UPDATE: Government inspectors sent to Bournemouth council after shocking Ofsted report on borough's schools

Bournemouth Echo: Shocking report shows half of Bournemouth's secondary pupils not getting 'good' education Shocking report shows half of Bournemouth's secondary pupils not getting 'good' education

GOVERNMENT inspectors have been sent in to Bournemouth council to find out why so few of its schools are good.

Representatives of Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Schools have been in town all week after the borough was ranked near the bottom of tables produced by inspection body Ofsted.

They will report back to the Chief Inspector of Schools Sir Michael Wilshaw and the results will be published in January.

The shocking tables revealed nearly half of secondary pupils in Bournemouth attend schools that are not providing a good education.

Ofsted's annual report lists authorities according to the percentage of pupils attending schools ranked good or outstanding by inspectors.

Bournemouth is 134th out of 151 for secondary pupils at just 53 per cent and 114th for primary pupils with 72 per cent.

The figures, which cover 2012/13, mean thousands of children in the borough are being educated in schools graded “requires improvement” or “inadequate.”

The national average is 74 per cent and 78 per cent respectively.

Ofsted's Acting Regional Director, Bradly Simmons, told the Daily Echo: “We are really concerned about the low proportion for both primary and secondary schools that are good at the moment.

“I sent members of HMI into Bournemouth to look at the support that the local authority gives to its schools.”

“Bournemouth is one of the lowest ranked authorities nationally for the proportion of pupils attending schools that were not judged good or outstanding at their last inspection” said the report.

“Consequently, in this authority too many pupils face the possibility of going through the whole of their primary and secondary school education in schools that are not providing at least a good education.”

Schools in Dorset and Poole are at the other end of the scale with Dorset at 86 and 89 per cent and Poole at 86 and 88 per cent.

But Dorset County Council is being urged to close the gap between affluent and poorer pupils.

The top secondary school areas in the country include Bath, Camden and Kensington and Chelsea with the Isle of Wight at the bottom of the table.

For primary schools, Darlington has the best figures with Wolverhampton at the bottom.

Jane Portman, Executive Director, Adults & Children at Bournemouth council said: “Bournemouth schools continue to improve year on year and we currently have 77 per cent of primary pupils attending good or outstanding schools.

“Our standards also continue to rise and our end of Key Stage 2 results this year are the best results achieved in Bournemouth. GCSE results in 2013 are above the national average and the best achieved in Bournemouth.

“These significant improvements are due to the hard work and dedication of our headteachers and governors working closely with parents to ensure all Bournemouth's children and young people get the best possible start in life.”

Councillor Nicola Greene, cabinet member for Education & Children services, said:

“We are working with Ofsted to provide them with up to date information on the improvements made to schools in Bournemouth. We are also discussing with inspectors our role in relation to academies as these schools are independent of local authority.

“This is part of Ofsted’s national programme of inspection across local authorities. The inspection is underway and their report will be available in due course.”

Comments (40)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:30pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Thriving Grey says...

And they want a pay rise!
And they want a pay rise! Thriving Grey

1:49pm Wed 11 Dec 13

BmthNewshound says...

Hardly a surprise. Education isn't a priority for Beesley Borough Council, more interested in investing £3.2m in a surf reef, £2m on speculative property development at Horseshoe Common, and £10m on the Imax than investing in the towns real future..... its children.
.
Recent claims that thousands of new jobs could be created in the town will come to nothing if the town doesn't have a well educated population and good schools to attract skilled workers.
Hardly a surprise. Education isn't a priority for Beesley Borough Council, more interested in investing £3.2m in a surf reef, £2m on speculative property development at Horseshoe Common, and £10m on the Imax than investing in the towns real future..... its children. . Recent claims that thousands of new jobs could be created in the town will come to nothing if the town doesn't have a well educated population and good schools to attract skilled workers. BmthNewshound

1:51pm Wed 11 Dec 13

onetimeapathetic says...

Thriving Grey you are an imbecile!
Thriving Grey you are an imbecile! onetimeapathetic

2:34pm Wed 11 Dec 13

muscliffman says...

Surprised - not! This only confirms what a lot of local employers could have told everyone for many years - indeed some tried!. There are some very serious attitude, educational and literacy problems in our local schools - and they start with the teaching staff, not the students.

Incredibly at the moment these failing teachers are more interested in militantly protecting their own already generous terms and conditions than educating our kids - so when is the next strike?
Surprised - not! This only confirms what a lot of local employers could have told everyone for many years - indeed some tried!. There are some very serious attitude, educational and literacy problems in our local schools - and they start with the teaching staff, not the students. Incredibly at the moment these failing teachers are more interested in militantly protecting their own already generous terms and conditions than educating our kids - so when is the next strike? muscliffman

2:58pm Wed 11 Dec 13

O'Reilly says...

I can't say I'm surprised since the insidious Common Purpose have got their tentacles into the Education Establishment.
Frankfurt School - Recommendations:
3. The teaching of Sex and Homosexuality to children
4.The undermining of schools and teacher's authority.
Teachers are now 'facilitators' not teachers under the Values Clarification BS....
I can't say I'm surprised since the insidious Common Purpose have got their tentacles into the Education Establishment. Frankfurt School - Recommendations: 3. The teaching of Sex and Homosexuality to children 4.The undermining of schools and teacher's authority. Teachers are now 'facilitators' not teachers under the Values Clarification BS.... O'Reilly

3:10pm Wed 11 Dec 13

fedupwithjobsworths says...

It would be interesting to know how Bournemouth’s LEA controlled schools compare to those under independent control. I suspect our LEA is infested with politically correct negative IQ do-gooders who are destroying the future of countless children.
It would be interesting to know how Bournemouth’s LEA controlled schools compare to those under independent control. I suspect our LEA is infested with politically correct negative IQ do-gooders who are destroying the future of countless children. fedupwithjobsworths

3:38pm Wed 11 Dec 13

BmthNewshound says...

Councillor Nicola Greene, deputy council leader and cabinet member for Education (what does she do to earn her allowances ?) and Jane Portman should both resign immediately.
.
Parents in Bournemouth should all be bombarding their councillors demanding to know what Beesley & Greene are going to do to resolve this pitiful situation.
.
The Councils new strapline is Building a better Bournemouth ...... that's a joke.
Councillor Nicola Greene, deputy council leader and cabinet member for Education (what does she do to earn her allowances ?) and Jane Portman should both resign immediately. . Parents in Bournemouth should all be bombarding their councillors demanding to know what Beesley & Greene are going to do to resolve this pitiful situation. . The Councils new strapline is Building a better Bournemouth ...... that's a joke. BmthNewshound

3:49pm Wed 11 Dec 13

woby_tide says...

"“Our standards also continue to rise and our end of Key Stage 2 results this year are the best results achieved in Bournemouth. GCSE results in 2013 are above the national average and the best achieved in Bournemouth. "

The GCSE results achieved in Bournemouth are the best in Bournemouth.....well I never.....

First place in a single horse race...fantastic work
"“Our standards also continue to rise and our end of Key Stage 2 results this year are the best results achieved in Bournemouth. GCSE results in 2013 are above the national average and the best achieved in Bournemouth. " The GCSE results achieved in Bournemouth are the best in Bournemouth.....well I never..... First place in a single horse race...fantastic work woby_tide

4:01pm Wed 11 Dec 13

speedy231278 says...

