Showing posts with label Gove. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gove. Show all posts

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Layer 459 . . . Work, Education, Management Culture, Creativity, Collaboration and Character

.
BBC2  - The British At Work

Unfortunately it's not just Brits who got sucked into fuckwit work culture and management culture. It's been a worldwide phenomenon - working ever-longer hours under management that's either Hitlerian, Machiavellian or David Brentian. Possibly all three simultaneously, depending on whether management thinks your 'performance' is OK or not.

The good thing about working in a public service not-for-profit 'professional' environment used to be that you were treated as an intelligent being who didn't need to be 'motivated' - you did more and gave more than you should, simply because you were there to serve others. Very sadly this is, by and large, no longer the case. Nowadays management consultants and business schools have convinced senior management everywhere that target-setting and payment by results should be applied to the 'workforce'. Nowadays everyone has to be micro-managed and performance-managed to death.

Throw into this mix management by email, by text, and by 'bonus' culture, and you have total alienation, stress, anxiety, loss of morale, illness and breakdown.

Work-life balance? Don't be stupid.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00zg047

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00zvf3f#synopsis

.............................................

Here are some quotes from an essential article in Guardian Education:

Let's look at all the evidence from top educators abroad
Michael Gove is keen to see what we have to learn from education systems internationally, but the lessons may not be as straightforward as he thinks, says Valerie Hannon
"Recently Michael Gove has stressed the importance of comparing education systems internationally, as seen in the OECD's Pisa studies, and of learning from the most successful nations. But what should our response be?
"The education secretary enthuses about Andreas Schleicher, of the OECD, calling him the "most important man in English education" for the insights his work confers. Schleicher's analysis, according to Gove, shows, first, that "we [England] are falling further and further behind other nations"; and second, that the key to success is "to recruit the best possible people into teaching and provide them with high-quality training and professional development". This is true – as far as it goes. But it is a partial analysis.
"What have successful systems to tell us about the issues we face today? Schleicher's work demonstrates compellingly that demand for the competencies 20th-century school systems were good at imparting (routine cognitive and manual skills) is falling sharply among employers across the world. He shows that 21st-century systems need to prepare young people with the skills to undertake non-routine analytic and, especially, non-routine interactive tasks. Schleicher's conclusion is: "The skills that are easiest to teach and test are also easiest to digitise, automate and outsource."
"The implication of these findings is that systems need to prepare students "to deal with more rapid change than ever before … for jobs that have not yet been created … using technologies that have not yet been invented". This is about learning how to learn, and new ways of thinking that involve creativity, critical thinking, problem-solving and decision-making. It is in sharp contrast to an emphasis on the capacity to reproduce facts." 
The really outrageous aspect to all this good sense is that 'progressive' educators have been saying these things since the early 20th century, and others like Dryden & Vos (The New Learning Revolution) have been banging on about it in more recent years - to no good effect in dopey old England.
"For this is the perspective being adopted by the world's leading systems. Rather than relying on past achievements, they are reconceiving how they approach the future. Take Finland – always at or near the top of the Pisa rankings. The director of the Finnish board of education has described how their system has identified the key competencies for lifelong learning, and is setting about transforming their system to ensure they're acquired. Critically, this entails enabling learners to "undertake meaningful problem-based inquiry, which might be multi-disciplinary, supported by blended teaching methods and hybrid resources". The Finns aren't giving up on acquiring knowledge. They just know it's not enough.
"Then there's South Korea, another "top performing" system. Perceived as exam-driven, cramming its students, Korea is set to change. Exploring the work of its very best schools has revealed that they focus on providing concentrated time for some subjects (rather than shallow drip-feed); on personalising learning; on evaluating creativity; and on experience-based learning. South Korea is basing its innovation agenda on the "three C's": creativity, collaboration and character.
"And finally, take one of the most improved cities in the world in terms of education performance – New York City. Gove recently hosted the former chancellor of the NYC school system, praising the rapid progress made by the city. What he omitted, however, was that NYC has acknowledged its current set of school improvement initiatives is inadequate to deal with the challenges young people face. So it has a launched an Innovation Zone, comprising a distributed network of schools, specifically to test and refine new approaches to learning and teaching that are more personalised and emphasise higher-level skills.
"So yes, let's join the global education community seeking out the best ways to make learning engaging and relevant to young people in the digital age. But let's do it with open minds, and attention to all the evidence."
Valerie Hannon is a board director of the Innovation Unit

.

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

Layer 447 . . . The Rights of the Child, Education, Michael Morpurgo, Schools, the Dimbleby Lecture, Lessons in Hate and Violence, and the Need for Apologies.

.
Continuing with yesterday's economics theme, the following articles are very good summaries of the case for Keynesian approaches, and the case against Friedmanite economics:

The Economy: We Are All Keynesians Now

Friday, Dec. 31, 1965

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,842353-1,00.html


from 2008

The End of the Age of Milton Friedman

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-madrick/the-end-of-the-age-of-mil_b_94228.html

.....................................

Children and Education

The wellbeing of children, the brainwashing & indoctrination of children, the education of children, and the abuse of children, are subjects that every one of us should be concerned with and pay attention to.

I'm still seething about that insane 'Tiger Woman' and her abuse of her own children. [see last blog] I'm even more seething about people like her who encourage other parents (and teachers) to put extreme pressure on children to achieve academically at the cost of their overall wellbeing, at the cost of their right to a proper childhood, and their right to a proper education.

I'm now seething at a programme that was broadcast by Channel 4's 'Dispatches' team this week -

Lessons in Hate and Violence

Dispatches goes undercover to investigate allegations that teachers regularly assault young children in some of the 2,000 Muslim schools in Britain run by Islamic organisations.

The programme also follows up allegations that, behind closed doors, some Muslim secondary schools teach a message of hatred and intolerance.

The programme is presented by reporter Tazeen Ahmad.

Dispatches: Lessons in Hate and Violence will not be available on 4oD at this time, due to an ongoing police investigation concerning subjects featured in the programme.

http://www.channe4.com/programmes/dispatches/episode-guide/series-80/episode-1

There are clips of the actual programme on the website, where Salahuddeen Ali has commented:

Great documentary. I am a muslim and I find this issue of muslim teachers/schools abusing children worthy of broadcast and investigation. As a muslim child growing learning the Quran, I was beaten and whipped. This is a fact. I read many muslims comments saying they're unhappy about this report. Well I hope they realize that when abuse is applied to children in their faith schools it will not be hushed down in respect to their image. Children's rights are above any faith, group or agenda. Thank you for this brilliant work.

Mohammed Abdullah commented:

Although I have not watched the full program I believe it is right to bring these issues to the forefront just like one would do with racism. Indeed there are preachers in Mosques and Madrasa's preaching Islam without the proper knowledge of the subject. We can deny the truth much as possible but these problems do exist I myself have experienced this. Those preachers only have a tunnel vision of religion and do not have a broader knowledge of this world. Those preachers who spread hatred, corruptions and mischief in the land they need to be bought to Justice. Al Quran Surat Al-M?'idah: Chapter 5: Verse 33: gives clear punishment for those who Spread hatred, Corruptions and Mischief on the land. I would like to praise TAZEEN AHMAD for this brilliant work.

The programme had used hidden cameras to film teachers and teachers' assistants barking at children and indoctrinating them about the vileness of non-Muslims - shouting at children who weren't concentrating hard enough on their Koran-reading. Worse than this, they were shown kicking and slapping children for not working hard enough.

The children worked in isolation - not speaking to or collaborating with any of their peers in their learning.  During unsupervised break times some of the children were aggressive and abusive to one another.

But let's be clear - this model and this pattern of learning exist in many other schools throughout the country, where children learn through didactic instruction, learn by rote, learn in isolation, and have an unbroken diet of uncreative, meaningless cramming.

It's a disgusting fact that more and more children learn in ghetto schools of one sort or another - instead of learning alongside children of all backgrounds and abilities. This is something the 'free schools' idea is meant to promote. The Tories have been searching for ages to figure out a way of giving public money to private and independent schools in order to reduce private tuition fees, and this a perfect wheeze for doing it. These people really do have a sense of entitlement to exclusive schools which are subsidised by public taxation, and which are run by the parents whose children benefit from them. People like Toby Young want control of the curriculum, the management, the recruitment of staff, and the style of teaching - and they don't give a toss about what more enlightened people say about the learning and wellbeing needs of children. Their sole aim is to have a neighbourhood school for their own children, run by the parents, which doesn't charge fees, and which will guarantee 'rigour' and a smooth passage to the Oxbridge college of their choice.

These schools may be less hate-filled than those shown on the C4 documentary, but just as negative in their effect through causing fragmentation of the system, entrenching privilege, promoting ghettoisation and destroying the rights of children to a proper childhood and an enjoyment of school and of learning itself.

........................................

Morpurgo

Michael Morpurgo is an exceptional human being, and a great champion of the rights of children. He was rightly given the honour of delivering the Dimbleby Lecture on BBC TV this week.

