Layer 417 . . . A Generation Under Strain, Old and Sad, Parris & Portillo, Brandreth, Clive Rowe, Panto, and the Secret Mediterranean?

.
Having watched the first programme of Trevor McDonald's new series, 'The Secret Mediterranean', I felt moved to write something about it - but really, I don't know if I can be bothered. This is OK! TV for the retarded. This is Hello! TV for couch potatoes. You can get a pretty good flavour of what it's like from Sam Wollaston's review, and the spot-on CiF comments following it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2011/jan/05/secret-mediterranean-with-trevor-mcdonald

This is a stinker of a TV production. How can anyone possibly make a bad documentary about an amazing place like the Med? Sir Trev and the people from Plum Pictures can - with ease. Traipsing round ludicrously expensive 'yachts' and the super-luxury hotels favoured by the super-rich and famous, making fatuous comments in his plummy accent - this what Sir Trev McWhicker does best.

He and Plum even managed to make Venice look boring, whilst Trevor himself looked slightly seasick as he was gondoliered around the less well-frequented canals of this jewel of the Mediterranean. The reason some of those outlying, dare I say backwater, canals are infrequently visited (though hardly 'secret')  is because they are boring. I'd rather take a cruise down the Grand Union through the Black Country. As long as I didn't have Sir T as a companion.

You can never expect Trevor to say anything interesting about anything - but surely we could expect more than, "This is very narrow," "Oh, it's lovely!", "Quite marvellous!", "It's quite soothing in a way, isn't it?" "We made our way along the calm waters, as the city slowly drifted by, as if in a hypnotic haze." I kid you not.

"It's not very easy getting around in this city - on the water."

Quite so, Trev - that would be on account of the narrow canals.

"But it's more beautiful!" said the gondolier.

"That's a very Venetian view of life!" said TM.

Er - No, Trev. That's just a fact. Venice is, on the whole, incredibly beautiful.

The final straw was hearing Trevor calling the canals "canarls", as in "gnarls". Is this what elecution lessons do for someone? Is this what gets bland people knighthoods?

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

By way of contrast, and for some brilliant laugh-out-loud entertainment, you could go to see Clive Rowe in Jack and the Beanstalk at the Hackney Empire. Except you can't, since it's the last show today. Mr Rowe is fantastic as the Dame in this excellent production - dominating and carrying the show with his incredible voice, timing and comic persona.  
  

Pantomime is such an amazing artform - consisting of spectacle, audience participation, singing, dancing, drama, comedy, storytelling, men dressed as women, women dressed as men, etc. The giant in this production was really something special. Get a flavour of it here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koQg8mJ3MAE&feature=player_embedded

    

Arise Sir Clive: Dame Extraordinaire!

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

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/08/unthinkable-ashes-free-to-air

by SalvadorDarley
I'm not used to England having a highly organised, utterly competent and ruthless cricket team. I preferred the days of collapso cricket, Gower in the Tiger Moth, Devon Malcolm swinging the bat to get the hundred up, Tuffers wheezing around the outfield looking for his fags and the occasional, heroic match-saving innings or tight victory (when the series is already lost).

Subsequently I've gone off cricket as I don't really understand it any more.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2011/jan/07/ashes-england-bowlers-reverse-swing

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

"Live in the moment!" said Giles Brandreth, on Desert Island Discs. Zennist (!) Giles admitted he has no music in his soul, like so many of these desert islanders. He's a man of the theatre, a man of the spoken word, he told us, by way of non-explanation. As if you can't be passionate about musical expression  as well as spoken language . . .

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00x8f2l

However, he did select "Boum!" by Charles Trenet.

Is it legit on this programme to choose a speech by Laurence Olivier (from Othello)?

His love of musicals is interesting, given his lack of interest in music. Clearly it's the words and the drama that appeal to people who love musicals.

He also loves Gilbert & Sullivan - more camping about and more wordfests for people who aren't interested in music.

"I wasn't young like other people were young in the Sixties."

"It's been useful being camp and having people think I'm gay. Very good cover!"

"You can't imagine anyone with more advantages than I had - a middle class child of the mid-Fifties."

"I am the world's most spoilt and self-centred man."

Even so, there's something a little bit endearing about Giles, as his many fans will no doubt attest. He certainly doesn't come across as a hard-line Thatcherite, or a fully paid-up member of the Nasty Party.