Our office often used to have students coming in for a placement while they did their university courses. These were kids with A-levels, part way through a degree course and the like, who mostly couldn't spell, had no grasp of basic grammar, couldn't string a coherent sentence together, and were quite frankly thick as two short planks. Yet, they're supposed to be the better ones!
Our office often used to have students coming in for a placement while they did their university courses. These were kids with A-levels, part way through a degree course and the like, who mostly couldn't spell, had no grasp of basic grammar, couldn't string a coherent sentence together, and were quite frankly thick as two short planks. Yet, they're supposed to be the better ones! speedy231278

4:06pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Bohochic72 says...

muscliffman wrote:
Surprised - not! This only confirms what a lot of local employers could have told everyone for many years - indeed some tried!. There are some very serious attitude, educational and literacy problems in our local schools - and they start with the teaching staff, not the students.

Incredibly at the moment these failing teachers are more interested in militantly protecting their own already generous terms and conditions than educating our kids - so when is the next strike?
The attitude problem comes from the parents. Children spend a quarter of their lives in school; who's responsible for the rest? You only have to visit your local supermarket to see the example they're being set to see why there are problems in schools.
I agree that there are problems with teaching standards and policy in our schools, such as teaching assistants and unqualified teachers, but to fall into the trap of "easy job" (generous terms and conditions) is a fallacy as outdated as women wanting the vote.
Muscliffman, have you ever tried teaching?
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: Surprised - not! This only confirms what a lot of local employers could have told everyone for many years - indeed some tried!. There are some very serious attitude, educational and literacy problems in our local schools - and they start with the teaching staff, not the students. Incredibly at the moment these failing teachers are more interested in militantly protecting their own already generous terms and conditions than educating our kids - so when is the next strike?[/p][/quote]The attitude problem comes from the parents. Children spend a quarter of their lives in school; who's responsible for the rest? You only have to visit your local supermarket to see the example they're being set to see why there are problems in schools. I agree that there are problems with teaching standards and policy in our schools, such as teaching assistants and unqualified teachers, but to fall into the trap of "easy job" (generous terms and conditions) is a fallacy as outdated as women wanting the vote. Muscliffman, have you ever tried teaching? Bohochic72

4:38pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Bob49 says...

speedy231278 wrote:
Our office often used to have students coming in for a placement while they did their university courses. These were kids with A-levels, part way through a degree course and the like, who mostly couldn't spell, had no grasp of basic grammar, couldn't string a coherent sentence together, and were quite frankly thick as two short planks. Yet, they're supposed to be the better ones!
Too true I'm afraid. The expression from some at the local uni is 'generation thick'. Sadly most of this generation are not aware of their inabilities but actually believe they are brighter than previous generations.

I don't believe it is simply down to teaching that there is this huge deficit in practical skills and common sense. Many parents seem to imagine that doing virtually every thing for them is the best thing - or simply makes for an easier life.

Sadly this has given us a generation with little sense of self reliance or even common sense. Theirs is a world of high expectation and minimal responsibility. Parents who spend much of their time shielding their offspring from failure are parents who are producing a generation who will be unable to cope with failure later in life.

it is no coincidence that there are such high numbers of this generation who are unemployed. The harsh fact is they are unemployable.

But rather than try to understand why that is the finger can conveniently be pointed at schools - whilst those in question are given yet another iPod etc and told it is all the fault of someone else.
[quote][p][bold]speedy231278[/bold] wrote: Our office often used to have students coming in for a placement while they did their university courses. These were kids with A-levels, part way through a degree course and the like, who mostly couldn't spell, had no grasp of basic grammar, couldn't string a coherent sentence together, and were quite frankly thick as two short planks. Yet, they're supposed to be the better ones![/p][/quote]Too true I'm afraid. The expression from some at the local uni is 'generation thick'. Sadly most of this generation are not aware of their inabilities but actually believe they are brighter than previous generations. I don't believe it is simply down to teaching that there is this huge deficit in practical skills and common sense. Many parents seem to imagine that doing virtually every thing for them is the best thing - or simply makes for an easier life. Sadly this has given us a generation with little sense of self reliance or even common sense. Theirs is a world of high expectation and minimal responsibility. Parents who spend much of their time shielding their offspring from failure are parents who are producing a generation who will be unable to cope with failure later in life. it is no coincidence that there are such high numbers of this generation who are unemployed. The harsh fact is they are unemployable. But rather than try to understand why that is the finger can conveniently be pointed at schools - whilst those in question are given yet another iPod etc and told it is all the fault of someone else. Bob49

4:59pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Wintonian says...

fedupwithjobsworths wrote:
It would be interesting to know how Bournemouth’s LEA controlled schools compare to those under independent control. I suspect our LEA is infested with politically correct negative IQ do-gooders who are destroying the future of countless children.
Since all Bournemouth's secondary schools are now Academies, that's a very difficult question to answer because the LEA has *no* secondary schools under its direct control.
[quote][p][bold]fedupwithjobsworths[/bold] wrote: It would be interesting to know how Bournemouth’s LEA controlled schools compare to those under independent control. I suspect our LEA is infested with politically correct negative IQ do-gooders who are destroying the future of countless children.[/p][/quote]Since all Bournemouth's secondary schools are now Academies, that's a very difficult question to answer because the LEA has *no* secondary schools under its direct control. Wintonian

5:06pm Wed 11 Dec 13

contric says...

i suggest jane portman you stop patting yourself on the back get your head out of your backside and stop quoting figures and percentages that mean nothing to parents and get in the real world by realising 134th out of 151 is simply no good for once put the kids 1st
i suggest jane portman you stop patting yourself on the back get your head out of your backside and stop quoting figures and percentages that mean nothing to parents and get in the real world by realising 134th out of 151 is simply no good for once put the kids 1st contric

5:22pm Wed 11 Dec 13

John T says...

woby_tide wrote:
"“Our standards also continue to rise and our end of Key Stage 2 results this year are the best results achieved in Bournemouth. GCSE results in 2013 are above the national average and the best achieved in Bournemouth. "

The GCSE results achieved in Bournemouth are the best in Bournemouth.....well I never.....

First place in a single horse race...fantastic work
Did Jane Portman, whose quote is referred to above, learn her brilliant English skills at one of Bournemouth's Key Stage 2 Schools or at a Language School teaching English as a Foreign Language?!
[quote][p][bold]woby_tide[/bold] wrote: "“Our standards also continue to rise and our end of Key Stage 2 results this year are the best results achieved in Bournemouth. GCSE results in 2013 are above the national average and the best achieved in Bournemouth. " The GCSE results achieved in Bournemouth are the best in Bournemouth.....well I never..... First place in a single horse race...fantastic work[/p][/quote]Did Jane Portman, whose quote is referred to above, learn her brilliant English skills at one of Bournemouth's Key Stage 2 Schools or at a Language School teaching English as a Foreign Language?! John T

5:42pm Wed 11 Dec 13

muscliffman says...

Bohochic72 wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
Surprised - not! This only confirms what a lot of local employers could have told everyone for many years - indeed some tried!. There are some very serious attitude, educational and literacy problems in our local schools - and they start with the teaching staff, not the students.

Incredibly at the moment these failing teachers are more interested in militantly protecting their own already generous terms and conditions than educating our kids - so when is the next strike?
The attitude problem comes from the parents. Children spend a quarter of their lives in school; who's responsible for the rest? You only have to visit your local supermarket to see the example they're being set to see why there are problems in schools.
I agree that there are problems with teaching standards and policy in our schools, such as teaching assistants and unqualified teachers, but to fall into the trap of "easy job" (generous terms and conditions) is a fallacy as outdated as women wanting the vote.
Muscliffman, have you ever tried teaching?
I completely accept your point about parenting, it forms a part of the greater argument that we have allowed standards of upbringing to spiral downwards in general - both inside and outside of the schools.

I am sure teaching is not easy, but for whatever reason/s it clearly used to be far more effective than it is today. I have been involved in teaching outside of the school environment, most recently basic English language to young employees with high grade exam passes but who were borderline illiterate. It is a great frustration for employers when youngsters arrive for a new job with education certificates suggesting them to be quite brilliant when it soon becomes evident that they are (to quote another post) as 'thick as two short planks'.