In this year's Richard Dimbleby Lecture, Michael Morpurgo explores the increasingly urgent issue of children's rights, and investigates the wrongs that young people have to endure.

One of Britain's most popular children's authors, Morpurgo has written over 120 books and more recently he has become a campaigner on behalf of children, both at home and abroad. In this role he visited the Middle East where he witnessed, first hand, the difficulties children face in times of conflict.

His most well known book, War Horse, was recently dramatised to great critical acclaim and it is now being made into a Hollywood feature film by Stephen Spielberg.

Related Links

    * Wikipedia: Michael Morpurgo (en.wikipedia.org)
    * Michael Morpurgo: Home (www.michaelmorpurgo.com)
    * BBC Scotland: Authors Live - Michael Morpurgo
    * BBC News: Entertainment & Arts: Michael Morpurgo on War Horse and beyond
    * BBC News: Entertainment & Arts: How to operate a War Horse puppet
    * IMDb: War Horse (www.imdb.com)
    * BBC News Magazine: How children's war fiction has changed

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00ymf57

Seven days left to view this.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00ymf57/The_Richard_Dimbleby_Lecture_15_02_2011/

The Rights of Children - summary of the lecture

UN Convention on Children's Rights - do we live by it?

Only two countries have yet to ratify this convention - Somalia and the United States.
 
The right to survival, access to healthcare, liberty and education

These rights are woefully neglected.

3.5 million of our children in the UK are mired in poverty.

Some of the most vulnerable have been appallingly treated.

We must tackle the impoverishment, neglect and exploitation of children.

The Yarls Wood detention centre - a deeply shameful institution - injustice was done to children put in this prison.

"Motherland" - a play by Natasha Walters.

"12 big men banged on our door. They took us to a police station."

We lock up asylum-seeking children, even though they are innocent of any crime.

The rights of children are flagrantly ignored.

"Are we doing the best for our children? No - and we are all to blame."

Librarians are the unsung heros of the book world. Unglamorous
people like this make a real difference to children's lives.

The younger the children, the less status for the people involved. Primary school teachers are the worst paid.

We have a short-term target-driven mindset. We need to go back to the needs of children. We need children to burn brightly and shine.

What we actually do is corral them and stifle them - we put them in places where success and failure [in tests and exams] is all that counts . . . Fear of failure is what does the most damage. We're like Mr Gradgrind in Dickens' 'Hard Times', whose notion of education was to ram 'facts' into children's heads . . .

We may not beat children any more, but I wonder how far we've moved on since Gradgrind . . .  We still have classes that are twice the size they should be - far too big for teachers to make proper relationships, particularly with children who are already disengaged and alienated.

New Zealand ranks 4th in the OECD education rankings, and doesn't have league tables. Finland ranks 2nd, and children there don't begin formal schooling till the age of seven. Britain ranks 20th.

We must remember that we are preparing children NOT simply for employment, or for the common good, but for the difficult decisions they will have to make in their personal lives, for the moments when they will have to take responsibility for themselves and for others, when they will be tempted to have inappropriate sex, or to take drugs, or to bully someone, or carry a knife, or throw a brick through a window . . .

There is no league table for mature behaviour, for the quality of relationships, for self-worth and for self-confidence.

The quality of their relationships is the most important factor in any child's life.

We must allow children to go 'off-piste', and we must trust them.

Forget the league tables and the targets, and let's break free of the shackles of a narrow curriculum - it's time to focus on the commitment and the talent of the people who touch our children's lives.

But we can't leave it all to the teachers. People from all walks of life can make a contribution.

Let's have more trips, visits and outings, more time in theatres, concert halls and museums, and let's get them out into the open air, tramping the hills . . . all this should be an integral part of their education, a right of every child - not an extra. It will pay dividends in the end.

What we absolutely do NOT need is to be closing down our libraries, cutting down our youth services and our provisions for special needs . . .

Let's give children the time to dream, to listen and to learn.

Too many of us, and too many children, are disengaged and alienated.

I shall continue to speak up for the rights of children as best I can.

"I hope you understand the enormity of my fury."

"One day we will apologise for Yarls Wood, and for the bureaucracy of neglect."

Very well said, Michael. 

..................................

One day we, the English - not the Scots or the Welsh, since they don't have them - will apologise for SATs, for league tables, for bureaucratising and micro-managing teaching and learning, for national 'strategies', for the narrowing of the curriculum, for depriving children of their right to learn in a stimulating and creative environment - learning at their own pace, pursuing their own interests and passions, finding their own voices, developing all their intelligences, developing the habit of joyful lifelong learning.

How many of us have continued to speak up for the rights of children, in spite of the pressures to ignore them, in spite of the pressures to return to Gradgrindism? How many  have kept their heads down, for fear of government agents and inspectors, for fear for their futures in their careers and in education? How many have been bullied and cajoled into silence, and how many have been converted willingly into the education Newspeak, and the language of attainment, SATs, value added, strategies, NLS, NNS, targets, payment by results, monitoring, challenge and all the rest?



How many parents and how many paid professionals have even a half of Michael Morpurgo's vision for children, and even a tenth of his determination to stand up for children's rights?

How many need to hang their heads in shame?
.

Friday, January 21, 2011

Layer 427 . . . Coulson, Laughing Policemen, Rotating Politicians and Educational Revolutions

.
The thing about the Today programme on Radio 4 is that it's often far more entertaining than the so-called light entertainment programmes. In between the dour and dull bits about politics and current events there are lots of amazing, disturbing and brilliantly funny bits.

..............................

When I was young, my dad's favourite record, and one of the nation's favourite records, was  The Laughing Policeman. This was a ditty about a  policeman who couldn't stop laughing, even when he was arresting people. The vocal bit was basically - Ah - ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha . . .  ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha HA!  At least that's the bit we remembered. Brilliant.

In the news this week we've been hearing tales of policemen who can't stop shagging. Policemen who are sent to spy on environmental activists and end up shagging them. Policemen who are supposed to give 'protection' to politicians' wives and end up shagging them. All together now for the Shagging Policeman -

Ah  . . . ah . . . ah . . . ah ah ah ah . . . aah aah aah aah aah aah . . . oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh oh
AAAAH!

Time for an update on the rest of the lyrics?

http://lyricsplayground.com/alpha/songs/t/thelaughingpoliceman.shtml

He's too ......... for a policeman
He's never known to ......... 
And everybody says
He's the ........iest man in town!.  

He ......... upon .......... duty 
He .......... upon his ...........
He .......... everybody
When he's ............ in the street. 

He never can stop ...........
He says he's never tried.
But once he did .......... a man
And ............ until he cried!  


..................................................

Alex Salmond said on Desert Island Discs this week, "Political spouses have got the roughest end of everything." Hmmmmm.

I forgot to mention in my comments about Alex Salmond that he's keen on horseracing and golf, and he's a lifelong fan of Star Trek. These Capricorn guys . . . eh? What are they like?

I've just got round to looking up the definition of the verb 'to haver' - an activity engaged in by The Proclaimers, according to them. It means 'to talk nonsense'. Sounds about right.

...........................................................

Chinese Revolution

"New models of learning are emerging from countries like China." So said the man from Pearson Education, which has just paid a small fortune to acquire an Indian on-line tutoring  company.

http://www.sify.com/news/Pearson-gets-control-over-TutorVista-for-Rs-577-crore-news-National-lbtaOhaejfg.html

How interesting that he focuses on China - a country that has gone to great trouble and great expense to re-train its entire teaching force on the principles and practice of The New Learning Revolution. A few years ago the Chinese leadership became convinced that it was important to abandon 'traditional' forms of schooling - Gradgrindism, Goveism, cramming 'facts' and 'knowledge' for high-stakes examinations, etc, - and they began to design forms of learning that maximise the benefits of the pupils' own motivation to learn, maximise access to the Internet, promote collaborative peer learning, formative assessment, creativity, and so on.

It strikes me as ironic that someone from the private sector apparently understands far better than our Gove-led coalition government that the Chinese are not only the greatest innovators and world leaders in manufacturing processes - having learnt from the best they could find around the world how to make things more efficiently - they are also set to show the rest of the world how to educate people, using the best educational practices they could find. Education that prepares people for life as well as work. Education for creativity, innovation and imagination. Education that inspires people to become self-directed, self-motivated lifelong learners.

There was a programme on TV last night which showed an interview with a group of Chinese students who were talking about world affairs and the Chinese political system - and a very bright, confident, well-informed and thoughtful group they were. Totally fluent in English, of course.

http://oxzen.blogspot.com/2009/12/layer-234-new-learning-revolution-and.htm

http://www.amazon.co.uk/New-Learning-Revolution-education-schooling/dp/185539183X 

http://www.thelearningweb.net/page011.html 

http://www.thelearningweb.net/page011summ.html 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9367000/9367626.stm 

...................................