In a similar vein, there was an excellent panel on Any Questions? this week - Ken Livingston, Matthew Parris and Michael Portillo. And Vivienne Westwood.

Parris and Portillo are a couple of interesting Tories - which you can't say about very many of them. Is it 'cos they is gay? You may not agree with their views, but you get a real sense of individuals who have long ago given up on parroting the party line, and who usually say what they truly believe. What's more they are knowledgeable, open-minded, decent, unbigoted and they think before they speak. And you can hardly say fairer than that. They may not have a complete grasp on economic theory, but then who has these days? They may not be egalitarians, but then neither were New Labour. And it's not entirely clear whether Ed Miliband's Latest Labour is going to be, either.

I particularly respect Parris for saying this:

Criticism of Tony Blair

Parris has suggested that Tony Blair has a deep flaw in his personality which made him unsuitable for the role of Prime Minister. On 18 March 2006 he wrote:

    I believe Tony Blair is an out-and-out rascal, terminally untrustworthy and close to being unhinged. I said from the start that there was something wrong in his head, and each passing year convinces me more strongly that this man is a pathological confidence-trickster. To the extent that he even believes what he says, he is delusional. To the extent that he does not, he is an actor whose first invention — himself — has been his only interesting role.

- Wikipedia

Classic symptoms of a psychopath, as I've said so many times myself.

As for Portillo, you have to have some respect for a man with enough of a sense of humour to say, "My name is now synonymous with eating a bucketload of shit in public".

That's right, he's talking about "the Portillo moment".

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

A couple of very worthwhile articles in the Observer today:

In contrast to Giles Brandreth's gilded youth -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/jan/09/young-people-generation-under-strain

No country for young people: is this generation under strain?

Young people confront a radically different social landscape to that of their parents, who stand accused alongside bankers and politicians of bequeathing an economic and environmental mess. Tracy McVeigh hears their views

Gary Watts said some very sensible things, including, "When you're growing up, no one tells you what life really is going to be like. It's constantly exams and then stress, more stress, coursework. By the time I reached 18 I was virtually burnt out from all of that."

Someone commenting on CiF said, - "Surely mankind will develop through education. If one generation is educated, and they educate more than the last generation, and that goes on in a long process with each generation more educated than the last, then surely that is a good thing?"

Well - it depends on what you mean by education. Learning to pass examinations doesn't necessarily equate with becoming wiser, more enlightened, more able to see the wood for the trees. Neither does it equate with becoming more emotionally intelligent, more empathetic, more intuitive, etc. In many respects our schools, through a relentless concentration on academic success, stifle the development of other crucial intelligences. Is this what our planet needs? Clever little academics with little in the way of human/spiritual values, little in the way of emotional and social skills and understanding? Is this not why we see so much drug-taking and violence in our society? No wonder some universities and some businesses are now beginning to see the need to produce more rounded individuals with more "life skills" and "employment skills", as they call them. Plus more creativity and more imagination. Thank goodness they do things differently in other, more enlightened, countries, such as Finland and Denmark, where education is still pupil-focused and pedagogy and the curriculum are still driven by respected professionals. Why are English pupils the most examined, the most miserable and the most burnt-out - as Gary Watts attests in this article? We do indeed have much to learn.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jan/09/andrew-rawnsley-oldham-saddleworth-byelection

Oldham and Saddleworth: All three leaders are jumpy about the verdict of the Pennines

The Oldham and Saddleworth byelection highlights the challenges facing each of the parties in the year ahead

by Andrew Rawnsley

This Thursday, the good folk of Oldham East and Saddleworth will vote in the first byelection of the coalition age. Some of the bad and ugly folk will take part as well. The result will be part-verdict on what has happened since last May, including the performance of the coalition and the leadership of Ed Miliband, and part-harbinger of how voters are likely to react in the 12 months ahead, a year of sharp tax rises, deep spending cuts and threatened strikes. What's not so agreed is precisely what and whom is being tested in Old and Sad.

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

It was Derren Brown night on C4 last night. This guy is a phenomenon. What it must be like to be that clever, and to have that much nerve and originality? He must have some fun times too, with friends as funny and brilliant as Matt Lucas and Bill Bailey.
.