Maybe teaching is not an easy job (what is - AND has 13+ weeks paid holiday?) but recent actions by the teachers in supporting their particularly militant Unions in industrial action which combined politics with self interest has not won them any friends.
[quote][p][bold]Bohochic72[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: Surprised - not! This only confirms what a lot of local employers could have told everyone for many years - indeed some tried!. There are some very serious attitude, educational and literacy problems in our local schools - and they start with the teaching staff, not the students. Incredibly at the moment these failing teachers are more interested in militantly protecting their own already generous terms and conditions than educating our kids - so when is the next strike?[/p][/quote]The attitude problem comes from the parents. Children spend a quarter of their lives in school; who's responsible for the rest? You only have to visit your local supermarket to see the example they're being set to see why there are problems in schools. I agree that there are problems with teaching standards and policy in our schools, such as teaching assistants and unqualified teachers, but to fall into the trap of "easy job" (generous terms and conditions) is a fallacy as outdated as women wanting the vote. Muscliffman, have you ever tried teaching?[/p][/quote]I completely accept your point about parenting, it forms a part of the greater argument that we have allowed standards of upbringing to spiral downwards in general - both inside and outside of the schools. I am sure teaching is not easy, but for whatever reason/s it clearly used to be far more effective than it is today. I have been involved in teaching outside of the school environment, most recently basic English language to young employees with high grade exam passes but who were borderline illiterate. It is a great frustration for employers when youngsters arrive for a new job with education certificates suggesting them to be quite brilliant when it soon becomes evident that they are (to quote another post) as 'thick as two short planks'. Maybe teaching is not an easy job (what is - AND has 13+ weeks paid holiday?) but recent actions by the teachers in supporting their particularly militant Unions in industrial action which combined politics with self interest has not won them any friends. muscliffman

5:54pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Wintonian says...

The problem is, the Local Authority has lost control of its secondaries as they are all now Academies, accountable to Whitehall.

Now you can have your own opinions of Bournemouth Borough Council, but I hope everyone realises that it means there is no local democratic accountability for secondary schools and it will happen more and more at primary level.

It is easy for the government to criticise the Local Authority when its schools are collectively below average, and easy for them to take the credit when the schools are above average.

But a few years down the line, when the current primary school population crisis hits the secondary schools, there will be nothing the Local Authority can legally do to influence the way the schools tackle the issue. The one thing a Local Authority can do is view the overall picture, but schools, naturally, especially with league-table pressure, will only ever look at their own circumstances.

Bournemouth Borough Council needs no help with negative PR with some of the things it gets up to, but this story really stinks of something far more sinister coming from national government level.
The problem is, the Local Authority has lost control of its secondaries as they are all now Academies, accountable to Whitehall. Now you can have your own opinions of Bournemouth Borough Council, but I hope everyone realises that it means there is no local democratic accountability for secondary schools and it will happen more and more at primary level. It is easy for the government to criticise the Local Authority when its schools are collectively below average, and easy for them to take the credit when the schools are above average. But a few years down the line, when the current primary school population crisis hits the secondary schools, there will be nothing the Local Authority can legally do to influence the way the schools tackle the issue. The one thing a Local Authority can do is view the overall picture, but schools, naturally, especially with league-table pressure, will only ever look at their own circumstances. Bournemouth Borough Council needs no help with negative PR with some of the things it gets up to, but this story really stinks of something far more sinister coming from national government level. Wintonian

6:45pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Townee says...

It's about time the government sent inspector into the town hall to find out why all our money has gone on white elephant schemes and not on things that benefit all the residents not just a few.
It's about time the government sent inspector into the town hall to find out why all our money has gone on white elephant schemes and not on things that benefit all the residents not just a few. Townee

8:05pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Teddy 1 says...

Would be good if they popped over tne boundary to Poole and did some inpections there...they would soon find issues in many of the schools and within the council schools teams too. My vote is they check out the first and middle schools in Broadstone schools first.
Would be good if they popped over tne boundary to Poole and did some inpections there...they would soon find issues in many of the schools and within the council schools teams too. My vote is they check out the first and middle schools in Broadstone schools first. Teddy 1

8:49pm Wed 11 Dec 13

ashleycross says...

There are lies, d.....d lies and statistics. Everywhere with grammar schools get these daft reports because most of the schools don't have the grammar kids attending them so they don't get the results you have to get to keep ofsted happy. No adjustment is made for the grammars being in the school area because ofsted is run by people who don't approve of grammars and couldn't do the maths to make the adjustment anyway.
There are lies, d.....d lies and statistics. Everywhere with grammar schools get these daft reports because most of the schools don't have the grammar kids attending them so they don't get the results you have to get to keep ofsted happy. No adjustment is made for the grammars being in the school area because ofsted is run by people who don't approve of grammars and couldn't do the maths to make the adjustment anyway. ashleycross

9:32pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Twisted choir starter says...

Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there....
Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there.... Twisted choir starter

9:58pm Wed 11 Dec 13

muscliffman says...

Twisted choir starter wrote:
Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there....
Confusing words - "The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there...."

Why the reference to class? A big strength of Grammar Schools is that the pupils are not selected by class or the social profile of the immediate catchment area, students qualify for entry based solely upon proven ability - irrespective of 'class' or background.

Genuine but competitive equality for the academically gifted.
[quote][p][bold]Twisted choir starter[/bold] wrote: Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there....[/p][/quote]Confusing words - "The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there...." Why the reference to class? A big strength of Grammar Schools is that the pupils are not selected by class or the social profile of the immediate catchment area, students qualify for entry based solely upon proven ability - irrespective of 'class' or background. Genuine but competitive equality for the academically gifted. muscliffman

10:38pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Yankee1 says...

Never mind. The Grammar Schools are sound. The rest can have Bournemouth Collegiate..........
.and there is always the Surf Reef.
Never mind. The Grammar Schools are sound. The rest can have Bournemouth Collegiate.......... .and there is always the Surf Reef. Yankee1

11:11pm Wed 11 Dec 13

The Seasider says...

Education, Education, Education.....
The underlying and often neglected issues are:
1. OFSTED REPORTS. Do you trust their assessments of schools? Is it right to carve up all schools in to just four categories of achievement? How blunt a tool it is to say that a whole school; its teachers, pupils, heads and governors are collectively either ‘outstanding’, ‘good’, ‘requires improvement’ or ‘inadequate’. OFSTED should assess the schools every few years and write a balanced review, but surely it needs to get away from labeling schools with such provocative, insensitive and demoralising one word verdicts.

I am not in favour of white wash reports claiming everything is fine, but I seriously question the good, versus the harm, that the current reports cause. Morale must hit rock bottom for any school not judged favorably and once a harsh assessment has been given, eg. ‘inadequate and requires special measures’, then surely that must make it even more difficult to turn the school around? I wonder if OFSTED in its efforts to improve education hasn’t gone overboard with its harsh bully-boy mentality, sending in their troops to give some schools a good kicking every now and again. Little wonder a head-teacher committed suicide earlier this year when she feared her ‘outstanding’ school was due to be downgraded to ‘good’. Little wonder teachers leave the profession in droves because of the constant assessments and that few will step up to be head teachers when a whole career can be destroyed by a 2 day assessment from an OFSTED inspector.

2. From “INADEQUATE” to “OUTSTANDING” in 16 months? Yes, it is possible. This morning, on Radio 4, I heard a head-teacher explained that her (primary) school was OFSTED inspected and judged to be ‘inadequate requiring special measures’. Just 16 months later it was re-inspected and found to be ‘outstanding’. Surely this calls in to question the criteria on which such harsh judgments are made in the first place.