Keeping Ourselves Informed


Aaron Sorkin - the creator of The West Wing and writer of The Social Network - said on R4 this morning that there's nothing more important to a democracy than a well-informed electorate. Which is why the ratings-chasing news channels in the USA are so fucking dumb. Or words to that effect.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Sorkin 

...................................


New Balls Please
I can't abide Ed Balls as a human being, and he was an appalling Minister of Education, but I suppose putting an economist like Ed B in charge of education was like putting a non-economist like Alan Johnson in charge of the economics brief. It was never going to work out well.

Thanks to The Shagging Policeman our poor Mr Johnson has now resigned and Ed B has finally become the shadow chancellor. One thing you can say about Edward is that he seems to have a proper understanding of Keynesian (ie enlightened) economics, and he also seems to have learned lessons from the demise of the neo-liberal Chicago school of (voodoo) economics.

A Brownite he may be. A New Labourite he may be. But if he gives George Osborne a good kicking every so often, and if he manages to forcefully make the case for a more enlightened approach to running the economy and cutting the deficit,  then I'll be first in line to congratulate him. Sadly for Ed Miliband, Alan Johnson was never going to do either of those things.

They may look and sound pretty callow and uncharismatic right now, but in 4 years time Miliband, Balls and Cooper could have the appearance of a winning team - if they manage to properly gel and really take the fight to the coalition.

That's if the coalition manages to last another 4 years. On Question Time last night a very impressive George Galloway, who made mincemeat of Alastair Campbell, predicted that if the Scottish elections go badly for the LibDems, as predicted, then they will pretty swiftly find a reason to bale out and force a new general election.


............................


And Finally . . . 

Coulson has resigned. Fucking good riddance. Bad luck on Cameron, who would have liked today's news to stay focused on the Johnson/Balls saga. Serves him right for appointing a scumbag in the first place. Pity he didn't learn from his role model's mistake in appointing the likes of Campbell as his spinmeister.

Stand by for the return of Blair to the Iraq enquiry today . . .


.

Thursday, January 20, 2011

Layer 425 . . . Education, Facts, Knowledge, Feelings, Gove, Gradgrind, Idiocy, Pedagogy, Ritalin, Curriculum, Intelligences, Zen and Lifelong Learning.

.
"Now, what I want is, Facts. Teach these boys and girls nothing but Facts. Facts alone are wanted in life. Plant nothing else, and root out everything else. You can only form the minds of reasoning animals upon Facts: nothing else will ever be of any service to them. This is the principle on which I bring up my own children, and this is the principle on which I bring up these children. Stick to Facts, sir!"

Thomas Gradgrind-Gove - Hard Times

http://www.fidnet.com/~dap1955/dickens/hardtimes.html

.................................................

Prescriptions of Ritalin as a controlling drug for UK children are currently running at 600,000 per year. A pundit on the Today (R4) programme thought that there's no problem with this -  if the end result is that there's an "increase in educational performance". No need to discuss what we mean by "educational performance" of course - we all know and agree that it simply means improved test and exam results in pursuit of arbitrary targets and league table scores.

So there we have it - there's no need to concern ourselves with moral, ethical, social and psychological issues - just focus on the child's ability and willingness to "settle down", become more passive, submit to traditional schooling and cramming for tests, and just say alleluyah for hitting the test and exam targets.

The presenters on our flagship news programmes allow their pet pundits to get away with this stuff. No wonder we're such a fucking dumb nation.

...........................................................

Confirmation, finally - as if it were needed - that Michael Gove is completely and utterly stupid. He's also an elitist and an evil bastard. He's demanding that the National Curriculum be reduced to a focus on "facts and knowledge".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9367000/9367626.stm

This man presumably has access to the huge body of work which tells us that Gradgrindism ("Teach these boys and girls nothing but facts") is not only futile, not only alienating, not only pointless, not only ridiculous - it's also counterproductive in the 21st Century in a huge number of ways. He's either not read about, or doesn't understand, the need for a New Learning Revolution.

The sole point of Gradgrindism is to sort out the academic goats from the non-academic sheep, and determine which of our children will go to university (if indeed that's what they want to do) and which of them will go to the elite universities. It has no other purpose.

It doesn't serve the needs of commerce and industry, which need individuals with imagination and creativity, and people with their social and emotional intelligences working effectively. 

It doesn't meet the needs of society in general, which also needs all of the above.

It doesn't meet the needs of individuals - to become rounded people who are capable of reaching their full potential, to become lifelong learners who enjoy learning for its own sake, to become active citizens, to become fully evolved human beings, etc.

It's profoundly depressing that an arrogant and ignorant little jerk like Gove is now calling all the shots in English education.

http://oxzen.blogspot.com/2008/04/layer-20-fully-evolved-humans.html

http://oxzen.blogspot.com/2008/05/layer-44-eyes-and-ears-of-community.html

http://oxzen.blogspot.com/2008/05/layer-48-eevnin-stannad-standards-evil.html

.............................................

Chapter II — Murdering The Innocents

THOMAS GRADGRIND, sir. A man of realities. A man of facts and calculations. A man who proceeds upon the principle that two and two are four, and nothing over, and who is not to be talked into allowing for anything over. Thomas Gradgrind, sir — peremptorily Thomas — Thomas Gradgrind. With a rule and a pair of scales, and the multiplication table always in his pocket, sir, ready to weigh and measure any parcel of human nature, and tell you exactly what it comes to. It is a mere question of figures, a case of simple arithmetic. You might hope to get some other nonsensical belief into the head of George Gradgrind, or Augustus Gradgrind, or John Gradgrind, or Joseph Gradgrind (all supposititious, non-existent persons), but into the head of Thomas Gradgrind - no, sir!

In such terms Mr Gradgrind always mentally introduced himself, whether to his private circle of acquaintance, or to the public in general. In such terms, no doubt, substituting the words ‘boys and girls,’ for ‘sir,’ Thomas Gradgrind now presented Thomas Gradgrind to the little pitchers before him, who were to be filled so full of facts.

Indeed, as he eagerly sparkled at them from the cellarage before mentioned, he seemed a kind of cannon loaded to the muzzle with facts, and prepared to blow them clean out of the regions of childhood at one discharge. He seemed a galvanizing apparatus, too, charged with a grim mechanical substitute for the tender young imaginations that were to be stormed away.

‘Girl number twenty,’ said Mr Gradgrind, squarely pointing with his square forefinger, ‘I don’t know that girl. Who is that girl?’

‘Sissy Jupe, sir,’ explained number twenty, blushing, standing up, and curtseying.

‘Sissy is not a name,’ said Mr Gradgrind. ‘Don’t call yourself Sissy. Call yourself Cecilia.’

http://www.online-literature.com/dickens/hardtimes/2/

..........................................................

I had an interesting chat with my son. He's very certain that when it comes to decisions and actions we should always trust our instincts. He's very against doing what anyone else suggests or advises.

He thinks we should all be in touch with our instincts, and prioritise them above the demands and wishes of those around us - our families, our society and the prevailing culture.

Leonard Cohen, of course, said, "I don't trust my inner feelings . . . Inner feelings come and go."

To this, my son says - when your feelings change, you should change with them. And deal with the consequences. (I'm sure Len would agree with him about that - his essential point about not trusting inner feelings was to do with the impermanence of the things we associate with 'love'.)

I think I know what my son's getting at. Ultimately we all need to develop a Zen attitude of spontaneity, authenticity, acting-without-acting, living without fear or anxiety, seeing each life experience as a positive from which we can learn something and from which we can continue to develop ourselves. Ultimately we must look within ourselves for our direction and our decisions, and not allow ourselves to be directed by others or by the prevailing culture - as long as our decisions and our actions don't harm others unnecessarily and inappropriately.

Where I disagree with him is in his referring to what I'd call a Zen attitude and a Zen life as simply 'following our feelings' or 'trusting our instincts'. This blog has discussed at length, in previous Layers, the importance of developing a distinctive 'instinctual intelligence', and also the need to become, through meditation, fully aware of our true selves - our personal intelligence. It's also focused on the need to develop other intelligences, which I've referred to as 'spiritual intelligence' (intuition, etc) and 'social intelligence' (empathy, etc.) If all of those intelligences are working well and working collaboratively, together with our intellect, then we can also become 'emotionally intelligent' and become more able to control our destructive emotions.

It's not mere pedantry or a matter of semantics to clarify and separate out these various intelligences, and to see 'instinctual intelligence' as simply a component of our whole psyche, so that someone who acts 'spontaneously' solely on the basis of 'instinct' is seen to be acting without the benefit and input of all of his/her intelligences. In essence our hard-wired instinctual intelligence just prepares us for flight, fight, freeze and sex. (Although various skills, such as driving and playing a musical instrument, can also become more or less 'instinctual'.)

Words matter. Concepts matter. Intelligences matters. Developing (and using) all of our intelligences matters very much indeed. But don't expect Michael Gove and the coalition government to understand any of that.

What a pity that their pal Anthony Seldon can't help them to see the uselessness of an Education Secretary and an education system that value "largely worthless pieces of paper" and very little else.