Layer 302 . . . Tales of Two Cities, Enchantment, Politics, Peace Camps, Demos, PR, and a Progressive Alliance

.
Paddy Ashdown, now pushing 70, showed this morning how to wear an open-necked shirt and still look funky. These younger politicians who wear their normal suit shirts without a tie just look - stupid.

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

Here's my recommended viewing for today:

Crisis Capitalism - Naomi Klein and Raj Patel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Ji_8tI0sbY

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

There was a very funny moment on TV this morning when Dame Anne Leslie, the notorious right-wing hag, argued against PR electoral systems on the basis that they let into parliament undesirable parties such as Austria's neo-nazi Freedom Party and BZO. A fellow panellist then pointed out that these are exactly the kind of parties that Cameron and co have joined up with in the European parliament. Brilliant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrian_Freedom_Party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B6rg_Haider

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

Tales of Two Cities

1. Venice - by Francesco da Mosto; BBC4

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0078ssj

"Not just beautiful. Enchanting."

So said a guy who's been sweeping St Mark's Square at dawn every day for 22 years. Venice is enchanting.

So here we have it: there's something beyond beautiful. There's something more than aesthetically pleasing and visually stunning. There's another dimension where aesthetics trigger . . . the divine. The transcendental. The spiritual. The realm of satori that lies beyond the merely physical. The connection with the metaphysical; the one-and-all; the source of all meaning and ultimate joy and delight. The source of our higher being. This is what the street sweeper connects with, every morning in Venice, as he watches the sun rise.

This programme is a visually stunning, brilliantly conceived, wonderfully edited, superbly written and beautifully narrated essay on an amazing city.

Now available on DVD.

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

2. London

Is London enchanting? Er . . . no. On the whole. London is something else. An amazing place in its own right, but not a place which of itself produces transcendental enchantment; though parts of it can, on certain days.

Arriving in Trafalgar Square yesterday I found it full of Morris dancers and their entourages, plus passing tourists, and this was only an hour after there was supposed to have been a massive demonstration in favour of PR and electoral reform. Hardly an Athens-like scenario.

Walking down Whitehall it was clear that the majority of people were tourists, speaking a variety of languages. This is a weird and not very wonderful street - though it's very impressive. All the financial and political pomp and power of the State is on architectural display. I'd really love to see there, every weekend, parties of visitors consisting of neighbourhood groups giving their young people an educational tour. Children and young people from all over the country should have a right to a guided tour of the throbbing heart of government, in order to stimulate their interest in politics, government and citizenship. How many schools, especially London schools, even bother to do this? You have to experience it, to begin to understand it.

Parliament Square yesterday was full of tents belonging to a peace camp set up as a 'democracy village' by activists who want to see our troops pulled out of Afghanistan, amongst other things

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/05/450803.html

 (c) Oxzen Pics

I noticed Sally Bercow had said she'd go to live in a tent in the Square when she was told to move out of the Speaker's flat for the duration of the election. An interesting character.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1233127/Sally-Bercow-I-binge-drinking-ladette-downed-bottles-wine-day-night-stands.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7353788/Sally-Bercow-I-will-sleep-in-tent-in-Parliament-Square.html

(c) Oxzen Pics

There's now an amazing media village on the green opposite parliament, which is dominated by a two-story black-glass prefab belonging to the BBC. This is the studio that was used for the BBC's political broadcasts this morning.

I finally came across the "Demo for Democracy" in Smith Square - which had been organised by POWER2010 and its Take Back Parliament campaign. They gave a huge cheer when Vince Cable emerged from Transport House, which was fronted by a row of police officers, and made his way on foot back to the Lib Dems HQ a couple of streets away, accompanied by chants of "No sell out!"

(c) Oxzen Pics

Walking back past Millbank Tower and Parliament an hour later, after a visit to the Tate - the Westminster village's very own art gallery - I came across Chris Huhne and David Laws on their way to LibDem HQ, deep in conversation. These guys, in terms of influence, appear to be in the top six of the Lib Dem hierarchy. In our current circumstances they are therefore in the top six power brokers in the entire country. Their backgrounds are very interesting - both of them public school and Oxbridge educated politicians who were originally investment bankers, operating deep in the throbbing heart of the City.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Laws
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Huhne

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

Helena Kennedy said on TV this morning that political tribalism is in decline, and her own record in the Lords shows she's always focused on issues and principles, not Party bickering and manoevering. PR allows us to have a more mature and intelligent democracy.