3. BUREAUCRACY. “A good steady year’s work.” Those 5 words are my entire school report, summing up a whole year of study! This was the 1980’s though! Imagine that now?! Now, every pupil has target grade expectation scores in every subject they study. Pupils are constantly tested and examined to the point of utter disillusionment of both the pupils, and teachers. The bureaucracy is mind-boggling. Every child’s journey through our current education system is a bewildering journey through the Kafkaesque nightmare of ‘learning objectives’, ‘assessment targets’, ‘achievement goals’ and so it goes on. Perhaps this mindless and time-consuming nonsense needs to be ditched in favour of a giving schools a free choice in how to teach the curriculum, with just one end of year test to work towards.

Let the teachers teach, and try to encourage some pleasure back in to learning. Is it not time to take the frustration and tedium out of the system, and so improve morale and performance all round? Don’t blame the kids. They are just trying their best to jump through the hoops that an adult world has placed for them. Whilst on the subject of blame....

4. THE BLAME GAME. Apart from what has already been mentioned in previous posts, perhaps it is time to focus some attention on role of the PARENTS. The academic success of your child is a combination of effort, encouragement and enthusiasm on the part of: the school and teachers (30%), the pupil’s natural academic ability (30%) and parental/ home support (40%). If the parent/s have a ‘can’t be bothered’ attitude to education, don’t expect miracles from your child or any school they go to. You have set the standards. It is your sloppy attitude which is the bar with which your child will try to aspire to.

As the large banner on Bart Simpson’s school once said: “Parents Evening Tonight: Let’s share the blame.”
Education, Education, Education..... The underlying and often neglected issues are: 1. OFSTED REPORTS. Do you trust their assessments of schools? Is it right to carve up all schools in to just four categories of achievement? How blunt a tool it is to say that a whole school; its teachers, pupils, heads and governors are collectively either ‘outstanding’, ‘good’, ‘requires improvement’ or ‘inadequate’. OFSTED should assess the schools every few years and write a balanced review, but surely it needs to get away from labeling schools with such provocative, insensitive and demoralising one word verdicts. I am not in favour of white wash reports claiming everything is fine, but I seriously question the good, versus the harm, that the current reports cause. Morale must hit rock bottom for any school not judged favorably and once a harsh assessment has been given, eg. ‘inadequate and requires special measures’, then surely that must make it even more difficult to turn the school around? I wonder if OFSTED in its efforts to improve education hasn’t gone overboard with its harsh bully-boy mentality, sending in their troops to give some schools a good kicking every now and again. Little wonder a head-teacher committed suicide earlier this year when she feared her ‘outstanding’ school was due to be downgraded to ‘good’. Little wonder teachers leave the profession in droves because of the constant assessments and that few will step up to be head teachers when a whole career can be destroyed by a 2 day assessment from an OFSTED inspector. 2. From “INADEQUATE” to “OUTSTANDING” in 16 months? Yes, it is possible. This morning, on Radio 4, I heard a head-teacher explained that her (primary) school was OFSTED inspected and judged to be ‘inadequate requiring special measures’. Just 16 months later it was re-inspected and found to be ‘outstanding’. Surely this calls in to question the criteria on which such harsh judgments are made in the first place. 3. BUREAUCRACY. “A good steady year’s work.” Those 5 words are my entire school report, summing up a whole year of study! This was the 1980’s though! Imagine that now?! Now, every pupil has target grade expectation scores in every subject they study. Pupils are constantly tested and examined to the point of utter disillusionment of both the pupils, and teachers. The bureaucracy is mind-boggling. Every child’s journey through our current education system is a bewildering journey through the Kafkaesque nightmare of ‘learning objectives’, ‘assessment targets’, ‘achievement goals’ and so it goes on. Perhaps this mindless and time-consuming nonsense needs to be ditched in favour of a giving schools a free choice in how to teach the curriculum, with just one end of year test to work towards. Let the teachers teach, and try to encourage some pleasure back in to learning. Is it not time to take the frustration and tedium out of the system, and so improve morale and performance all round? Don’t blame the kids. They are just trying their best to jump through the hoops that an adult world has placed for them. Whilst on the subject of blame.... 4. THE BLAME GAME. Apart from what has already been mentioned in previous posts, perhaps it is time to focus some attention on role of the PARENTS. The academic success of your child is a combination of effort, encouragement and enthusiasm on the part of: the school and teachers (30%), the pupil’s natural academic ability (30%) and parental/ home support (40%). If the parent/s have a ‘can’t be bothered’ attitude to education, don’t expect miracles from your child or any school they go to. You have set the standards. It is your sloppy attitude which is the bar with which your child will try to aspire to. As the large banner on Bart Simpson’s school once said: “Parents Evening Tonight: Let’s share the blame.” The Seasider

11:13pm Wed 11 Dec 13

Twisted choir starter says...

muscliffman wrote:
Twisted choir starter wrote:
Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there....
Confusing words - "The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there...."

Why the reference to class? A big strength of Grammar Schools is that the pupils are not selected by class or the social profile of the immediate catchment area, students qualify for entry based solely upon proven ability - irrespective of 'class' or background.

Genuine but competitive equality for the academically gifted.
No, you're wrong. Look at the sutton trust research:



More than four times as many grammar school pupils come from outside the state sector – with the vast majority likely to be from fee-paying preparatory schools – than the number entitled to free school meals, new Sutton Trust research shows today.

It shows that 2.7% of entrants to grammar schools are entitled to free school meals, whereas 12.7% of entrants come from outside the state sector, largely from independent schools. By contrast, around 16% of pupils are eligible for free school meals in state secondary schools in England, and just over 6% of English 10-year olds are enrolled in independent fee-paying schools.
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Twisted choir starter[/bold] wrote: Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there....[/p][/quote]Confusing words - "The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there...." Why the reference to class? A big strength of Grammar Schools is that the pupils are not selected by class or the social profile of the immediate catchment area, students qualify for entry based solely upon proven ability - irrespective of 'class' or background. Genuine but competitive equality for the academically gifted.[/p][/quote]No, you're wrong. Look at the sutton trust research: More than four times as many grammar school pupils come from outside the state sector – with the vast majority likely to be from fee-paying preparatory schools – than the number entitled to free school meals, new Sutton Trust research shows today. It shows that 2.7% of entrants to grammar schools are entitled to free school meals, whereas 12.7% of entrants come from outside the state sector, largely from independent schools. By contrast, around 16% of pupils are eligible for free school meals in state secondary schools in England, and just over 6% of English 10-year olds are enrolled in independent fee-paying schools. Twisted choir starter

11:36pm Wed 11 Dec 13

cheeriedriteup says...

I wonder a a couple of simple changes could be made, less holidays for teachers equals more time for pupils to learn, less teachers training days after their holidays, more time for pupils to learn, less teachers strikes more time for pupils to learn.
I wonder a a couple of simple changes could be made, less holidays for teachers equals more time for pupils to learn, less teachers training days after their holidays, more time for pupils to learn, less teachers strikes more time for pupils to learn. cheeriedriteup

11:50pm Wed 11 Dec 13

muscliffman says...

Twisted choir starter wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
Twisted choir starter wrote:
Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there....
Confusing words - "The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there...."

Why the reference to class? A big strength of Grammar Schools is that the pupils are not selected by class or the social profile of the immediate catchment area, students qualify for entry based solely upon proven ability - irrespective of 'class' or background.

Genuine but competitive equality for the academically gifted.
No, you're wrong. Look at the sutton trust research:



More than four times as many grammar school pupils come from outside the state sector – with the vast majority likely to be from fee-paying preparatory schools – than the number entitled to free school meals, new Sutton Trust research shows today.

