxes to pay for the education in the long run. Why dont you freaks go back to your factories and coal mines and get that finger numbing disease that the government in scotland wont pay your surviving relatives a penny in compensation. It seems that sort of life is all you want with your critical analysis of this article. I notice that not one of you has a suggestion for making underperforming schools into some of the most productive in the country. Far easier to just complain and say that the snp are gods gift to politics when they are clearly as corrupt and inefficient a bunch as I've ever had the displeasure to encounter and I thought labour were as bad as the torries. So dont dare call me a friend of wendy's or whoever is the current leader of the tartan tories.
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 2:22am Wed 5 Mar 08


Jonny Bond
I cant believe the numbskulls who criticise the idea of improving some of the worst schools
Tough.

We will run our own country and our own education system in our own way.

Posted by: Edward, Edinburgh on 2:39am Wed 5 Mar 08
It was, as mentioned in the article modeled on the English City Academy's, so want even a Scottish Labour idea, it was in fact Tony Blair telling Scottish Labour what to do!
Do they work in England? No not really! It was and is all gloss and no real substance with students channeled through narrow band subjects, that is an academy will specialise in one single subject area, then its all about results and league tables a Labour fixation
Posted by: gordon Brown ate my hamster, Australia on 3:00am Wed 5 Mar 08
What is the comprehensive system? Do we have comprehensive schools in scotland?
Posted by: Lobeydosser, Woodlands Road on 4:24am Wed 5 Mar 08
Am I to believe that some of the posts are saying that the comprehensive system is ok and that mediocrity, underperformance, lack of ambition and the lack of drive to reach high achievement is acceptable?

If this is so; then some of the posters really are a bunch of numpties.
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 4:41am Wed 5 Mar 08

Lobbydosser Lobotomised
Am I to believe that some of the posts are saying mediocrity, underperformance, lack of ambition and the lack of drive to reach high achievement is acceptable? If this is so; then some of the posters really are a bunch of numpties.
No. No one is saying that.

What does that make you?
Posted by: Lobeydosser, Woodlands Road on 5:27am Wed 5 Mar 08
Well LA what are you saying, what is your plan to improve Scottish education so that it is ambitious, driven to succeed and high achieving?

Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 6:00am Wed 5 Mar 08
Lobbydosser
what is your plan to improve Scottish education
I reject entirely the proposition from which you wish to begin the argument, that is,in the main Scottish schools are crap.

You and I are products of them. Do you feel a loser?

As I've often said, education is the platform of the political charlatan.

They know they can spout off a lot of rhetoric with impunity because radical change is complicated and far too costly to impliment. It's a safe call - teachers don't have the clout or the time to bite back. The politician appears to be addressing society's ills offering solutions. More chalk, talk, and bring back the Lochgelly.

In the end, the basis of good education is the quality of the teachers, concomitant with society's attitude to their worth, and the value of schools in the community.

But if society says greed is good, and our schools crap ...


Posted by: James S Dow, Bucharest on 6:15am Wed 5 Mar 08
It is sad that the SNP despite it's "raison d'etre" seemingly fails to appreciate or understand that Scotland's greatest asset is we, the Scots. For the future prosperity of our nation it is the responsibility of the curent generation to endow each new generation of Scots with the best education we can provide. That includes identifying those with the best potential and giving them the best. While the Comprehensive system should be geared to ensuring that a high standard of education is provided to all, it should also allow us to identify potential at all stages in pupil development. When we see talent then let's have the facility to hone it to perfection.
Posted by: exile, far away on 6:40am Wed 5 Mar 08
Los Angeles, bring back the Lochgelly.

Sad to see this comment from a nationalist. I would have thought we had more imagination than this. As far as I can remember from my scool days, violent punishment did not engender discipline and learning, it simply turned the classroom into a them-and-us circus.
Posted by: Reddwz, underground on 6:50am Wed 5 Mar 08
there is a lot of p*sh being spoken here.

Schools of ambition weren't 'based' on City Academies. The two schemes were entirely different in concept and delivery.

Doing away with the scheme is one thing - clearly within the rights of any legitimate government. But how is Fiona Hyslop going to pull under-performing schools up by the boot straps?

talking about doing so is not going to achieve the results she wants.
Posted by: Paul, Paisley on 7:01am Wed 5 Mar 08
Schools of ambition have the following results:
1. Teachers who are involved in running it get stars on their CV and move on to others by promotion.
2. Teachers in Schools of Ambition are kept in late at night to attend irrelevant training when they are tired and disinterested as they could be marking or preparing.
3. The school gets good press that the local community does not believe as discipline usually goes down the tubes as everyone is focused on the paperwork and not the action.
Goodbye the latest 'spin' meister.
Posted by: Lobeydosser, Woodlands Road on 7:33am Wed 5 Mar 08
LA,

Fair enough, I see where you are coming from.