Charles Dickens satirised the living daylights out of a school system that killed children's curiosity and reduced children to being passive memorisers of so-called facts and knowledge - and that was way back in the 19th Century, before computers and the Internet were even imagined. The ridiculous Gove still doesn't, and won't ever, get it. The man is an absolute joke.
.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Layer 411 . . . Glorious Winter Weather, Heathrow Chaos, British Business Ownership, PLCs, Gradgrind Gove, Betraying Our Children, Booktrust, Dylan's Favourites, Spotify, Trenet, and Boum!

.
Day Three in Melbourne, Trott undefeated on 168, the lead more than 400, Bresnan playing a blinder, the Aussie batsmen all out for little more than 100, and with only their bowlers left to bat it'll all be over before lunch tomorrow. How long have we waited for England to play this well, and for Australia to play this badly, in Australia?


 http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/dec/28/the-ashes-2010-australia-england

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2010/dec/27/ashes-2010-england-australia-live

 http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/cricket/match/53517


.........................................

The 'Definitive Collection' of Charles Trenet is now available on Spotify. Includes 'La Mer' and 'Boum!'. C'est magnifique!

Apparently the basic (free) version of Spotify is again available to anyone who wants to download it in Britain. No 'invitations' required.

Also on Spotify I stumbled across 'The Best of Bob Dylan's Theme Time Radio Hour'. Bob's choices are, as you'd expect, immaculate.

Matzo Balls                   by Slim Gaillard
Alimony Blues               by Eddie 'Clearhead' Vinson
Tulip or Turnip              by Duke Ellington
Midnight Hour               by Clarence 'Gatemouth' Brown
Let Me Play With Your Poodle        by Tampa Red
Deep Purple                  by The Ravens
Tennessee                     by Carl Perkins
John The Revelator       by Blind Willie Johnson
Pistol Packin' Mama     by Al Dexter
Telephone Is Ringing     by Pee Wee Crayton
Mystery Train               by Little Junior Parker
This Train                     by Sister Rosetta Tharpe
Take The 'A' Train      by Duke Ellington
Good Morning Heartache        by Billie Holiday
etc . . .

................................................

This glorious winter weather

Snowy slopes, blue skies. Ignore what you read in the papers – most people are having a lovely break

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/23/glorious-weather-christmas-break-move

by Simon Jenkins

The world is mad. Most Britons have, like me, just enjoyed the most glorious weather of the year. The western shores of the British Isles have seen a week of almost continuous sun, open horizons and star-filled nights. Freezing air has kept the early snow from melting. With brief exceptions, main roads have been open and supplies plentiful. An exquisite Christmas beckons, with snowy slopes and blues skies, a photographic negative from the usual greens and greys.

So what is the Britain we have read about in the papers and watched on the news, one of relentless, total misery? It must be one that is enmeshed in London and can't stay still. It is a metropolis of the damned, hyper-mobile, frantically trying to get into or away from itself, stranded in motorways and on railway platforms, entombed in detention centres that claim to be airports. The inhabitants all incant, "I was only trying to get away for Christmas", to a chorus of "When is the government going to do something?" An aviation company was even quoted as claiming it was Whitehall's job to keep it supplied with de-icing equipment.

The Heathrow airport boss, Colin Matthews, even said he would "give up [his] bonus" because of the snow. Most travellers could not care less about his bonus: they want a plane. As for the bonus, the truth is out. It is apparently no longer a reward for exceptional achievement. It is standard remuneration on top of salary, at risk only if it snows and is considered a risk to public relations.

Philip Hammond has been browbeaten by sufferers from acute seasonal mobility disorder, and by their media cheerleaders. It would be gratifying if, just once, a transport secretary had the nerve to stand up and tell everyone that when the weather is bad it is a good idea to leave their cars in the garage, tear up their rail passes, forget Marbella and tuck up at home with a good book. They should see their loved ones some other time. Normality cannot be guaranteed.

Simon's taken a heavy panning for this article on CiF, and of course for most people the snow and ice have been a massive inconvenience and often dangerous. However, it's good to get a half-full view of the effects of the winter weather. For many of us the snowy landscapes and cityscapes ARE beautiful - if we only have time to walk, and stand, and stare.

Maybe more people ought to re-think the wisdom of travelling during the winter, and reconsider the benefits of just staying at home. Maybe people ought to invest in better clothing, better boots, and some bags of grit. Maybe people ought to plan for snow and ice, instead of just hoping there won't be any. Maybe the people who run airports and railways and buses and ambulance services ought to re-think their priorities and do some proper contingency planning. Maybe we all should re-think our attitude to the elderly and the disabled and the housebound. Maybe we should all re-think what we do in our homes and our families, and re-think how we spend our time together. Or our time apart.

...............................................

Heathrow's chaos is indicative of a wider national malaise

We have the oddest and most regressive constitution for private ownership anywhere in western capitalism

by Will Hutton

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/25/will-hutton-british-ownership-rules

It was not Heathrow's finest hour. The pain was there to see in the pictures of thousands of passengers delayed without information, left to camp for hours on inhospitable floors. Less visible were many thousands of others, like some friends of mine, who, courtesy of the internet and the closure of Heathrow's slip roads, thankfully never made it to the airport at all. The freakishly heavy snowfall would have disrupted any world airport, but not for as long as Heathrow, which was still suffering acute delays three or four days later.

The country has never seriously debated what good ownership of assets might constitute – whether by a football club or a public company. Instead, the response to the social and economic irresponsibility of some private ownership has been to call for nationalisation and public ownership, while the response to the waste and lack of innovation of some public ownership has been to call for private ownership. There has been too little attempt to think through what the constitution and process of ownership might be that would create great owners, whether in the public or private sector, or among the many other forms of ownership, ranging from partnership to co-operatives.

Instead, with the rise of the neoconservative right, there has just been the unquestioning assumption that the best form of ownership is private; in Britain, that necessarily means our idiosyncratic variant of the public limited company. This represents the oddest and most regressive constitution for private ownership anywhere in western capitalism. British company law makes no requirement on shareholders and directors to have any obligation to be good stewards of their assets, their employees or their customers. Shareholders' rights to do what they want with their shares to maximise their immediate value is more stark than anywhere else and directors' responsibilities are only to serve the interests of these madly unconstrained shareholders.

The debacle at Heathrow is one consequence of this insouciance, but the wreckage stretches across the economic landscape. British companies think, strategise, innovate and invest their way to success far less than their competitors in different ownership regimes. They know the penalty for one wrong move is to be taken over as responsibility-free shareholders sell out to some opportunistic predator advised by London's network of lawyers, accountants and investment bankers who grow fat on the lush fees.

No other capitalist economy organises its affairs in this way. When British Airports Authority was privatised in 1986 – with the not unreasonable aim of making it more innovative and freeing it from the stultifying anti-investment rules of the Treasury – there was no creative thought about what constitution of ownership would be the best for an airport. The Americans require their airports to be owned by, not for, companies whose constitution obliges the owners and managers to put the public interest of efficient and comfortable travel first. In Britain, the issue was not even aired. BAA was simply to become a British public limited company, whose sole objective would be profit maximisation.

This self-serving ideology is betraying Britain. The public limited company is a remarkable institution. Incorporation allows the sharing of risk by many providers of private savings. In return for incorporation, the company receives the licence to trade and to make profits as long as it observes the law of the land. The public company is the great engine of capitalist growth. But the constitution of the company matters. Shareholders and directors can be required to take interests into account other than their own immediate profits. Other countries do this and prosper. Not the British.

The lesson is that ownership counts, a view that as disaster piles on disaster is at last gaining some transaction. I chair the recently established Ownership Commission to investigate how better ownership might be achieved, from both introducing mutuality and co-operatives into the public sector to potential revisions in company law for public companies. It reports next autumn. The subject matter is not just technical stuff. This Christmas, there will be people who are not with those they love thanks to BAA's priorities. Good ownership matters very much indeed and Britain has too little of it.

.............................................

Michael Gove is betraying our children yet again

The decision to stop funding Bookstart, with its free books for the young, is unnecessarily cruel

    * Editorial
    * The Observer, Sunday 26 December 2010

  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/dec/26/editorial-child-literacy-books-education 

For most book lovers, the affair starts early and the earlier the introduction is made, the deeper the affection. The benefits of parents reading to their children, as a bonding experience and as a step on the road to literacy, are well documented. Promoting that activity was the founding purpose of Bookstart, the government-sponsored programme which gives starter packs of literature to every child in the country.

The scheme is run by an independent charity, Booktrust, but it depends on a £13m government grant. The trust says that, with the support of the publishing industry, it gets £4 pounds in value for every £1 it receives in public money. It was announced last week that, as of next year, Booktrust will get nothing.

The arguments for austerity are well rehearsed. The money to reduce the deficit has to come from somewhere. A soft target for cuts is presented by this relatively new service, which has yet to embed itself in the nation's consciousness as a cherished institution. It surely would, if allowed to continue. The coalition is, in theory, committed to investment in early years development. Ministers lose no opportunity to express their determination to give children from all backgrounds the best start in life. But they have clearly decided that giving out books is an inefficient way to achieve that goal.

