There has been a lot of talk this week about 29% ! Not because 29 is particular interesting although it is a prime number, A Lucas number, and there are 29 days in February in a leap year. It is, for the mathematicians among you, also a a Pell prime a tetranacci number and an Eisenstein prime.
The
talk wasn't even because of the stereotypes loved by comedians, `Lot 29'
was to auctions what `PC 49' was to policemen. `Lot 29' was likely to be
a hideously ugly vase, a chair on the point of falling to pieces, a wireless
that only crackled, or some other object that no one in their right mind
would want to buy. And it wasn't even because 29 is the highest possible
hand in a game of cribbage. No! The talk of 29 was because that is the
percentage A-C at GCSE grades my school got last year!
It is interesting
because it has put my school on the 'National Challenge ' list. Any school
below 30% goes on this list and they get a load of cash to try and improve.
If they don't improve by 2011 ( I think the meeting was at the end of a very
long day I only had half my brain there the other half was still on the
copious amount I have to write for reports and the fight my year 9 had in
the last period ) they face closure or being turned into an academy.
My school thought 'great we are closing anyway but now the govenment is going to give us a load of cash and we can make sure we go out with a bang.' It was particulary interesting seeing the figures the govenment proposed. They are spending about £4m on the challenge with more than half of it towards the closure or change to academies - which kind of presumes failure doesn't it ? !
The implications of this "national challenge" do not seem very postive at all . For my school it doesn't matter, it was the first time we had dipped below the 30% and at 29% we are in the not so pants bracket but it got me thinking how would this be for other schools? According to our Head there are six hundred and thirty-eight schools on this list, surely most will be from the poorest and most disadvantaged areas of the country? What good is it going to do the children in those schools to be set statistical "targets" in terms of examination results? From what I have seen and heard those targets are unrealistic in both their extent and timescale. This is in a round about way acknowledged in the way the money has been allocated.
How does a child and the parents of that child feel when their school is threatened with closure or replacement by academies if they fail to achieve them?
This
kind of thing can only serve to further undermine teachers and "named-and-shamed" schools will surely be destabilised. Which can only
have the effect of denigrating and demoralising their pupils? It all
seems to be part of what can only be described as a very cynical political game. If schools are seen as failing then the government stands
more of a chance of convincing parents and local communities that the idea
of private-sector control of schools is a good idea.
My form were
saying to me yesterday they are at the worst school their parents read about
it in the paper. I said to them that they are at a school where their
teachers care about them they achieve a lot to be proud of and not everything
in the paper is true. I also started a discussion on subjective reasoning and
how everyone has a different definition of what is bad. Quite a few of my
children said 'well I like it here stop putting it down', which I thought was
good , and talked about the production they are doing at the end of term, how
we achieved in a recent maths challenge etc.
Lets go back to the private sector control of schools, surely this is dangerous? It give me the collywobbles when I think of people with a specific agenda not necessarily for the good of society getting involved in how children are educated. For example I have had a personal horror of fundamentalist Christians or Muslims not letting children learn about Darwin , ever since I spoke to a teacher who received an essay on genetics where the only source of research was the Koran. (In passing, 29 is also the number of suras in the Qur'an that begin with muqatta'at) I met an educated man the other day who blithly refered to evolution as a nineteenth century theory. It scares me that to some people a rejection of 'Darwinism' is becoming associated with some kind of moral superiority .
I think blurring the boundaries
between Science and theology can only lead to some kind of awful pseudoscience unsupported by empirical evidence which is just plain dodgy .
As a maths and science teacher , I have a passion for science and
I remember being struck by the profound explanatory power of Darwin when I
was at school. Thinking about it, without a proper understanding of Darwin's
theories you could never understand anthropology , palaeontology, zoology ,
physics the list goes on . So if is not taught ipso facto it could only lead
to a lack of specialists in those fields in the future which would most
likely hinder the creation of a competitive economy.
Hmmm went off on a tangent then, but how we educate our children is so important it bothers me greatly the way education is being handled by our present govenment. Not that I know that much about it as a NQT I am still learning, and unfortunately don't have the time to read enough. AS I am not a parent I have not really thought about govenment education policies, well ever really (although I used to be very active on the environmental side) until I started the teaching malarky,
Well I have hit politics and religion in this blog often considered taboo , thought it only right as the last blog discussed sex ! I would be pleased to hear any comments if I still have any readers left ....
I always feel I don't know enough !


