I agree that politicians play the educational game for politics sake but they are only there for a 5 year term (or less) and sound bites with poor funding are gimmicks. A lot of the academics who have studied this phenomenon have come to the same conclusion education policy changes with government and there is no long term strategy, i.e. a lot longer than 5 years. For example how many times have the school qualifications changed over the last 20 years?

Unfortunately I did not lose out, or feel a loser, because the lobotomy did not work and I did very well out of the education system.
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 8:05am Wed 5 Mar 08

Lobbydosser's No Toss*er
I did not lose out, or feel a loser, because the lobotomy did not work and I did very well out of the education system.
LoL Nice humour.

Exile Far Away
bring back the Lochgelly.
You misread - I was using shorthand to lampoon corporal punishment. IAs a yoof I campaigned to have it abolished , even went as far as writing a "learned paper" for Glasgow Uni to show by a year's study and statistics it did no good at all. LoL

Corporal Punishment, take a step forward!
Yessir!


Posted by: spagan, heisker, scotland on 8:25am Wed 5 Mar 08
This was another gimmick - that gave the previous schools ministers a few photo-opportunities.

The best thing the previous shower did was to relax some of the curricular guidelines to allow some pupils to have more of a vocational education.
Apart from that, it was spin and photo-shots every second week.
Underperforming schools do need additional resources - but that needs to be a Local Authority decision - with input from HMIE (the school inspectors). Often, as well as additional resources, their is a need for a new Headteacher - and some new blood middle-managers as well.
Posted by: stonehaven on 8:54am Wed 5 Mar 08
How ironic, coming from the party who wrecked so many schools in the 1970s by introducing the low achieving comprehensive system and scrapping the selective schools (eg Hillhead High, my school). Tam Dalziel was the main proponent of the comprehensive system. Incidently, he preferred to send his kids to a private school but believed the comprehensive system the best for all (except his kids of course).

Labour broke the system. They are in no position to lecture others on how to fix it.
Posted by: sociowoman, Dundee on 8:55am Wed 5 Mar 08
The money was only going to some schools/areas.

As for statistics and these schools, are they cooked? Nobody would trust the figures. What about class sizes and so on?

Personally, I did not and will not believe the spin attached to these schools. AND if these schools do as they say, they will end up dominated by the middle class.

Are these schools all PR and bluster and little else? AND if we choose ANY school and throw money and publicity at it, it WILL improve. It will make the teachers into "stars" - make them look even dafter. People are not not stupid.

More generally, we must improve the standards of teachers AND boot the incompetent out. Far too many of them. AND we must improve teacher training. Its well know that at teacher training colleges few if any students fail - now thats bizzare.
Posted by: Mist, Glasgow on 8:59am Wed 5 Mar 08
Many posters seem to think that this initiatve was for underperforming schools, when this wasn't in fact the case, at least in the authority where I work. It was a gimmick and will be of no loss whatsover.

Talking of gimmicks, the Herald should investigate the cost effectiveness of Glow - the amount of money wasted on this initiative is jaw droppingly high.
Posted by: stonehaven on 9:19am Wed 5 Mar 08
Mist @ 8:59am.

I have never heard of Glow but just looked it up on the internet. Tell us more about it and the money being invested.
Posted by: sid the sceptic, renfrewshire on 9:27am Wed 5 Mar 08
i think wardog got it spot on. another way labour found of throwing good money at problems that they caused and didn't know how to fix . (got to look after the numpties that vote for you.)even now in opposition they still only have the old plans and ideas that are regularly being shown for what they are. outdated , passed it.& irrelevant .A BIT LIKE THERE MSP'S.
Posted by: Jock Politicaljunkie, Glasgow on 9:36am Wed 5 Mar 08
sociowoman, Dundee. 8:55am.

Good point about the fact that hardly any trainee teachers fail the training. I think if this money saved could diverted to some way of finding out whether teachers CAN ACTUALLY TEACH, then we'd be half way there. Ability to teach has got nothing what-so-ever to do with ability to pass exams at college and general intelligence.