It is impossible to know what return the state might be getting on its investment in Booktrust. The system hasn't been running long enough to tell whether the beneficiaries are more literate than they otherwise might have been, or whether they have more vivid imaginations, or whether they love books more. Only a minister inspired by Thomas Gradgrind, the crudely utilitarian headmaster in Dickens's Hard Times, would attempt such a calculation.

In fact, the decision to axe Bookstart over Christmas suggests education secretary Michael Gove gets his inspiration from a different Dickens character… Free books for children? Humbug!

.

Monday, November 29, 2010

Layer 389 . . . More Royal Wedding Thoughts, Civilisation, Closing Libraries, Conservatism, Blandness, Blairism, Thatcher's Children and the Class of 68

.
What kind of philistine country allows its libraries to close down - no matter how desperate its politics and economics?

Without libraries, we will lose a mark of our civilisation

250 libraries are earmarked to be closed, yet the government ignores this huge loss to the community
by Catherine Bennett
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/28/library-closures-catherine-bennett

How happy does it make you when you hear your library will be closed to save money?
Soon, Mr Cameron's happiness project may help councils to establish whether libraries do, as philanthropists once believed, have something important to offer communities or whether, as many authorities have concluded, the contribution of this service to general well-being is so negligible as to make it a prime candidate for cuts.

Of course, for the almost 250 libraries already earmarked for closure, their role in the happiness supply chain is probably irrelevant. By the time experts have established that, where the alleviation of ignorance, illiteracy, isolation, helplessness, unemployment, infirmity, boredom, neglect and poverty are concerned, libraries do, after all, offer something culturally irreplaceable, they will be gone. It is becoming clear that Mr Cameron's government will do nothing to protect them.
In another model example of the big society at work, his proposal is furiously opposed by an existing community group, Friends of Gloucestershire Libraries. This is not merely because they want librarians who have been trained to run libraries, a job that involves helping other citizens input highly personal information into computers as well as recommending and ordering books, supporting literacy, hosting community groups, storytelling, helping with homework, dealing with the lonely, needy or difficult individuals who rely on the places in ways that vast chunks of the supposedly squeezed middle, as well as prosperous county councillors, will never know.

Lauren Smith, a spokesperson for another volunteer group, Voices for the Library, points out that it is the very people who do not use libraries "whose voices are loudest".

Without libraries, another campaigner predicts, many of the uneducated, unemployed and otherwise forgotten former users will end up needing much costlier help, further down the line, inside job centres, doctors' surgeries, advice centres, housing offices. But a more pressing problem is that "community-run" can only, where it is divorced from the prevailing library service, be a euphemism for permanently trashed.

Supposing every devolved library were to be taken over by a group which was, by chance, composed of kindly, discreet book-lovers with no family commitments, willing to travel and with a gift for incessant fundraising and building maintenance, there would still be no way customers – or beneficiaries – could depend upon it. How do users complain when the library is shut during advertised opening hours?
Bastards. This is sickening and outrageous. We need more and better libraries, not fewer - if we're to become the civilised and enlightened country many of us hoped we might be. But then bringing civilisation, empowerment and enlightenment to the masses was never on the Tory agenda, was it? Far better for people to stay at home with their soap operas, tabloid TV and 'newspapers', celebrity magazines and satellite sports channels.

"Please mum, can we go to the library today?" "Shut up and get back to your cartoons, you bloody little bookworm."

...........................................................

Typical of the vile comments on Comment is Free at the foot of the article is this one by someone whose icon says Smash The State:
I have to say of all things, Libraries are not a priority.
If it has to be done close libraries in wealthy areas, especially those silly small ones what never have the book you want. They can afford their own book anyway.
Leaving aside the small matter of why this type of moron is crawling all over the Guardian website these days (because there's now a paywall around the Murdoch empire?) - this is precisely why children, as well as adults, need libraries. So that some of them at least don't grow up to be bigoted, ignorant fuckwits.

...................................................

She might be a bit of a whacky Hackneyite, but it's good to see Suzanne Moore back in the Guardian this weekend:
Royal wedding? It's the bland leading the bland
Kate Middleton is the perfect people's princess for this dull, conservative land
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/nov/26/kate-middleton-conservative-style

Had I recently arrived from a land far away – and indeed it's a long time since I have been in this newspaper – I wouldn't have much trouble telling you which government is in power. I would simply glance around at people's homes, the clothes they wear, the programmes they watch on TV, and I would see as clear as day that conservative taste stalks the land. It was creeping up on us before the Tories were elected but now it is triumphant. In its understated way of course. Conservative taste does not present itself as anything but good taste. It is just "classic". It is nice, cosy, comfortable rather than sexy. It is simply the way things should be.

To see it in action just look at the swish of the Middleton hair. Of course this lovely young woman has lovely hair which has been blow-dried into glossy swishiness. This is the pinnacle of her achievement and every woman in the land should aspire to it.

This may, of course, be about my refusal to age gracefully, but why, watching this hard-edged girl and diffident young manboy, did I feel unable to place them generationally? They don't resemble any young people I know. It was her tights that did it – flesh-coloured. Opaques would bring down the monarchy.

But what do I know? Fashion editors liked the dress. Possibly "surrendered wife" is the look du jour. Of course it's all nice enough in a middle-aged "don't frighten the horses" Tory spouse way.

The prevalence of Conservative style is the norm to which we all aspire . . .

This is a style that explicitly represses sex and money. Bling is for those who don't have wealth. Sex is about Sam Cam style prettiness and should not be overt. It's about cleanliness and enormous amounts of grooming. No wonder that every subculture at some point makes women look properly dirty with smeared mascara and messed-up hair.
Conservative style is about everything being in the right place whereas real style depends on interesting juxtapositions. It is about more than buying a Heals kitchen or getting a nice blow-dry. These conventions are deadening and restrictive. During a recession nostalgia sells, but nostalgia for what exactly?

This is not fashion. Or actual taste. It is buying into a vision of classlessness that has been defined entirely by the upper middle class as just the way things are. It is heart-stoppingly dull. These signs and rituals of respectability are part of the dominant consensus. This blanding out is a narrowing down of what culture can do. Of what life can be.

The down-home, retro, neutered aesthetics of conservatism are as deadly as their politics. Resist on every front.
................................................

This article says all you need to know about the former PM and the Tory leadership - that they so admire the creature formerly known as T Blair.
Tony Blair's misleading lesson

They call Tony Blair the master and quote from his book.

by Stefan Stern

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/26/davidcameron-georgeosborne

It's love. "I love A Journey," Michael Gove has confessed to this newspaper. Tony Blair's memoirs are like no other book he has ever read, he declared. And Gove's passion is shared by many in the cabinet. David Cameron has admitted how much he enjoyed the book; George Osborne is said to have an audio version, which allows him to hear the author telling his story in his own voice. At No 10 and No 11 Blair is known as "The Master".

Health secretary Andrew Lansley is another fan. "If you read Tony Blair's memoirs, he makes it clear that he regrets the fact that they did not pursue ... reform much more strongly in the early days of the Labour government," he told the PoliticsHome website (paywall). Gove has drawn a similar conclusion. "One of the ... lessons of A Journey – there are many lessons in it – is don't hang around," he said.
 "Reform", eh? This is classic Chicago-School neo-conservative Shock Doctrine tactics, of course. Declare a national emergency and then trash whatever social democratic welfare state still remains as fast as possible, before anyone really understands what's happening.
The truth is it is not yet clear how good a leader Blair actually was. The electoral track record looks impressive. But how hard was it to defeat the Conservatives in 1997 and 2001? His last victory in 2005 was by a margin of only 3%.
This is rubbish. It's perfectly clear. As I never tire of saying, this country was so desperate to get rid of the Tories in '97 that it didn't matter a toss who was the leader of the Labour party at that time. Labour was elected in spite of having the twattish Blair(s) as its leader(s) - as far as 'traditional' Labour supporters were concerned.

Blair, however, turned out to be a very able leader - in terms of fooling lots of people into believing he was some sort of progressive politician, in terms of forcing through the continuation of Thatcherism, in terms of taking forward the whole neo-conservative globalising agenda, in terms of championing bankers and big finance, in terms of shackling us to George W and his cronies, etc.

No wonder these Tories love him.

.......................................................

Thatcher's children can lead the class of 68 back into action

The students aren't just angry about education cuts. They see themselves as a vanguard for a much wider protest campaign
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/26/student-protest-public-sector-cuts

by Polly Toynbee

The scandalous abolition of the education maintenance allowance (EMA), which gives £30 a week to sixth-formers from the poorest families, is as central to their protest as their tripled fees. I read out a heartbreaking email I had just received from a Hackney sixth-former: she and her twin brother live with their disabled mother. Together they will lose £60 a week in allowance and wonder if they can stay on. She went on her first march on Wednesday, peacefully, far from any violence, and was horrified at being kettled by the police for five hours. Are police and government conspiring to turn peaceful young people into outraged militants?