It shows that 2.7% of entrants to grammar schools are entitled to free school meals, whereas 12.7% of entrants come from outside the state sector, largely from independent schools. By contrast, around 16% of pupils are eligible for free school meals in state secondary schools in England, and just over 6% of English 10-year olds are enrolled in independent fee-paying schools.
I beg to differ with your statistical interpretation, most remaining Grammar Schools are unsurprisingly in wealthier 'Conservative' voter areas where the change to comprehensives has been politically resisted - so the figures you quote will be unavoidably skewed to reflect this affluence.

As you say a disproportionate percentage of Grammar School entrants are coming from private education backgrounds rather than state schools. This does rather reaffirm that the state system is currently underperforming, whilst in any case if the surviving Grammar Schools were closed those privately educated kids would no doubt remain in elitist private education and not enter state schools at all.

I am no fan of the private education system in so far as it proves with some people in our current political establishment that the most superb level of education money can buy does not actually create any additional brain cells!
[quote][p][bold]Twisted choir starter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Twisted choir starter[/bold] wrote: Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there....[/p][/quote]Confusing words - "The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there...." Why the reference to class? A big strength of Grammar Schools is that the pupils are not selected by class or the social profile of the immediate catchment area, students qualify for entry based solely upon proven ability - irrespective of 'class' or background. Genuine but competitive equality for the academically gifted.[/p][/quote]No, you're wrong. Look at the sutton trust research: More than four times as many grammar school pupils come from outside the state sector – with the vast majority likely to be from fee-paying preparatory schools – than the number entitled to free school meals, new Sutton Trust research shows today. It shows that 2.7% of entrants to grammar schools are entitled to free school meals, whereas 12.7% of entrants come from outside the state sector, largely from independent schools. By contrast, around 16% of pupils are eligible for free school meals in state secondary schools in England, and just over 6% of English 10-year olds are enrolled in independent fee-paying schools.[/p][/quote]I beg to differ with your statistical interpretation, most remaining Grammar Schools are unsurprisingly in wealthier 'Conservative' voter areas where the change to comprehensives has been politically resisted - so the figures you quote will be unavoidably skewed to reflect this affluence. As you say a disproportionate percentage of Grammar School entrants are coming from private education backgrounds rather than state schools. This does rather reaffirm that the state system is currently underperforming, whilst in any case if the surviving Grammar Schools were closed those privately educated kids would no doubt remain in elitist private education and not enter state schools at all. I am no fan of the private education system in so far as it proves with some people in our current political establishment that the most superb level of education money can buy does not actually create any additional brain cells! muscliffman

1:19am Thu 12 Dec 13

Wintonian says...

Another thing: why do rural schools generally outperform urban ones?

Probable answer: because in rural areas there is no real 'choice' because if you don't choose your local school, the next one is so many miles away in the next town that you couldn't possibly get to it.

This means that in rural areas a town's only secondary school is far more likely to have the genuine whole mix of its population, than in an urban area where more schools are accessible and inevitably some schools will be ones that are avoided in favour of supposedly better ones and end up with children from less educationally able backgrounds.

County Authorities which comprise mainly rural areas always tend to have better results than urban Authorities, partly for that reason.
Another thing: why do rural schools generally outperform urban ones? Probable answer: because in rural areas there is no real 'choice' because if you don't choose your local school, the next one is so many miles away in the next town that you couldn't possibly get to it. This means that in rural areas a town's only secondary school is far more likely to have the genuine whole mix of its population, than in an urban area where more schools are accessible and inevitably some schools will be ones that are avoided in favour of supposedly better ones and end up with children from less educationally able backgrounds. County Authorities which comprise mainly rural areas always tend to have better results than urban Authorities, partly for that reason. Wintonian

8:10am Thu 12 Dec 13

BIGTONE says...

They are too busy squandering taxpayers cash to notice. That's why.
They are too busy squandering taxpayers cash to notice. That's why. BIGTONE

9:24am Thu 12 Dec 13

glendower2909 says...

Firstly before I am accused of bias I am not a teacher nor am I involved in the education system just someone who believes in a balanced view rather than believing every little word spouted by the vocal minority

“Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask.

“Easy life” I drive past my daughters school at 07:00 every morning and the teaching staff are present. The same staffs are more often than not also there when I drive home in the evening so they have a longer on site working day than I do including travel. Not the easy life that people presume.

Firmly believe that education is so vital to the prosperity of both the country as a whole and individuals that it should be taken out of political control in the same vein as the setting of interest rates was removed from the incumbent Chancellor of the Exchequer. How can we get any consistent platform on which to build when with every change of government/minister we lurch from one educational agenda/ideology to another? Before anything is given the chance to bed in approaches are changed based on political preferences rather than proven fact.
Firstly before I am accused of bias I am not a teacher nor am I involved in the education system just someone who believes in a balanced view rather than believing every little word spouted by the vocal minority “Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask. “Easy life” I drive past my daughters school at 07:00 every morning and the teaching staff are present. The same staffs are more often than not also there when I drive home in the evening so they have a longer on site working day than I do including travel. Not the easy life that people presume. Firmly believe that education is so vital to the prosperity of both the country as a whole and individuals that it should be taken out of political control in the same vein as the setting of interest rates was removed from the incumbent Chancellor of the Exchequer. How can we get any consistent platform on which to build when with every change of government/minister we lurch from one educational agenda/ideology to another? Before anything is given the chance to bed in approaches are changed based on political preferences rather than proven fact. glendower2909

9:27am Thu 12 Dec 13

High Treason says...

Part of the problem is poor discipline from parents and the human rights act enabling children to get away with everything. Meanwhile the council spends £200k on a fancy car parade.
Part of the problem is poor discipline from parents and the human rights act enabling children to get away with everything. Meanwhile the council spends £200k on a fancy car parade. High Treason

9:27am Thu 12 Dec 13

glendower2909 says...

Wintonian wrote:
Another thing: why do rural schools generally outperform urban ones? Probable answer: because in rural areas there is no real 'choice' because if you don't choose your local school, the next one is so many miles away in the next town that you couldn't possibly get to it. This means that in rural areas a town's only secondary school is far more likely to have the genuine whole mix of its population, than in an urban area where more schools are accessible and inevitably some schools will be ones that are avoided in favour of supposedly better ones and end up with children from less educationally able backgrounds. County Authorities which comprise mainly rural areas always tend to have better results than urban Authorities, partly for that reason.
True to a point however the main differnece between urban and rural educational standards is the level of immigration.

Personally I have no issue with immigration as most incomers work harder than many of the indigenous population but one issue with regards to the lower standards in urban schools (and yes B,mouth in now more urban than not) is the high level of immigrant children needing language support. This saps the available resources for children as a whole and skews the results of any of these surveys/reports.
[quote][p][bold]Wintonian[/bold] wrote: Another thing: why do rural schools generally outperform urban ones? Probable answer: because in rural areas there is no real 'choice' because if you don't choose your local school, the next one is so many miles away in the next town that you couldn't possibly get to it. This means that in rural areas a town's only secondary school is far more likely to have the genuine whole mix of its population, than in an urban area where more schools are accessible and inevitably some schools will be ones that are avoided in favour of supposedly better ones and end up with children from less educationally able backgrounds. County Authorities which comprise mainly rural areas always tend to have better results than urban Authorities, partly for that reason.[/p][/quote]True to a point however the main differnece between urban and rural educational standards is the level of immigration. Personally I have no issue with immigration as most incomers work harder than many of the indigenous population but one issue with regards to the lower standards in urban schools (and yes B,mouth in now more urban than not) is the high level of immigrant children needing language support. This saps the available resources for children as a whole and skews the results of any of these surveys/reports. glendower2909

12:30pm Thu 12 Dec 13

muscliffman says...

glendower2909 wrote:
Firstly before I am accused of bias I am not a teacher nor am I involved in the education system just someone who believes in a balanced view rather than believing every little word spouted by the vocal minority

“Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask.