When I was at secondary school I had a maths teacher who was supposedly somesort of mathematical genius. I'm sure he MAY have been a great mathematician, but for me and my class mates he was not so good. The man just COULD NOT TEACH. He had no communication skills to speak of, he was shy, timid and could not get any sort of concept over. He also kept missing bits of the curriculum out as came apparent at the exam, when we were tested on stuff we hadn't covered. Maybe he couldn't think down to our level, but what is plain as day, he was miss-employed!

I was lucky and got through the year on a nack for maths and good teachers before and after - others were not so lucky.

On a wider education thought - there seems to be a bit of a bidding war of sorts over infant class sizes. Would it not perhaps be better to go for a smaller riduction is class size to say just 22, but to extend this reduction to the rest of primary classes 4 to 7?

If the bidding war were to continue to rediculous degrees - lets hypothesise, say 12 KIDS per class at infants P1 to P3 - I think it would do more harm for those children to then at P4 be tossed into a class of 33. Education is a long haul process. Fine, have good foundations but attention has to be paid to all levels of the build.

I think if all primary classes were reduced to 22 kids per class then a better and longer term benefit would occur. The longer term (7 year) reduction would also help kids catch up they had a duff teacher for one year as they would still have a good teacher pupil ratio.
Posted by: Rab The Man, Was My Uncle on 9:42am Wed 5 Mar 08
James S Dow wrote:
It is sad that the SNP despite it's "raison d'etre" seemingly fails to appreciate or understand that Scotland's greatest asset is we, the Scots. For the future prosperity of our nation it is the responsibility of the curent generation to endow each new generation of Scots with the best education we can provide. That includes identifying those with the best potential and giving them the best. While the Comprehensive system should be geared to ensuring that a high standard of education is provided to all, it should also allow us to identify potential at all stages in pupil development. When we see talent then let's have the facility to hone it to perfection.
JAMES DOW
Could you just be confusing "best" with "most privileged"???......
.....Of course you couldn't..........or couldn't admit it
Posted by: Paul, Castle Douglas on 9:45am Wed 5 Mar 08
Eric Wilkinson, professor of education at Glasgow University, said: "There were obviously positives, but overall this project was flawed because it spread resources far too thinly. What we need is a programme which is far more ambitious than this one."


Well, if the professor of education at Glasgow Uni says that.....

I think that the SNP have to come up with something. I suggest taking a look at other countries' education systems and seeing how they work.
Posted by: subrosa on 10:21am Wed 5 Mar 08
Now is the time to return to the good system which was destroyed. Allow schools and pupils to select an academic or vocational education. Both can't be done in the one school building as has been proven over and over again.

Yes some children were in the wrong stream, but the whole comprehension system was wrong because it tried to put two types of education together (and two or three schools in many cases) into the one building. My old school wasn't big enough and still isn't. All it has done is reduce the overall quality of education and lost us our excellent base of 'hands on' productive workers ie engineers, electricians, plumbers, printers - lots I knew set up their own businesses.

That's now coming back to bite because these skills are vanishing owing to many holders of these skills reaching retirement and their is no incentive for the next generation to train the up and coming one.
Posted by: spagan, heisker, scotland on 10:38am Wed 5 Mar 08
Agreed Paul - but it is very difficult to compare like with like.

Just as a starter for 10!
1 Ensure that 'background/privileg
e' doesn't bring any unfair advantage over others.
2 Create a Scottish 'Baccalaureate' that is challenging and world-respected - that allows direct entry to second year at University.
3 Establish Early Years Centres that provide wraparound childcare and education from age 3 to 9. Open and free 50 weeks of the year from 8am to 6pm.
4 Create Middle Schools that cater for those from 10 to 14 - appropriately 'set' according to ability - with support for those who require it and challenges for those more able. Not just academically, but in craft, sport, the arts etc.
5 Middle Schools should also be open 8am to 6pm - with before and after school times involving instructors, parents and volunteers from all of the community's clubs and societies.
6 Allow young people to leave with basic literacy/numeracy - 'core life skills' - to get apprenticeships, attend college - or any job that provides an element of training until at least age 16/18.
7 14+ ''Academies' should be geared towards an Intermediate Certificate at 15/16 and the Baccalaureate at 17/18. Have exams in the Winter months, with 'resits' in Spring or Summer. (If a kid is heading for University, they could be encourage to work hard, pass their Baccalaureate in February - and then work, volunteer or travel until the Autumn.)
8 Young People in the Academies should be encouraged, supported and 'rewarded' for working with younger children in the middle schools - before and after school hours.
9 In larger towns and cities, allow Middle Schools and Academies to specialise if they so wish - in craft, or music, or sport or science or language.
10 Its clear that our system has not stood the test of time. The world has changed, our communities have changed - but all we've done is tinkered around the edges.