What started as protests about tuition fees accelerated into a political movement against cuts of all kinds. Inequality, poverty, the shredding of public services, unemployment, bankers and boardroom bonuses had become part of the protest. One fight, one struggle, they said, as if 40 years had suddenly fallen away. Not exactly Paris 1968, but in their sit-in meetings they were beginning to see themselves as the vanguard for a wider campaign. Thatcher's children, selfish, materialist, apathetic? Not at all.

Another eye-opener: the coalition has U-turned to shelve its pledge to protect public sector workers who blow the whistle on dangerous, corrupt or incompetent practices. Why? Ministers just realised it would also protect anyone revealing damage done to services by their own cuts.

When the Metropolitan police commissioner talks of a new era of civil unrest, he may not know which way to look for the next wave. Will it be the cavalcade of wheelchairs that so alarmed politicians last time their users tipped themselves on to the pavement outside No10? More school pupils, losing not just EMA but by next year teaching assistants and teachers, along with libraries, swimming pools, school sports and youth clubs? Or mothers with prams, since women are the great losers in income, childcare, nurseries and other services? Or nurses from closed wards? The "squeezed middle" will be angry, the £12,000 to £30,000 earners about to lose £720 a year, as identified by the Resolution Foundation this week. The same middle saw the decade of GDP growth pass them by, with most new wealth sucked upwards to the top few percentiles.

No doubt the government secretly hopes violent protest by striking public sector unions will alienate popular support. The unions need to be cleverer than that, standing on the side of the public and never against them. Striking teachers sending children home so parents lose days of work will lose sympathy that would otherwise be guaranteed by more creative action.

The recklessness in coalition assaults on the NHS, benefits and council services, with the pain distributed so unjustly, suggests a high-risk government speeding without seatbelts. With so many candidates, it's hard to tell what will erupt as iconic "poll tax" issues. Students are always first – energy, time and lack of children make protest easy. But the class of 68 may not be far behind, an older generation dusting down its memories and equally free of family to make its voice heard, the generation who had it all supporting the recession generations, growing up debt-laden with shrunken services, too few jobs and years away from owning a home.
.

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Layer 388 . . . Education, the White Paper, and the Alexander Review

.
Schools and the teaching profession in England stand accused of cowardice, complacency, confusion, disunity, lack of professionalism and lack of vision. Not by Michael Gove. By me.

Through failing to resist the assault on its professionalism by successive governments the teaching profession has forfeited its right to be seen as a profession, and appears to be a divided bunch of self-interested functionaries who simply do as they're told, even when the people doing the telling are plainly idiots and cretins who have NO clue as to the needs of learners and teachers.

Who are all these 'superheads', for instance, who have allegedly 'turned schools around'? To face in which direction? The 'Standards Agenda'? Teaching to the tests? 'Driving up standards? Uncritical adoption of governmental 'reforms'? Creating factory schools that constantly drill and coach pupils with league tables their sole concern? Yes you bastards - you know who you are.

Of course the best of the best have managed to achieve government targets without sacrificing concern for individual children and without letting go of a determination to provide schools that offer a broad and balanced and creative curriculum. All of which is much easier to achieve if you have a proper comprehensive intake of pupils and a stable staff.

But it's been a dog eat dog world, and it's likely to get even worse. Thanks to Gove and co.

Schools' sole concern from now on ought to be for the pupils and their families. That's to say, for the total wellbeing of their pupils, and not just their test scores.

Unless schools are enabling children to grow up loving school and learning to love learning for its own sake, and feeling that every day is enjoyable and creative, then they are failing in their duty. Schools are NOT businesses, and they have no business behaving as though test and exam scores are all that matter.

Take Primary schools. Why have they not joined together and said we're going to adopt wholesale the recommendations of the Cambridge Primary Review? For the answer to this question, see paragraph 1 - above.

The headline on the front page of the Times Educational Supplement - no hotbed of revolution - on Friday October 16th 2009 said,

Alexander Review: Give us back our schools

http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6025096

by Helen Ward

Biggest investigation since Plowden demands end to era of centralised control

The biggest investigation into primary education in a generation has demanded that England’s schools are reclaimed from politicians who have imposed a “state theory of learning” on teachers.

The final report of the independent Cambridge Primary Review, published today, calls for the depoliticisation of the classroom, with central control slashed to a minimum and funding pumped into schools.

The study, which has taken three years and draws on the work of more than 3,000 researchers, begins: “Ours is a public system of education which belongs to the people and is not the personal fiefdom of ministers and their unelected advisors.”

Its recommendations include that formal primary education should not start until the age of six, and that the current system of league tables and national tests be scrapped and replaced with a new system of accountability in which teacher assessment plays a stronger role.

Professor Robin Alexander, who led the inquiry, said he was irritated that the debate over education had been presented as a simple battle between “the trendy” and “back to basics” factions.

“The whole discourse has been hijacked by the mythmakers,” he told The TES. “This is about reclaiming the debate, it is about resetting the agenda for professionals.”

The final report, Children, Their World, Their Education, is being sent to every school in the UK, including secondaries and special schools.

It is the largest inquiry of its kind since Lady Plowden’s in 1967, but is more independent than its predecessor. The Alexander Review was funded by the Esmee Fairbain charitable foundation while the Plowden report was commissioned by the government of the day.

Many of its findings have been revealed over the last year and half in a series of interim reports, including an assertion that childhood is not in crisis, and that primary schools provide a safe haven for young children in a changing world.

John Bangs, head of education for the National Union of Teachers, said teachers would applaud many of the review’s conclusions, including the change in official primary starting age. “Professor Alexander is spot on that education is too important for the factionalisation of party politics,” he said.

As the report notes, the Department for Children, Schools and Families, as well as Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary have criticised the interim reports for containing “a collection of recycled, partial or out of date research”.

However, both the anti-centralisation and the subject specialist recommendations will appeal to the Conservatives, which have pledged to move funding from agencies to the frontline.

David Laws, Liberal democrat spokesman for education, said: “The strength of the report is that it’s not been commissioned by the Government and its terms of reference haven’t been unnecessarily restricted. It is able to recognize some of the achievements of primary education and progress made in the last decade while also being willing to be critical about those things that have gone wrong. We feel very strongly that the degree of micromanagement and interference is on a scale that would never have been tolerated and would have been seen as shockingly totalitarian 30 years ago.”

..................................................

Ah yes, David Laws. I remember him well. One of the main movers and shakers in the coalition negotiations, I seem to recall. Foxy little guy. Gove's counterpart in the LibDems.

As Kundera said, politicians rely on our forgetfulness. 

................................................

Disadvantage lies at heart of primary review

http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6025135

Robin Alexander praises schools as ‘the centre that holds when things fall apart’, but while rejecting media ‘myths’ of a generation in crisis he argues that more must be done to narrow the gap between vulnerable children and the rest. Helen Ward reports

Forty years ago, the Plowden report declared that at the heart of the educational process lies the child.

Now, the most comprehensive inquiry into primary schooling in Britain since then has laid out its vision of education. And central to its vision is the disadvantaged child.

“For this is our bottom line,” the Cambridge Primary Review states. “The education of young children matters immeasurably - to them both now and in the future and to our society. It matters to all children but especially to those who, in our divided society, lack the massively compensating advantages of financial wealth, emotional harmony and a home life that is linguistically, intellectually, culturally and spiritually rich.”

The review, which set out to examine how primary education can best meet the needs of today’s children, is indignant about the politicisation of education.

In the final report, edited by Professor Robin Alexander, the review’s leader, rails against media myths of failure and politicians’ ill-founded claims of success.

The report’s prevailing mood is underlined by its headline conclusions: reform Sats and scrap league tables, extend the early-years foundation stage to Year 1, rebalance the curriculum, train teachers to become educators not deliverers of ready-made lessons and carry out a full review of special educational needs provision.

The report is more than another shot in one of the many battlegrounds of education. It is deeply serious, foreseeing that “sensationalising headlines will do nothing like justice” to the breadth, weight and authority of the evidence. But it is readable and not without humour (among the 88 historical milestones it lists are 1969’s “back to basics”, 1992’s “back to basics again” and 1998’s “back to basics yet again”).

It is an ambitious attempt to go beyond governments, override spats and appeal directly to “all those interested in primary education”. It concludes with 75 recommendations that the 14 authors believe would provide the education and the childhood that all children deserve.

It begins by exploring the state of childhood, noting one father’s complaints about his son’s alleged truancy and failure to do his homework - comments made in Mesopotamia 3,500 years ago. Is the modern “crisis in childhood” real? What is the evidence?

Start by listening to children, suggests the report; 72 per cent say their peers are “kind and helpful”.

Health, education and respect for children have improved vastly. There are genuine concerns about equity, but the distorted picture of “blighted” childhoods prevents change where it is needed.

