A Question: What Is Going To Happen To Our Knowledge-based Foundations?
Another week of GCSEs results, another week of conversation surrounding league tables, the ‘dumbing down’ of Key Stage 3s, and widespread strategies and promised for education review and reform. The Blue Party have already stated a wish to enhance league tables in order to give greater weighting to better grades and more ‘worthwhile subjects. With indications to under achievement in this series of blogs, the news could not be more worrying. Recently our society again have heard our society denounced as ‘broken’ from the opposition bench, with young culture being slammed. Contrariwise peers are now told that young people who study ‘worthless’ subjects may have their results devalued when considering the good work of other colleges (some people resort to hiring a tutor to get by). I will return to the patronizing position toward modern day students in a later blog, with criticism on the inevitable reaction to continuing success.
The focus this week is on rubbish institutes. This again is a very vague definition, but is regularly thrown into journalistic pieces, especially at this time of year. A school which is deemed to be ‘underachieving’ must be considered objectively, peers wouldn’t believe a ‘mild day’ to be in anyway the same when reported in the weather forecast in the UK and Australia, yet peers consider failing schools to be as bad as each other regardless of location and resources. I talked to private tutor and they said that in recent times we have seen a growth of ‘specialist colleges’ whether they are in Science or Performing Arts etc.
The tutor went on to say that these institutes therefore must have different targets to reach, but on an overall scale, these strong departments may mask weaker areas within the college. The league tables do not reflect the pupils and environs which the institute has to adapt to. Inner city colleges traditionally have to deal with young people who are regularly exposed to gang culture, drug abuse and binge drinking, as well as many kids who are not as bright as some in more affluent areas. kids may also affect their progress. This links in well with my previous blog on failing students who are less able.
In many cases, the challenge of helping these less able kids to reach their potential is far more taxing for an educator than simply feeding a bright students’ hunger for understanding. I very much doubt that even the complex ‘progress tables’ for schools (only behind Duckworth-Lewis and the scoring for the Heptathlon in complexity) includes this when determining the rankings. Consequently many institutes and, in reality, many educators are tarred with the reputation of being poor.
This leads to an Ouroboros situation, where in colleges desperate for enthusiastic, committed teachers, you have teachers who are apathetic, and feel undervalued in their jobs. On a level which many individuals could empathize with, consider the disappointment many would experience when someone fails to appreciate the effort put into a present or something similar. If one scales this emotional response when bearing in mind that people move houses to avoid your teaching, this is quite a body blow for someone in a profession which requires commitment and passion in the face of many difficulties within the classroom, not to mention that private tutors are becoming more popular.