Which is pretty much what Oxzen wrote in response to Henry Porter's article on PR today.

Is this really the end of Punch and Judy politics?

The adversarial system we have lived with for so long is outdated and a bar to true progress

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/may/08/henry-porter-proportional-representation?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments

During the election, I took part in a dozen or so public meetings. I was struck by the incredible focus of the audiences. People were paying attention in a way that was quite new to me and was also rather moving. They wanted to believe; they wanted the best for those around them, particularly the new generation of voters, which is what makes the failure in all those polling stations such a scandal. The idea that people in those audiences were divided into first- and second-class voters because of their political allegiance was appalling.

We rediscovered the wonder of free elections last week and saw its potency and that is where we should start on the issue of PR. Two hundred-odd years ago, you might have met a stout man of affairs, probably a Tory, who would have deplored the idea of extending voting rights and abolishing rotten boroughs: he was swiftly consigned to history by the Whigs and their Great Reform Act of 1832. A hundred years ago, you would have met the same type spluttering at the mention of votes for women; he was swept aside by the suffragettes.

Today, that very same conservative voice will tell you that first past the post is the only system that can produce stable, decisive governments. But the view that says we have to tolerate an unfair voting system will go the way of all that self-serving opinion of the past.

The election seems to be telling us to settle on PR as a principle and then find a system that suits our politics. Neither of the main parties properly concedes this need, because it threatens their power, but a hung parliament is the clearest possible hint to them that we demand changes in the political culture that are more than spin.

Part of the British genius for progressive reform is that we used to understand that with each advance in people's rights and enfranchisement, government improved. PR is not a threat to government, but the only way to renew its legitimacy and improve its performance. PR means progress as well as equality at the ballot box.

Oxzen commented:

Good article, but

    . . . with each advance in people's rights and enfranchisement, government improved.

There have been important advances, but it's not clear that government has always improved. Would you say that the Blair/Brown government was an improvement on the Attlee government, which was arguably our one and only socialist government? Would Attlee have left it to the markets to dismantle, asset-strip, sell off, and cease to invest in British industry, and inflate property bubbles?

The reason that PR is essential, and has been adopted by more enlightened countries, is that it encourages and enables government on the basis of coalitions around ideology, and not just personalities and parties. The age of 'broad church' parties such as Labour and the Conservatives, which mainly provide career paths for professional politicians, has to come to an end. People need to know what and who they're really voting for when they take the trouble to vote. The New Labour brand fooled far too many people for far too long. A trade descriptions act is needed for politics as well as retailing.

Government on the basis of which party has the biggest share of seats and/or votes, even though their share of the vote is way below 50%, is almost as childish as government on the basis of personal popularity contests between individual politicians. This is what now enables the Tories to claim they have a right to govern when they know very well that the majority of voters are against them ideologically, and probably always will be.

The nonsensical neoliberal theories of market efficiency have been tested to destruction, trickle down economics have been shown to be a deception, and only government by coalitions of social democrats and others on the left is going build a better Britain based on social justice and sound economics. It's time for our politics to grow up and for politicians to persuade people to vote for them on the basis of where they really stand and who they'll work with in a balanced parliament. This is what happens in mature democracies.

The Tories have nothing to offer this country - certainly not PR - but New Labour are little better, unless they now admit they've been seriously going down the wrong road for the past 13 years.

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

Alex Salmond has said that the country now needs a "progressive alliance" consisting of all the anti-Tory parties coming together. Can't argue with that.

(c) Oxzen Pics

.

Layer 234 . . . . The New Learning Revolution . . . and The Aims of Education

.
To tie the ideas together from the previous two blogs on the subject of transforming schools, learning and education - I'm going to reiterate what I've written previously about Dryden & Vos's seminal book – The New Learning Revolution.

(See Layer 147 - http://oxzen.blogspot.com/2009/04/layer-147-academia-technology-desert.html)

Read large sections of it here on Google Books -

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=y7LxRLxQQ_oC&pg=PA23&lpg=PA23&dq=new+learning+revolution+%2B+vos&source=bl&ots=wEu8IuChPh&sig=zYMd3T-1o7pSTaUEbvSPz_tnf0Y&hl=en&ei=y9IVS6qMO9aL4gbe7aXXBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CAoQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=&f=false

The subject matter of this book is new ways to learn, teach, think, create and communicate.