Any thoughts out there?
Posted by: Angus Smith on 10:54am Wed 5 Mar 08
Comprehensive National Curriculum is boll8cks as all of us old enough know.
Firstly we need the Three R's with and added C, for DDDUUUHHH
Computers.
Then a set level 'Attained and useful common knowledge' every child by law and no exceptions.
Thereafter different directions catered for and monitored by Government as to a useful current need of the Nation's requirements.
Comprehensive fails every time due to everybody being different.
I am a failed product of Private Education,I was thrown out of Geography Class 'O' Grade because I would not stop asking the teacher why Mrs. Ramaphur's cooking pot styles were more important to my Life skills than possessing a full knowledge of every country and its Capital Pop. etc.This of course was taught to all pupils prior to the dreaded Great Comprehension
Posted by: Wen D, Inversnecky on 11:10am Wed 5 Mar 08


GORDON BROWN ACTS AGAINST HIS OWN COUNTRYMEN!

http://www.siol-nan-
gaidheal.com/phpBB3/
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=
5166

Hope you Fifers will take heed of this treachery at election time!
Posted by: Wen D, Inversnecky on 11:10am Wed 5 Mar 08


GORDON BROWN ACTS AGAINST HIS OWN COUNTRYMEN!

http://www.siol-nan-
gaidheal.com/phpBB3/
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=
5166

Hope you Fifers will take heed of this treachery at election time!
Posted by: Wen D, Inversnecky on 11:10am Wed 5 Mar 08


GORDON BROWN ACTS AGAINST HIS OWN COUNTRYMEN!

http://www.siol-nan-
gaidheal.com/phpBB3/
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=
5166

Hope you Fifers will take heed of this treachery at election time!
Posted by: Charles S Parnell, IRB on 11:12am Wed 5 Mar 08
£15m will be used to shore up the shortfall in the budget. All the promises need to be paid for, like not increasing council tax, robbing Peter to pay Paul, at some point the figures do not add up. Did anyone notice the lack of grit on the roads during the cold snap, another cut back ....
Posted by: Paul, Castle Douglas on 11:24am Wed 5 Mar 08
SPAGAN,

You make some very good points. With regards to univerisyt education, it is possible that pupils aged as young as 16 or 17 can actually go to university. This is far too young. Even 18 years old is too young in my opinion. I spent some time in Poland and the standard of education there is higher than over here, generally speaking. Kids start primary school at 6 years old and don't finish 'Liceum' (secondary school, so to speak) until they are 19 or 20. THEN they go to univeristy and do a FIVE year Masters degree. Very few people do 3 year degrees, they are not seen as being very useful (as everyone does Masters).
I know I'm straying from the main point of the article, but I think people should be aware that countries with much less funding in education (teachers earn on average £300 a month there) produce students who are very well educated.
Posted by: nurse bill, dumfries on 11:29am Wed 5 Mar 08
Normally I would be railing against the next government stiffing the policies of the previous one just as something to do but this one seemed a dead duck from the off as more of a millionare's vanity project to "give something back".Especially as he had taken so much from the kid's parents in the first place!
Not to mention the worker's lives he probably scarred along the way with his cheapo production methods.Plus all the non-union stuff,the tax avoidance etc.
I'm sure Tom Hunter is seen as up there with Andrew Carnegie in his benevolence but,I've heard that old Andy was a bit of a tyrant to work for so there may be more similarities than differences after all!
Posted by: spagan, heisker, scotland on 11:34am Wed 5 Mar 08
Hi Paul
Even here, more and more people are doing Masters degrees.
I think age has less to do with it than 'maturity' - and I do think our current 18 year olds have had fewer opportunities to lead initiatives than we had a generation before.
In terms of costs - in Poland - I think you'll find GPs are paid less than 100K - and politicians receive a package somewhat less than 3-500K!!!
I'd rather see Scotland compared with other countries in the world's top 10 economies.
Slainte Mhor.
Posted by: Burd Tina on 11:43am Wed 5 Mar 08
I've always felt that Schools of Ambition was an attempt to re-introduce selective education by the back door. My village primary school class was divided into two at eleven-plus and sent to different schools in different towns. Pretty soon those of us at high school stopped socialising with our former friends because we felt they were "only" at a secondary school and they felt we were hoity-toity.

subrosa, 10.21 am

I disagree with you about streaming. Children develop at different rates and their interests change a lot during their teenage years. Pupils need to be able to take the subjects they find interesting and are good at, whether these subjects are all academic, all vocational or some of each, and to change the direction of their studies if their perceived needs change. I don't see why both academic and vocational subjects can't be taught in the same school if it designed to promote this and properly staffed. I agrree that the building or buildings need to be big enough to cope with this.