“Easy life” I drive past my daughters school at 07:00 every morning and the teaching staff are present. The same staffs are more often than not also there when I drive home in the evening so they have a longer on site working day than I do including travel. Not the easy life that people presume.

Firmly believe that education is so vital to the prosperity of both the country as a whole and individuals that it should be taken out of political control in the same vein as the setting of interest rates was removed from the incumbent Chancellor of the Exchequer. How can we get any consistent platform on which to build when with every change of government/minister we lurch from one educational agenda/ideology to another? Before anything is given the chance to bed in approaches are changed based on political preferences rather than proven fact.
“Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask."

An intriguing angle, but are you really taking us into the murky world of tax avoidance by teachers, because what you suggest with their holiday pay might well be a way to unavoidably achieve that within an otherwise 52-week contract commitment.

It would be interesting to know exactly how this teacher holiday remuneration is structured on paper - especially from the taxman's perspective.
[quote][p][bold]glendower2909[/bold] wrote: Firstly before I am accused of bias I am not a teacher nor am I involved in the education system just someone who believes in a balanced view rather than believing every little word spouted by the vocal minority “Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask. “Easy life” I drive past my daughters school at 07:00 every morning and the teaching staff are present. The same staffs are more often than not also there when I drive home in the evening so they have a longer on site working day than I do including travel. Not the easy life that people presume. Firmly believe that education is so vital to the prosperity of both the country as a whole and individuals that it should be taken out of political control in the same vein as the setting of interest rates was removed from the incumbent Chancellor of the Exchequer. How can we get any consistent platform on which to build when with every change of government/minister we lurch from one educational agenda/ideology to another? Before anything is given the chance to bed in approaches are changed based on political preferences rather than proven fact.[/p][/quote]“Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask." An intriguing angle, but are you really taking us into the murky world of tax avoidance by teachers, because what you suggest with their holiday pay might well be a way to unavoidably achieve that within an otherwise 52-week contract commitment. It would be interesting to know exactly how this teacher holiday remuneration is structured on paper - especially from the taxman's perspective. muscliffman

12:38pm Thu 12 Dec 13

jinglebell says...

muscliffman wrote:
Twisted choir starter wrote:
Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there....
Confusing words - "The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there...."

Why the reference to class? A big strength of Grammar Schools is that the pupils are not selected by class or the social profile of the immediate catchment area, students qualify for entry based solely upon proven ability - irrespective of 'class' or background.

Genuine but competitive equality for the academically gifted.
A large majority of children in grammar schools have middle class parents. Why? Because the middle classes are far more likely to have funds to provide extra tuition toward preparing the children for the 11 plus exams. They are "schooled" toward the 11 plus through one to one tuition and also sent to special tuition schools during term breaks. The same practice is used for later exams right up to 'A' level.
This practice was not always so prevalent, however, it has grown considerably in the last 30 years. Thus, we have in B'mth - and other Local Authorities, where the grammar schools system still exists - a situation where the bar of aspirational achievement is lifted high for some, whilst the remainder are given the message it is low, which is an unrealistic message in terms of preparation for real life.
In life, some are more able in certain areas than others, but we can and must learn from each other in order that communities can communicate effectively, work together, and learn from each other.
Twynham School in Christchurch does not allow children to apply to it if they have also applied to take the 11 plus. Twynham is an exemplary school with superb results that speaks volumes of the benefits to be had of not having a grammar school.
As a pure anecdotal example, I recall a class at school, where the teacher, used to put us into groups, which always had at least one of the very bright kids in it. The teacher would give each group a question to tackle. We would discuss in our groups how to tackle the question. One of the "clever" guys, frequently used to "re-explain" various aspects of the question to the rest of us and/or potential answers, and we would ask him questions too and put forward our points. I found this method really useful and benefited from it.
I met him again just a few years ago, he said that he felt all the "re-explaining" had a significant impact on his own ability to think through and understand concepts. He said the most effective thing, however, had been the questions we put forward and challenged him with as they were not from a text book but rather the unexpected and so they made him think much more deeply. I guess it worked as he went on to study at Oxford and became a physicist of some renown.
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Twisted choir starter[/bold] wrote: Abolish the grammar schools and have decent mixed gender comprehensives. Like Winchester where all 3 secondary comprehensive schools do well meaning every kid gets a decent education. The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there....[/p][/quote]Confusing words - "The pushy middle class seem perfectly happy without grammars there...." Why the reference to class? A big strength of Grammar Schools is that the pupils are not selected by class or the social profile of the immediate catchment area, students qualify for entry based solely upon proven ability - irrespective of 'class' or background. Genuine but competitive equality for the academically gifted.[/p][/quote]A large majority of children in grammar schools have middle class parents. Why? Because the middle classes are far more likely to have funds to provide extra tuition toward preparing the children for the 11 plus exams. They are "schooled" toward the 11 plus through one to one tuition and also sent to special tuition schools during term breaks. The same practice is used for later exams right up to 'A' level. This practice was not always so prevalent, however, it has grown considerably in the last 30 years. Thus, we have in B'mth - and other Local Authorities, where the grammar schools system still exists - a situation where the bar of aspirational achievement is lifted high for some, whilst the remainder are given the message it is low, which is an unrealistic message in terms of preparation for real life. In life, some are more able in certain areas than others, but we can and must learn from each other in order that communities can communicate effectively, work together, and learn from each other. Twynham School in Christchurch does not allow children to apply to it if they have also applied to take the 11 plus. Twynham is an exemplary school with superb results that speaks volumes of the benefits to be had of not having a grammar school. As a pure anecdotal example, I recall a class at school, where the teacher, used to put us into groups, which always had at least one of the very bright kids in it. The teacher would give each group a question to tackle. We would discuss in our groups how to tackle the question. One of the "clever" guys, frequently used to "re-explain" various aspects of the question to the rest of us and/or potential answers, and we would ask him questions too and put forward our points. I found this method really useful and benefited from it. I met him again just a few years ago, he said that he felt all the "re-explaining" had a significant impact on his own ability to think through and understand concepts. He said the most effective thing, however, had been the questions we put forward and challenged him with as they were not from a text book but rather the unexpected and so they made him think much more deeply. I guess it worked as he went on to study at Oxford and became a physicist of some renown. jinglebell

1:17pm Thu 12 Dec 13

jinglebell says...

High Treason wrote:
Part of the problem is poor discipline from parents and the human rights act enabling children to get away with everything. Meanwhile the council spends £200k on a fancy car parade.
I agree that "poor discipline from parents" is part of the problem, however, it does not explain why schools specifically in B'mth are doing so badly in comparison to those in the rest of the country. Does it mean that most parents in B'mth do not discipline their children, whilst in the remainder of England they do?
What is it that marks B'mth out from the rest of the country? Is B'mth Council providing sufficient additional support for teachers in terms of teacher's assistants, or equipment?
Is the Borough more demographically segregated than is the norm elsewhere?
When it is not difficult for a Local Authority to arrange for Headteachers and teachers to visit high achieving schools, one has to wonder why B'mth Council have not long ago arranged for these visits.
At the end of the day, the buck stops with B'mth Council, as this is not news; the steady decline has been going on for some years and they should have been finding out why and putting measures in place to address it.
Whilst the Council appears to put its own members to the fore, rather than its residents' needs, it is likely we will sadly continue to see a continuing decline in services in all areas of our lives.
[quote][p][bold]High Treason[/bold] wrote: Part of the problem is poor discipline from parents and the human rights act enabling children to get away with everything. Meanwhile the council spends £200k on a fancy car parade.[/p][/quote]I agree that "poor discipline from parents" is part of the problem, however, it does not explain why schools specifically in B'mth are doing so badly in comparison to those in the rest of the country. Does it mean that most parents in B'mth do not discipline their children, whilst in the remainder of England they do? What is it that marks B'mth out from the rest of the country? Is B'mth Council providing sufficient additional support for teachers in terms of teacher's assistants, or equipment? Is the Borough more demographically segregated than is the norm elsewhere? When it is not difficult for a Local Authority to arrange for Headteachers and teachers to visit high achieving schools, one has to wonder why B'mth Council have not long ago arranged for these visits. At the end of the day, the buck stops with B'mth Council, as this is not news; the steady decline has been going on for some years and they should have been finding out why and putting measures in place to address it. Whilst the Council appears to put its own members to the fore, rather than its residents' needs, it is likely we will sadly continue to see a continuing decline in services in all areas of our lives. jinglebell