It is now the world’s biggest-selling non-fiction book.

10 million copies of this book have been sold in China alone.

The Chinese government has completely retrained its teaching force in order for them to teach on the basis of these progressive ideas about learning and teaching. This was a massive project, and represents a radical and progressive break with their traditional methods of teaching.

Why do this? Because the Chinese government has understood that learning has to be a dynamic process, driven by the needs and wishes of learners to be responsible for their own learning and to become equipped with creative thinking and communication skills.

This stands in contrast to traditional models of education which are based on the acquisition of a specified body of knowledge and the ability to pass tests on one’s memory of that curriculum.

In a world where information is available day and night from a laptop computer or even a telephone connected to the Internet, why should hundreds of millions of pupils and students be sitting in rows of desks facing their teachers in classrooms designed for a different age?

Very soon it will be possible for all advanced countries to provide every pupil with a cheap laptop computer. In eight or ten years time it will be possible for every pupil to own a pocket computer. Those who don’t possess this technology will be severely disadvantaged.

Traditional schooling is breaking down. In Britain record numbers of pupils are being excluded from school because of their undisciplined behaviour. Frankly, many of them are bored and cannot see the point in doing what schools are asking them to do.

Not only are many teachers and schools offering no intellectual stimulation, they are also failing to provide learning in social, emotional and spiritual intelligence.

In the foreword of this book Christopher Ball, the chairman of Britain’s ‘Campaign for Learning’, says, ‘This book explains what is going on in the gradual collapse of the old model of education, and the advent of the revolutionary new models of learning’.

He goes on to say, “The old school model is as dead as the industrial revolution that spawned it. The flight of both pupils and teachers from traditional schooling will soon become an embarrassment for governments in developed countries. Neither the curriculum (what is taught) nor the pedagogy (how it is taught) is any longer sustainable.”

“What lies at the heart of this book is a shift of focus from teaching to learning, and a recognition that a new philosophy of learning must lead the curriculum.”

In the 21st Century “the rewards of the good life will go to those who are most adaptable - who learn best. They will also go to those who learn to use and share the new world of interactive technology, instant communication, collaborative innovation and multimedia creativity.”

To that list I would add that the rewards will also go to those who learn to become emotionally, socially, instinctually, intellectually, physically and spiritually intelligent.

These are the clear goals of progressive education - an education that is needed for the 21st Century.

These are the goals we must reach if we are to become “a more creative, cooperative, sharing world society”. These are the true aims of education.

…............................................ 

Here's another page worth checking out -

Pupils under too much pressure to go to university say teachers

http://www.edge.co.uk/news/pupils-under-too-much-pressure-to-go-to-university-say-teachers

There is too much pressure placed on young pupils to head for university, teachers believe, and conversely, too little connection between schools and local businesses.

According to a new study from independent education foundation, Edge, two thirds of teachers think there is too much emphasis on pupils getting a degree at a traditional university while over a third (39%) of teachers feel their institutions still offer too little practical and vocational learning. Involvement with local businesses is seen as widely insufficient with fifty-nine per cent stating that their school or college does not offer enough opportunity for students to learn with local companies.

The study was conducted among over 1,000 teachers and FE lecturers in the state and independent sectors. Exploring their views on the current education system, it shows widespread teacher support for a greater emphasis on practical and vocational pathways – and broad agreement that these routes help pupils to succeed.

Andy Powell, Chief Executive of Edge said: “Teachers know large parts of the system are too academically biased, they recognise a balanced approach is better and they are tellingly concerned that local businesses have insufficient involvement in pupils’ learning in schools.

“We support the teachers’ views. There are many paths to success and we need a richer education with more real-world learning opportunities for young people. Change is beginning to happen, but things are moving too slowly. This generation will be working in a global economy and will have to deal with extraordinary challenges – we have to ensure they are properly equipped.”

The majority of teachers (59%) believe practical and vocational learning often leads to a good career, but they also recognise their knowledge of the qualifications available falls short when compared to their understanding of academic routes.