So, congratulations to Fiona Hyslop and the Scottish government for getting rid of Schools of Ambition.

Posted by: Paul, Castle Douglas on 11:45am Wed 5 Mar 08
Sure Spagan, but I'm just comparing what I know. I'd love to see Scotland compared with top economies but my point is that I know many families from Czech and Poland who have come over here, and put their teenage kids into decent state schools and found that they are well above the rest of their class. They had already done a lot of the work in their home country. Pupils are given a larger workload in europe.
Countries like Poland educate their students to a very good level and they don't have the luxury of the govenment and people like Tom Hunter pouring money into their schools.
I agree that it all comes down to maturity rather than age, and you are right that 18 year olds get fewer responsibilites than previously. I work at a further education college, and some of the work my colleagues do is glorified babysitting (16 to 18 year olds). Sometimes it it impossibe to treat them as adults. Don't know whose fault it is. Parents, schools, their own?
Posted by: Graham, Glasgow on 11:45am Wed 5 Mar 08
LA, 1:17AM. YES LET ALL OUR CHILDREN LIVE IN SHARED MISERY. ONWARDS AN DOWNWORDS.
Posted by: Paul, Castle Douglas on 11:48am Wed 5 Mar 08
Sure Spagan, but I'm just comparing what I know. I'd love to see Scotland compared with top economies but my point is that I know many families from Czech and Poland who have come over here, and put their teenage kids into decent state schools and found that they are well above the rest of their class. They had already done a lot of the work in their home country. Pupils are given a larger workload in europe.
Countries like Poland educate their students to a very good level and they don't have the luxury of the govenment and people like Tom Hunter pouring money into their schools.
I agree that it all comes down to maturity rather than age, and you are right that 18 year olds get fewer responsibilites than previously. I work at a further education college, and some of the work my colleagues do is glorified babysitting (16 to 18 year olds). Sometimes it it impossibe to treat them as adults. Don't know whose fault it is. Parents, schools, their own?
Posted by: spagan, heisker, scotland on 12:00pm Wed 5 Mar 08
I'm guessing that you are also referring to educationally aspirational families from Cz and Po? Many of the children whose parents are coming to take up manual unskilled jobs here have kids who are much less able than those you're picturing.
We also do have some fantatsically able and educated young people at out state schools - just not enough of them.
Posted by: Angus Smith on 12:04pm Wed 5 Mar 08
Hey Graham Boy,how can you head downwards when your arse is rested upon the cancerous bedrock of 50 Labour years?
Posted by: Paul, Castle Douglas on 12:10pm Wed 5 Mar 08
spagan wrote:
I'm guessing that you are also referring to educationally aspirational families from Cz and Po? Many of the children whose parents are coming to take up manual unskilled jobs here have kids who are much less able than those you're picturing. We also do have some fantatsically able and educated young people at out state schools - just not enough of them.
Yeah. I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that Poland and Czech are bursting at the seams with super-kids. :)
I'm just saying that generally their education seems to be better than ours.
I agree, we need to get more out of pupils. Do you think harder tasks and more homework a step in the right direction?
I think too many schools make life easy for pupils, just to keep them happy and make them feel like they are performing well.
There won't be sweeping reforms but I hope that, bit-by-bit, the SNP can change the education system here. I enjoyed my schooling and can't really complain but I wasn't in a bad school.
Posted by: Mist, Glasgow on 12:27pm Wed 5 Mar 08
stonehaven wrote:
Mist @ 8:59am. I have never heard of Glow but just looked it up on the internet. Tell us more about it and the money being invested.
£40 million has been spent on Glow so far in order to create a intranet for Scottish schools. Much of the focus has been on the 'fact' that teachers will save time as they'll have their diaries etc online and will be able to share resources more effectively. In my experience many teachers are technophobes who don't like sharing - the existing school intranets haven't been used to share resources effectivel