The review praises primary schools as “the centre that holds when things fall apart”. It praises the Government’s efforts to narrow gaps in educational attainment.

Mick Brookes, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said the review was correct to draw attention to disadvantaged pupils and the inequality in the education system.

The report is independent, but it is responsive to the political landscape in which it finds itself. It advocates change in a system that seems to be constantly changing. This term, the Government is due to announce its final decision on the recommendations of Sir Jim Rose’s review, which was limited to the primary curriculum.

The Rose review recommendations, which have been widely welcomed in the profession, call for the national curriculum to be rearranged into six areas of learning and six essential skills, in an attempt to give teachers more flexibility. The new curriculum is due to be introduced by 2010.

But the Cambridge review calls for the process to be suspended. Sir Jim’s review has fundamentally missed the point, it argues. The problem is not curriculum overload, but a mismatch between what schools have to do and the skills of their staff. Primaries need more teachers and more specialist teachers in addition to generalist class teachers.

But how seriously will politicians treat its proposals?

As the review notes, some of its recommendations have already been taken up - including scrapping National Strategies - though ministers dismissed them when they were made in its earlier interim reports.

Professor Alexander knows only too well the risks that the final report’s calls may be ignored or even attacked as “off message”.

It concludes: “The Cambridge Primary Review is for the longer term, not the next election… its final report is not just for transient architects and agents of policy. It is for all who invest daily, deeply and for life in this vital phase of education, especially children, parents and teachers.”

In other words, it is for you.

..............................................................

Key recommendations

End the “state theory of learning”. The Government should not tell teachers how to teach.

- Extend the foundation stage to age six. Have a single primary key stage.

- Prioritise narrowing the gap between vulnerable children and the rest.

- Undertake a full review of special educational needs.

- Follow Professor Alexander’s curriculum recommendations, including the creation of 12 aims and eight domains.

- Reform assessment; stop current Sats; scrap league tables; assess all areas of the curriculum and use sampling to monitor national standards.

- Undertake a full review of primary school staffing.

- Reform initial teacher training.

- Protect rural and middle schools.

- Protect and expand school libraries.

- End primary/secondary funding differential.
...................................................................

FAQ
Q. What is the Cambridge Primary Review?

A. A three-year inquiry into the state and future of English primary education.

Q. Who is Robin Alexander?

A. Director of the review and fellow of Wolfson College, Cambridge University. He was one of the “three wise men” who led a government inquiry into primary education in 1991. He has long advocated a more central place for oracy in primary education.

Q. How is this review different from Sir Jim Rose’s?

A. Sir Jim was commissioned and paid by the Government to look at the primary curriculum. Professor Alexander’s review has been funded by the Esmee Fairbairn Foundation and looks at the whole of primary education.

Q. What does Professor Alexander think about primary schools?

A. Primary schools appear to be under intense pressure but in good heart. They are highly valued by children and parents and in general are doing a good job. They do not neglect and never have neglected the 3Rs… For many, schools are the centre that holds when things fall apart.

www.primaryreview.org.uk

What the report says…

 . . . about teaching staff

England has 198,200 primary teachers and 172,600 primary school support staff - one adult for every 11 primary pupils. This is investment on a remarkable scale.

The class teacher system is taken for granted, but does it best serve primary pupils’ needs?

It arose because it combined cheapness and efficiency in the context of large classes, a basic curriculum and view of teaching as little more than drilling of facts and skills. But subject knowledge is the elephant in the room.

A national review of staffing and funding policy is required. And more specialist teachers are needed, especially in upper primary.

A two-year PGCE should be considered to help to achieve this. Initial teacher training should move away from compliance culture. The Training and Development Agency for Schools’ professional standards need changing as they encourage conformity rather than originality and do not recognise that experienced teachers need autonomy to be effective. Continuing professional development is often patronising.

Headteachers need to be supported so they can focus on leading learning. The current model in which the head is burdened with a proliferating range of responsibilities is no longer tenable for a single person.

Teaching assistants have liberated teachers from tasks that diminish time with children, but the use of TAs as teachers is not acceptable. They need training for working with small groups and children with SEN.

. . . about pupils
Legitimate concerns exist about children’s lives today, but the “crisis” of modern childhood has been grossly overstated.

For most children, perceived risk is much greater than actual risk. But for a significant minority the risks and deprivations are at least as severe as they are portrayed and it is here that attention needs to be focused. Social disadvantage blights the early lives of a larger proportion of children in Britain than in many other countries.

Britain is very diverse - and to an extent which at the time of Plowden would have been unimaginable. The transience and unpredictability of migration and the inadequacy of local information adds to pressure on schools. The review encountered evidence of discrimination against marginalised groups, within the education system as well as in society.

. . . about government
Assumptions and formulas for funding primary education should be reviewed. The staffing of primary schools should be led by the curriculum and the needs of pupils. A new funding formula is needed, preceded by a national staffing review. Excessive funding variation between local authorities and key stages should be eliminated.

The National Strategies have cost £2 billion. Savings arising from terminating them should be shifted from government and local authorities to schools.

Centralised reform has produced important and necessary changes in children’s services, but has gone too far in relation to curriculum and pedagogy. The role of government should revert to providing the administrative and financial framework, setting the goals and scope of the national curriculum and the broad standards primary schools should achieve.

Assessment should be reviewed and league tables stopped. Children’s learning should be assessed formatively throughout the primary phase and summatively before the transfer to secondary school. A separate system should be used to evaluate schools and monitor national standards externally, using sample testing.

......................................................... 

What's happened since this report was published? Anyone taken any note of it?
Not really. People like Balls and Gove have done what people like them usually do. And the Primary sector, to its shame, has kept its head down and failed to demand full implementation of the above.
.

Friday, November 26, 2010

Layer 387 . . . Brazil, Rio, Lula, Education, White Paper, Gove and Ofsted

.
This week I've been thinking about Rio de Janeiro. Never having set foot in South America, it was interesting to talk with someone who's lived there for over 30 years. Rio sounds like a pretty wonderful place, not least on account of its climate, whose average temperatures never fall below 18C. Throughout the year the highest average monthly temperatures range from 28C to 34C. How perfect is that?

Rio de Janeiro is the most visited city in the southern hemisphere and is known for its natural settings, carnival celebrations, samba, Bossa Nova, balneario beaches such as Copacabana, Ipanema and Leblon. Some of the most famous landmarks in addition to the beaches include the giant statue of Christ the Redeemer ('Cristo Redentor') atop Corcovado mountain, named one of the New Seven Wonders of the World; Sugarloaf mountain (Pão de Açúcar) with its cable car; the Sambódromo, a permanent grandstand-lined parade avenue which is used during Carnival; and Maracanã stadium, one of the world's largest football stadiums. Rio de Janeiro will host the 2016 Summer Olympics, the first South American city to host the event, and will host the final match for 2014 FIFA World Cup.   -  Wikipedia

There are significant disparities between the rich and the poor in Rio de Janeiro. Although the city clearly ranks among the world's major metropolises, one fifth of its inhabitants live in neighbourhoods known as favelas, where housing is not regulated. In the favelas, 15% of the population are poor, compared to 10% in the general population. There have been a number of government initiatives to counter this problem, from the removal of the population from favelas to housing projects such as Cidade de Deus to the more recent approach of improving conditions in the favelas, bringing them up to par with the rest of the city, as was the focus of the "Favela Bairro" program.   -   Wikipedia

Today I came across this in the Guardian:

Rio de Janeiro gun battles leave at least 14 people dead

Many killed in major police assaults on favela strongholds of drug traffickers and gangsters


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/25/rio-gun-battles-favelas-14-dead

Prolonged gun battles between police and drug traffickers left at least 14 people dead yesterday in Rio . . .

The deaths came during a series of major police assaults on the city's slums, including one favela that serves as the HQ of the city's largest drug gang.

Triggered by a spate of attacks on police and drivers, the incursions began on Tuesday and involved hundreds of heavily armed police operatives, bulletproof vehicles and helicopters.

About 150 people were arrested during the sweeps by 17,500 officers while at least 22 people have been killed since Sunday, according to Rio's military police. The wounded have included two policemen and an 81-year-old man while an estimated 17,000 children were left unable to attend lessons as a result of the clashes.

"We did not start this war," Colonel Lima Castro, a spokesman for Rio's military police said last night. "We were provoked and we will emerge victorious."

The massive operations in at least 20 Rio favelas followed a wave of apparently co-ordinated attacks by drug traffickers who torched buses and cars and planted homemade bombs in various locations.

The attacks were reportedly instigated by Rio's oldest and most powerful drug faction, the Red Command, as a reaction against official attempts to pacify the favelas which have so far seen several suspected gangsters expelled.

After Tuesday's operations, the confrontations erupted again yesterday when armed police poured into the Complexo da Penha, a sprawling labyrinth of slums which is home to leading members of the Red Command faction.

It is controlled by scores of fresh-faced gang members armed with assault rifles and machine guns.

Helicopter images shot by one TV channel showed dozens of gang members, brandishing handguns and assault rifles, gathered at an entrance to the community.