2:39pm Thu 12 Dec 13

keith milton says...

common purpose indoctrination camps are what schools are today,the government now own your children.

its to prepare kids to obey authority and the system,not challenge it.

and 90% of what is taught is lies and propaganda

home schooling is the only way.
common purpose indoctrination camps are what schools are today,the government now own your children. its to prepare kids to obey authority and the system,not challenge it. and 90% of what is taught is lies and propaganda home schooling is the only way. keith milton

3:22pm Thu 12 Dec 13

glendower2909 says...

muscliffman wrote:
glendower2909 wrote: Firstly before I am accused of bias I am not a teacher nor am I involved in the education system just someone who believes in a balanced view rather than believing every little word spouted by the vocal minority “Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask. “Easy life” I drive past my daughters school at 07:00 every morning and the teaching staff are present. The same staffs are more often than not also there when I drive home in the evening so they have a longer on site working day than I do including travel. Not the easy life that people presume. Firmly believe that education is so vital to the prosperity of both the country as a whole and individuals that it should be taken out of political control in the same vein as the setting of interest rates was removed from the incumbent Chancellor of the Exchequer. How can we get any consistent platform on which to build when with every change of government/minister we lurch from one educational agenda/ideology to another? Before anything is given the chance to bed in approaches are changed based on political preferences rather than proven fact.
“Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask." An intriguing angle, but are you really taking us into the murky world of tax avoidance by teachers, because what you suggest with their holiday pay might well be a way to unavoidably achieve that within an otherwise 52-week contract commitment. It would be interesting to know exactly how this teacher holiday remuneration is structured on paper - especially from the taxman's perspective.
I am not a tax specialist so cannot comment on the intricacies of HMRC however looking at it simply as long as people are being paid on a PAYE basis which I presume most teachers are then surely it is academic how much you are paid and when over the course of a tax year

If I was paid for example £12000 in one hit at month one I would be taxed massively but by end of year any tax liability would unravel and I would apply for a refund. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong but do not see an issue.
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]glendower2909[/bold] wrote: Firstly before I am accused of bias I am not a teacher nor am I involved in the education system just someone who believes in a balanced view rather than believing every little word spouted by the vocal minority “Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask. “Easy life” I drive past my daughters school at 07:00 every morning and the teaching staff are present. The same staffs are more often than not also there when I drive home in the evening so they have a longer on site working day than I do including travel. Not the easy life that people presume. Firmly believe that education is so vital to the prosperity of both the country as a whole and individuals that it should be taken out of political control in the same vein as the setting of interest rates was removed from the incumbent Chancellor of the Exchequer. How can we get any consistent platform on which to build when with every change of government/minister we lurch from one educational agenda/ideology to another? Before anything is given the chance to bed in approaches are changed based on political preferences rather than proven fact.[/p][/quote]“Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask." An intriguing angle, but are you really taking us into the murky world of tax avoidance by teachers, because what you suggest with their holiday pay might well be a way to unavoidably achieve that within an otherwise 52-week contract commitment. It would be interesting to know exactly how this teacher holiday remuneration is structured on paper - especially from the taxman's perspective.[/p][/quote]I am not a tax specialist so cannot comment on the intricacies of HMRC however looking at it simply as long as people are being paid on a PAYE basis which I presume most teachers are then surely it is academic how much you are paid and when over the course of a tax year If I was paid for example £12000 in one hit at month one I would be taxed massively but by end of year any tax liability would unravel and I would apply for a refund. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong but do not see an issue. glendower2909

3:35pm Thu 12 Dec 13

glendower2909 says...

Jinglebell - "A large majority of children in grammar schools have middle class parents. Why? Because the middle classes are far more likely to have funds to provide extra tuition toward preparing the children for the 11 plus exams. They are "schooled" toward the 11 plus through one to one tuition and also sent to special tuition schools during term breaks. The same practice is used for later exams right up to 'A' level."

Sorry again I think people are losing the point. Taking an interest in your children is nothing to do with money.

My kids did not attend the grammar school although the oldest was accepted. She opted to stay where she was and has flourished and is now at her last year in Uni and on course for a first class degree. The 2nd child is now in her first year of a medicine degree having not bothered to apply for the grammar school.

We did not pay for tutors or anything of that ilk. We simply took the time to get involved in their education, attended all school/parent functions when requested, took them to libraries and helped with homework where we ourselves understood.

We did not park them in front of the TV/Wii/Play station or let them watch endless dross TV.

Please folks to a greater degree we are all masters of our own destiny and must take responsibility for our own choices and outcomes. It is not all down to others/someone else’s fault.

The sooner we start to instil this outlook on our kids ie don’t blame others the better prepared they will be for life.
Jinglebell - "A large majority of children in grammar schools have middle class parents. Why? Because the middle classes are far more likely to have funds to provide extra tuition toward preparing the children for the 11 plus exams. They are "schooled" toward the 11 plus through one to one tuition and also sent to special tuition schools during term breaks. The same practice is used for later exams right up to 'A' level." Sorry again I think people are losing the point. Taking an interest in your children is nothing to do with money. My kids did not attend the grammar school although the oldest was accepted. She opted to stay where she was and has flourished and is now at her last year in Uni and on course for a first class degree. The 2nd child is now in her first year of a medicine degree having not bothered to apply for the grammar school. We did not pay for tutors or anything of that ilk. We simply took the time to get involved in their education, attended all school/parent functions when requested, took them to libraries and helped with homework where we ourselves understood. We did not park them in front of the TV/Wii/Play station or let them watch endless dross TV. Please folks to a greater degree we are all masters of our own destiny and must take responsibility for our own choices and outcomes. It is not all down to others/someone else’s fault. The sooner we start to instil this outlook on our kids ie don’t blame others the better prepared they will be for life. glendower2909

4:35pm Thu 12 Dec 13

jinglebell says...

glendower2909 wrote:
Jinglebell - "A large majority of children in grammar schools have middle class parents. Why? Because the middle classes are far more likely to have funds to provide extra tuition toward preparing the children for the 11 plus exams. They are "schooled" toward the 11 plus through one to one tuition and also sent to special tuition schools during term breaks. The same practice is used for later exams right up to 'A' level."

Sorry again I think people are losing the point. Taking an interest in your children is nothing to do with money.

My kids did not attend the grammar school although the oldest was accepted. She opted to stay where she was and has flourished and is now at her last year in Uni and on course for a first class degree. The 2nd child is now in her first year of a medicine degree having not bothered to apply for the grammar school.

We did not pay for tutors or anything of that ilk. We simply took the time to get involved in their education, attended all school/parent functions when requested, took them to libraries and helped with homework where we ourselves understood.

We did not park them in front of the TV/Wii/Play station or let them watch endless dross TV.

Please folks to a greater degree we are all masters of our own destiny and must take responsibility for our own choices and outcomes. It is not all down to others/someone else’s fault.