Edge is inviting the public at large and teachers to have their say on the education system and will feedback findings to politicians of the three main parties prior to the general election. Teachers can join the debate at edge.co.uk/revolution.

The research was conducted online by YouGov between 2nd-8th October 2009. Respondents were drawn from state secondary schools (712), independent schools (105) and sixth form/FE/tertiary education environments (131), making a total sample of 1,034.

…........................................

 How would you change the education system? 

http://www.edge.co.uk/revolution

Help revolutionise education now.
…....................................

Venice hit by high water

Flood waters engulfed the lagoon city of Venice leaving close to 45% of the historical centre under water

 Saw this on the Guardian website – amazing pictures of Venice under water.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2009/nov/30/venice-flooding-under-water

….............................................................. 

Disturbing reports about the national health service -

The worst NHS wards ... where safety is a lottery

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2009/nov/29/nhs-safety-hospitals-deaths

…..........................................................

Desert Island Discs – Morrisey

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qnmr

For those who didn't know that DID is now available on iPlayer and podcast – wake up!

This piece from the Guardian about the Morrisey programme is less interesting than the comments afterwards on CiF -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2009/nov/30/morrissey-desert-island-discs-kirsty

Morrissey: This charming Man Friday

http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2009/nov/29/observer-profile-morrissey

.

Layer 93 Accusations, Recriminations, and Children’s Services.

.
Last month the headteachers of 61 state-funded primary schools and seven secondary schools in Haringey wrote an ‘open letter’ in support of their Director of Children’s Services, Sharon Shoesmith, saying that her resignation, or dismissal, would be detrimental to their pupils. They said they felt compelled to show their support for Shoesmith and they consider her “an outstanding public servant”.

They added: “Should the Child P case result in her loss from the borough, then our children and young people will lose one of their most effective, determined and committed champions.”

“Initially, in her role of director of education, Shoesmith transformed a demoralised education service, derided by many headteachers, into one with which we are now proud to be associated.

“The exceptional rate of improvement of many of the borough’s schools would not have been possible without the support of the service that Ms Shoesmith rebuilt, revitalised and led.

“Since more recently becoming the director of Haringey’s Children and Young People’s Service, Shoesmith has continued to work relentlessly and with a determination that the service she leads and develops ensures best practice in providing education, care, support and protection for all of our young people.”

Well, I don’t know about you, but when a large posse of headteachers saddles up with the intention of riding to the rescue of their leader, then I’m inclined to pay attention to their views. After all, these are all people who are appointed and maintained in their posts on the basis of having a track record of good judgement, clear thinking and concern for children’s well-being.

Or at least that used to be the case . Further study is needed on the degree to which the new generation of headteachers has been appointed on the basis of their commitment to reaching arbitrary academic targets and their expertise in cramming children for mind- and spirit-deadening tests, first and foremost. As far as the culture of classrooms and schools is concerned the achievement of targets has become synonymous with well-being.

But hold on - where’s the open letter of support for Shoesmith from senior managers in the social services part of her empire? What are their views? Do they not consider her an outstanding public servant? Could this be a case of someone who has great vision and leadership skills as far as education is concerned, but NOT having any relevant experience or any great understanding of social work, and therefore no ability to impact on the quality of that part of the council’s service?

Similarly there are many instances of Directors of children’s services departments coming from a social services background with no experience or expertise in education. What makes such people equipped to be the head of a huge empire of schools and associated service departments? What real responsibility can they exercise when they are utterly reliant on the information they receive and the views they are presented with from their junior managers and their senior colleagues who do have a background in education? Are they not susceptible to having the wool pulled over their eyes? Do they even know the right questions to ask?

And was it such a great idea anyway for the government to create mega-departments for ‘children’s services’ in an attempt to ensure ‘joined-up thinking’ within local councils? I myself was privileged to witness at first hand how one of these departments came together within an inner-city LA. It was pretty obvious to me that the person who was being groomed for the top job had no real clue as to how schools should be led and managed, and no independence of judgment on pedagogy and curriculum, for example, let alone anything to say about creating quality learning environments.

But then that person didn’t need to. All that was necessary was to sign up for the government’s ‘standards agenda’ and away we go! Government thinking has been and still is that generic management skills of a high order are all that matter when it comes to leading bureaucracies. MBAs rule! OK?