Last night gunfights continued, cars burned and police roadblocks were set up across the city. Internet rumours of impending attacks, in shopping malls and in the city's beachside south zone, spread rapidly.

Rio's governor, Sérgio Cabral, also took to the airwaves. "This is an act of despair," he said. "We will carry on with the same policy of retaking territory."

One civil police officer told the Guardian that authorities expected further attacks. "There's going to be trouble," he said.

Brazil's a fascinating country, and is about to become a hugely important economic force in the world. It's politics are also very interesting.

Brazil is the largest country in South America. It is the world's fifth largest country, both by geographical area and by population. - Wikipedia

President-elect: Dilma Rousseff

Dilma Rousseff is the first woman to be elected as Brazil's president. She is former chief of staff to, and favoured successor of, outgoing president Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.
Dilma Rousseff has pledged to continue the policies of her predecessor.

In the October 2010 elections to succeed President Lula, she narrowly failed to win an outright majority in the first round.

The result meant Ms Rousseff faced the second-placed candidate, Sao Paolo mayor Jose Serra of the main opposition Social Democracy party, in a run-off vote on 31 October.

Ms Rousseff, 62, was little known to her compatriots until Mr Lula selected her as his favoured successor after a number of high-profile candidates were forced out by corruption scandals during his time in office.

She joined the government in 2003 as energy minister. In 2005, Mr Lula made her his chief of staff, a post she held until March 2010, when she launched her campaign for the presidency as the Workers Party (PT) candidate.

During the election campaign, Ms Rousseff made it clear that she represented continuity with the Lula government, under which millions of Brazilians saw their standard of living rise.

She is known to favour a strong state role in strategic areas, including banking, the oil industry and energy.

Dilma Rousseff was born in 1947 and grew up in an upper middle class household in Belo Horizonte, in the coffee-growing state of Minas Gerais.

Her father, Pedro Rousseff, was a Bulgarian immigrant.

Her seemingly conventional background changed in the mid-1960s, when she was in her late teens. She became involved in left-wing politics and joined the underground resistance to the military dictatorship that seized power in 1964.

She has said that she was never actively involved in armed operations, but in 1970 she was jailed for three years and reportedly tortured.

After her release at the end of 1972 she studied economics and went on to become a career civil servant.

In 2009, she was treated for and recovered from lymphatic cancer.

Outgoing president: Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva

Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, popularly known as Lula, is set to step down on 1 January 2011 after two four-year terms in office, being barred by the constitution from standing for a third term.
   
President Lula da Silva

Lula promises to help Brazil's poorest while pursuing growth

Elected in 2002 on promises to boost growth and to narrow the gap between rich and poor, Lula, of the centre-left Workers' Party, secured a second term in a landslide election victory in October 2006.

In his first term, Lula implemented tough fiscal policies, overseeing economic stabilisation and falling levels of inflation and foreign debt.

He changed the pension system and pushed through a modest increase in the minimum wage.

Welfare programmes targeted millions of poor families. But he had to contend with a surge of land invasions by activists frustrated at what they saw as the slow pace of agrarian reform.

In 2005 his popularity was dented by claims of corruption in the ruling party, focusing on a cash-for-votes scheme in Congress. The president apologised and said he had known nothing about the alleged corruption.

In January 2007, Lula marked the start of his second term in office by announcing an ambitious investment programme.

Brazil is a major commodities exporter and Lula has argued strongly that countries should not put up protectionist barriers in response to the current global economic crisis.

Lula was born in 1945 in the impoverished north-east. His family moved to Sao Paulo when he was seven and he left school at 14 to become a metal worker.

In the 1970s, he honed his political skills as a fiery union leader in the industrial suburbs of Sao Paulo. He went on to help found the Workers' Party.

- BBC    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/1227110.stm

.............................................................

Oh dear - what to say about Gove and his White Paper? Some of the rhetoric sounds plausible,  and is probably inspired by his pal Anthony Seldon and various anarcho-conservatives. Gove's own reactionary prejudices, however, are pretty apparent. He really is a banana.

School reforms: bad teachers out, social mobility in as Gove outlines goals

White paper transforms teacher training, creates an English baccalaureate and encourages traditional uniform
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/nov/24/school-reforms-teachers-social-mobility

It encourages schools to have "traditional blazer and tie uniforms" as well as prefects and house systems.

The teaching unions claimed Gove's plans would sharpen the divides between schools. Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said the white paper would "increase bureaucracy and government interference".

"If the education secretary genuinely wishes England to do as well as countries such as Finland, to which he frequently refers in the white paper, he should follow its example by replacing the inspection system with school self-evaluation, refrain from the publication of results by school league tables and the setting of narrow performance targets."

The white paper also narrows the role of Ofsted, to oversight of four areas: pupil achievement, the quality of teaching, school leadership, and pupil behaviour.

The government plans to change regulations on removing incompetent teachers, enabling headteachers to "deal more swiftly, effectively and fairly with underperforming members of staff".

Gove told the Commons: "The best schools systems recruit the best people to teach, train them intensively in the craft of teaching, continue to develop them as professionals throughout their career, groom natural leaders for headship positions and give great heads the chance to make a dramatic difference."

The white paper includes new assessments of "aptitude, personality and resilience" for candidates seeking to enter teaching. High-fliers wishing to switch careers will be tempted by being offered an "accelerated route to leadership" rather than facing the prospect of starting their careers at the bottom.

Armed forces veterans with a degree will have their tuition fees sponsored if they wish to train as teachers and the government will explore a "bespoke, compressed" undergraduate route for former soldiers without a degree.

Gove told reporters: "Not every school would welcome the RSM from Sandhurst joining their ranks, but I have to say there are a number of heads I've talked to who'd bite my arm off to have him doing PE on a Friday afternoon."

The government will create a national network of teaching schools, modelled on teaching hospitals, which will receive funding to provide professional development for teachers and heads.

The white paper proposes a new financial incentive for schools to collaborate, encouraging stronger ones to support weaker schools and improve their performance.

What the reforms mean

The curriculum should set out core knowledge and understanding. It has been too prescriptive and has specified teaching method, which teachers should be free to decide. The national curriculum will be "slim, clear and authoritative" so that all parents can see what their child is expected to know. Academies and free schools will retain the freedom to set aside aspects of the national curriculum, but will be required to teach a "broad and balanced" curriculum.

The long-term goal is to move to a national funding formula under which money would go directly from Whitehall to schools, bypassing local authority control.

The government will not fund graduates who do not have at least a 2:2 degree. The Teach First programme, which recruits highly able graduates, will be expanded. Career-switchers will be encouraged, as will former members of the armed forces who want to teach. The government is to investigate creating a fast-track training route for former servicemen and women who do not have degrees.

......................................................

Ofsted

Regular readers of Oxzen will be aware that this blog loathes Christine Gilbert's rotten regime at Ofsted, and all that it's done, and not done, to schools.

Zoe Williams wrote this column in the Guardian this week:

Michael Gove's missed the obvious target for reform – Ofsted

The inspectorate's disdain for teachers is shaping policy. But those in the classroom believe those who can't teach, inspect

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/24/education-white-paper-ofsted

Some elements of the white paper on education just sound a bit thick. I don't mind that. It is when the coalition sounds cunning that I dread it the most. Still, it bears pointing out that education secretary Michael Gove talks about a "toxic target culture" and then announces a stricter target: raising the threshold at which schools are considered to be "failing" to having fewer than 35% of pupils achieving five GCSEs graded A* to C. The current level is 30% – the change would bestow a failure tag on 439 schools (on 2009 figures). David Cameron spent most of the election vowing to free teachers who have to "teach to the test" only to launch a new test, this time for six-year-olds, to see if they can recognise words.

Teaching unions can defend their members stoutly, and teachers of course can defend themselves: there's no shortage of people saying that if lessons look "dull and uninspiring" it's because the autonomy and creativity has been stripped out of the process by the latest set of targets, and the ones before that. But what unions don't do is criticise Ofsted back, so from a bystander's perspective the inspectorate retains its air of authority and impartiality.

Privately, though, teachers are scathing about Ofsted. Dennis Charman, secondary teacher and secretary of the NUT in Hammersmith and Fulham, is very rare in saying this openly: "I've taught for 36 years and my school is regarded as an outstanding school. I wouldn't allow an Ofsted inspector into my house. There is no respect for them in the profession. Why do people leave teaching to take on this work, on a daily contract basis? Generally it's because they can't hack it in the classroom. I would stand up in front of 1,000 teachers and say this, and they would all cheer."

Targets are set, standards are raised in sometimes eccentric directions, teachers are never consulted but are then made accountable to rules in which they've had no input.

So a government appoints people who aren't teachers to set targets; those same people then attack schools for being too target-driven; and a new regime sets new targets to break the spell of the old targets. It would be more interesting, productive – and cheaper – to reform Ofsted, so that it drew its inspectors from among the best of the active teaching population. The "target" problem would probably solve itself.
.