The sooner we start to instil this outlook on our kids ie don’t blame others the better prepared they will be for life.
Taking an interest in your children is the main factor that makes a difference, I agree with you, and I do not doubt for a moment that the time and interaction with your children has had a profound and positive effect in their success, however, as far as grammar schools are concerned, segregating children from each other at a young age is not beneficial.
Certainly, too there are likely to be a variety of factors at work here that is leading to such failing results.
What I fail to see addressed, however, are the questions that surround all this in relation to B'mth Council. Why is it that the schools in B'mth are doing less well than schools in other parts of England?
[quote][p][bold]glendower2909[/bold] wrote: Jinglebell - "A large majority of children in grammar schools have middle class parents. Why? Because the middle classes are far more likely to have funds to provide extra tuition toward preparing the children for the 11 plus exams. They are "schooled" toward the 11 plus through one to one tuition and also sent to special tuition schools during term breaks. The same practice is used for later exams right up to 'A' level." Sorry again I think people are losing the point. Taking an interest in your children is nothing to do with money. My kids did not attend the grammar school although the oldest was accepted. She opted to stay where she was and has flourished and is now at her last year in Uni and on course for a first class degree. The 2nd child is now in her first year of a medicine degree having not bothered to apply for the grammar school. We did not pay for tutors or anything of that ilk. We simply took the time to get involved in their education, attended all school/parent functions when requested, took them to libraries and helped with homework where we ourselves understood. We did not park them in front of the TV/Wii/Play station or let them watch endless dross TV. Please folks to a greater degree we are all masters of our own destiny and must take responsibility for our own choices and outcomes. It is not all down to others/someone else’s fault. The sooner we start to instil this outlook on our kids ie don’t blame others the better prepared they will be for life.[/p][/quote]Taking an interest in your children is the main factor that makes a difference, I agree with you, and I do not doubt for a moment that the time and interaction with your children has had a profound and positive effect in their success, however, as far as grammar schools are concerned, segregating children from each other at a young age is not beneficial. Certainly, too there are likely to be a variety of factors at work here that is leading to such failing results. What I fail to see addressed, however, are the questions that surround all this in relation to B'mth Council. Why is it that the schools in B'mth are doing less well than schools in other parts of England? jinglebell

9:10pm Thu 12 Dec 13

muscliffman says...

glendower2909 wrote:
muscliffman wrote:
glendower2909 wrote: Firstly before I am accused of bias I am not a teacher nor am I involved in the education system just someone who believes in a balanced view rather than believing every little word spouted by the vocal minority “Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask. “Easy life” I drive past my daughters school at 07:00 every morning and the teaching staff are present. The same staffs are more often than not also there when I drive home in the evening so they have a longer on site working day than I do including travel. Not the easy life that people presume. Firmly believe that education is so vital to the prosperity of both the country as a whole and individuals that it should be taken out of political control in the same vein as the setting of interest rates was removed from the incumbent Chancellor of the Exchequer. How can we get any consistent platform on which to build when with every change of government/minister we lurch from one educational agenda/ideology to another? Before anything is given the chance to bed in approaches are changed based on political preferences rather than proven fact.
“Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask." An intriguing angle, but are you really taking us into the murky world of tax avoidance by teachers, because what you suggest with their holiday pay might well be a way to unavoidably achieve that within an otherwise 52-week contract commitment. It would be interesting to know exactly how this teacher holiday remuneration is structured on paper - especially from the taxman's perspective.
I am not a tax specialist so cannot comment on the intricacies of HMRC however looking at it simply as long as people are being paid on a PAYE basis which I presume most teachers are then surely it is academic how much you are paid and when over the course of a tax year

If I was paid for example £12000 in one hit at month one I would be taxed massively but by end of year any tax liability would unravel and I would apply for a refund. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong but do not see an issue.
I am not a tax expert either but I have enough payroll experience to be fairly certain there would be tax and NI implications of teaching staff were only on (say) a 42 week annual contract rather than a more normal annual/52 week one - the actual payment intervals would not be relevant to the final yearly tax liability.

Perhaps someone can clarify - are regular state school teachers taxed upon 52 week contracts or not?
[quote][p][bold]glendower2909[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]glendower2909[/bold] wrote: Firstly before I am accused of bias I am not a teacher nor am I involved in the education system just someone who believes in a balanced view rather than believing every little word spouted by the vocal minority “Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask. “Easy life” I drive past my daughters school at 07:00 every morning and the teaching staff are present. The same staffs are more often than not also there when I drive home in the evening so they have a longer on site working day than I do including travel. Not the easy life that people presume. Firmly believe that education is so vital to the prosperity of both the country as a whole and individuals that it should be taken out of political control in the same vein as the setting of interest rates was removed from the incumbent Chancellor of the Exchequer. How can we get any consistent platform on which to build when with every change of government/minister we lurch from one educational agenda/ideology to another? Before anything is given the chance to bed in approaches are changed based on political preferences rather than proven fact.[/p][/quote]“Teacher Holidays”. Lots of people mentioning the long holidays. The fact is that while teachers may get 13+ weeks holiday per year the reality is that like you and I they are only paid for 4/5 of these weeks. Quoted wages are pro-rata to allow 12 monthly pay dates so this is really a non-story. If you want to have 2 months of unpaid just approach your HR department and ask." An intriguing angle, but are you really taking us into the murky world of tax avoidance by teachers, because what you suggest with their holiday pay might well be a way to unavoidably achieve that within an otherwise 52-week contract commitment. It would be interesting to know exactly how this teacher holiday remuneration is structured on paper - especially from the taxman's perspective.[/p][/quote]I am not a tax specialist so cannot comment on the intricacies of HMRC however looking at it simply as long as people are being paid on a PAYE basis which I presume most teachers are then surely it is academic how much you are paid and when over the course of a tax year If I was paid for example £12000 in one hit at month one I would be taxed massively but by end of year any tax liability would unravel and I would apply for a refund. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong but do not see an issue.[/p][/quote]I am not a tax expert either but I have enough payroll experience to be fairly certain there would be tax and NI implications of teaching staff were only on (say) a 42 week annual contract rather than a more normal annual/52 week one - the actual payment intervals would not be relevant to the final yearly tax liability. Perhaps someone can clarify - are regular state school teachers taxed upon 52 week contracts or not? muscliffman

9:02am Sat 28 Dec 13

Rabbitman64 says...

muscliffman wrote:
Surprised - not! This only confirms what a lot of local employers could have told everyone for many years - indeed some tried!. There are some very serious attitude, educational and literacy problems in our local schools - and they start with the teaching staff, not the students.

Incredibly at the moment these failing teachers are more interested in militantly protecting their own already generous terms and conditions than educating our kids - so when is the next strike?
You appear to be a person of quite limited knowledge. They are fair Terms and Conditions not anymore. Unfortunately because of the state of the job market, it is difficult for teachers to motivate pupils to work hard when they are going to end up on the dole? The useless Tories have created that with the amount of anti-employment legislation that has been bought in since 2010.
[quote][p][bold]muscliffman[/bold] wrote: Surprised - not! This only confirms what a lot of local employers could have told everyone for many years - indeed some tried!. There are some very serious attitude, educational and literacy problems in our local schools - and they start with the teaching staff, not the students. Incredibly at the moment these failing teachers are more interested in militantly protecting their own already generous terms and conditions than educating our kids - so when is the next strike?[/p][/quote]You appear to be a person of quite limited knowledge. They are fair Terms and Conditions not anymore. Unfortunately because of the state of the job market, it is difficult for teachers to motivate pupils to work hard when they are going to end up on the dole? The useless Tories have created that with the amount of anti-employment legislation that has been bought in since 2010. Rabbitman64

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree