Comments on: A Brief History of Education Part 2: The 1944 Education Act http://oldandrew.edublogs.org/2006/11/26/a-brief-history-of-education-part-2-the-1944-education-act/ A Blog About Teaching in Tough Schools in the UK Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:05:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: News is Good http://oldandrew.edublogs.org/2006/11/26/a-brief-history-of-education-part-2-the-1944-education-act/#comment-363 News is Good Mon, 27 Nov 2006 15:36:14 +0000 http://oldandrew.edublogs.org/2006/11/26/a-brief-history-of-education-part-2-the-1944-education-act/#comment-363 As opposed to those who can't work? And how will you tell the difference? As opposed to those who can’t work? And how will you tell the difference?

]]> By: lilyofthefield http://oldandrew.edublogs.org/2006/11/26/a-brief-history-of-education-part-2-the-1944-education-act/#comment-362 lilyofthefield Mon, 27 Nov 2006 08:38:40 +0000 http://oldandrew.edublogs.org/2006/11/26/a-brief-history-of-education-part-2-the-1944-education-act/#comment-362 You could start with removing benefits for those who won't work. You could start with removing benefits for those who won’t work.

]]> By: News is Good http://oldandrew.edublogs.org/2006/11/26/a-brief-history-of-education-part-2-the-1944-education-act/#comment-361 News is Good Sun, 26 Nov 2006 18:14:35 +0000 http://oldandrew.edublogs.org/2006/11/26/a-brief-history-of-education-part-2-the-1944-education-act/#comment-361 Would you not say that, in a sense, the major ideas in contemporary education are within-classroom selection? By this, I mean that an individual teacher has to serve different needs within one room, rather than students being split up into different institutions by (tricky to assess) scholastic merit. Differentiation, and all that jazz, is nicer because it is arguing that student needs are the wellspring of their treatment, rather than their performance on tests - so it's for their own good. Also, it allows a student to be within an environment in which they can succeed - rather than stuck in a school which has certain expectations of the students, meaning that those who work to become high-flyers are stuck, a student can pull their finger out and get the resources they need to do well. On the down side, this system is a lot of work for the teacher. It also covers up the seemingly indisputable fact that the main predictor of a student's success is their social background. This means that a good school is a middle-class one, and a poor school a working-class one. It is not to each student according to their needs, as all schools are not equal. So we are back to a form of educational inequality. The only escape route that I can see is to foster a culture in which learning and education are important, so that as many children as possible desire it and work hard. Then they will do well, there will be no peer pressure to skive, and we will have a 'learning community' in the true sense of the term. As long as vast swathes of the population are allowed to fail, expected to fail, and see no reason not to fail, then we will have people that do not want to learn messing around in schools which cannot provide teaching. There is always going to be selection going on, whether purposefully or accidentally, when there are widely differing ideas about the worth of education amongst different social classes, and no amount of Must Could Should will change that. Would you not say that, in a sense, the major ideas in contemporary education are within-classroom selection? By this, I mean that an individual teacher has to serve different needs within one room, rather than students being split up into different institutions by (tricky to assess) scholastic merit. Differentiation, and all that jazz, is nicer because it is arguing that student needs are the wellspring of their treatment, rather than their performance on tests - so it’s for their own good. Also, it allows a student to be within an environment in which they can succeed - rather than stuck in a school which has certain expectations of the students, meaning that those who work to become high-flyers are stuck, a student can pull their finger out and get the resources they need to do well.

On the down side, this system is a lot of work for the teacher. It also covers up the seemingly indisputable fact that the main predictor of a student’s success is their social background. This means that a good school is a middle-class one, and a poor school a working-class one. It is not to each student according to their needs, as all schools are not equal. So we are back to a form of educational inequality.

The only escape route that I can see is to foster a culture in which learning and education are important, so that as many children as possible desire it and work hard. Then they will do well, there will be no peer pressure to skive, and we will have a ‘learning community’ in the true sense of the term. As long as vast swathes of the population are allowed to fail, expected to fail, and see no reason not to fail, then we will have people that do not want to learn messing around in schools which cannot provide teaching. There is always going to be selection going on, whether purposefully or accidentally, when there are widely differing ideas about the worth of education amongst different social classes, and no amount of Must Could Should will change that.

]]>