But it’s interesting to consider what the curriculum might consist of on a course for the National Professional Qualification for Directors of Children’s Services. What would you need to know and to have done in order to get a place on the course? Possibly some experience of teaching as well as social work could be an advantage? Experience of team building within both a state school and a social services department? An understanding of pedagogy as well as therapeutic practice?

No matter - the government was in a rush to force all local authorities into creating huge departments of ‘children’s services’, whether or not individuals could be found who were qualified to lead them. And lord knows there were plenty of ambitious and willing candidates lining up to take on the top positions, whether or not they’d paid their dues and had at least SOME experience within both the relevant disciplines and professions.

And let us not forget - generic management and leadership skills are what we’re looking for! We’re all realists now - are we not? After all, we don’t expect the Prime Minister to be an expert on economics, education, health, social services, defence strategy, and the whole damned caboodle, do we? Not any more, at any rate.

There was no time to waste, apparently - and no time to prepare council departments properly, let alone to train and prepare people appropriately, for the huge amalgamation of departments that was proposed. And so it came to pass that a new generation of super-managers was put in place, with very interesting consequences throughout the land.

Meanwhile, the well-qualified Ed Balls, the minister for balls-ups in schools and families, has his own ideas about competence and leadership ability within Haringey council, and it turns out he has no regard at all for the views of the 61 Shoesmithite headteachers in that part of the world. So either he’s right to have dismissed Ms Shoesmith, in which case the 61 headteachers are all idiots for trying to keep her in post, or he’s wrong and Ms Shoesmith should not be slung out on the very day that an inspector’s report on the malfunctioning of her department is delivered. After all, if she’s not been in post very long, and she’s not yet up to speed with the social services part of it, is that her fault?

And what about Ofsted, which reported quite recently that Haringey provide ‘good’ children’s services? Christine Gilbert, Ofsted’s head honcho, witters on, with her tight little mouth and her pursed lips, about the need for unannounced inspections, but of course she’ll escape any blame for the death of Baby P, even though she’s ultimately responsible for the council in question being put into the second highest category for children’s services and therefore viewed as a successful local authority.

“Lightning Inspections” are what she now wants, but did it really take a hideous death like this to tell us that the system for carrying out inspections of children’s services has always been a total waste of time and money, in that it gave those departments months and even years to prepare for scrutiny - to put together all the bullshit statistics in the world to cover the backs of the top bureaucrats? At enormous public cost in terms of distraction from the proper task, and in officer hours spent on compiling huge dossiers with which to deceive the Ofsted inspectors and persuade them that targets were being hit, or at least addressed effectively.

Oh yes - it’s been OK to give the poor bloody schools 2 or 3 days’ notice of an Ofsted inspection - but bureaucracies are a completely different matter, are they not? Well Ms Gilbert, it’s fine being wise after the event, but it was YOU that’s overseen the introduction of a system for inspecting schools on the basis of data and statistics, and it’s YOU that’s gone along with the same approach for the inspection of children’s services.

“We can’t rely on statistics”, she now bleats, but that’s exactly what she and her Ofsted buddies have been happy to do, until now. And she now agrees that inspectors should talk directly to children and young people about their perceptions of what’s being done in their name.

More bullshit. It wouldn’t have made any difference to Baby P, and it won’t make any difference to those poor bloody schools that have been given the bullet and put into Special Measures under her regime, in spite of inspectors being told by the pupils that they enjoy their school, in many instances, and they believe that they achieve well in spite of all the adverse factors, like recruitment and retention difficulties, which so often impact on their schools and their well-being. It seems Ms Gilbert may no longer be so enamored of the ‘targets culture’. Now that the game’s almost up she may as well just come out and say, “I was just doing my job”. Carrying out orders, you see. Well aren’t they all?

So we may now be heading back towards a culture of inspections where human observation and actual analysis of what’s happening within schools and local authorities is the basis for judgments, rather than data and statistics. We may no longer need to tolerate Gestapo methods whereby headteachers are put in a chair and ordered to explain their lack of productivity and failure to hit targets, with a firing squad awaiting those who refuse to play the game or fail to satisfy with their answers. “Why is zis Value Added so bad!? Why is your school not reaching Floor Targets in Englisch? Answer me!!”

Sorry Germany, I mean you no disrespect. I’m just trying to draw some parallels with the methodology that’s been adopted by New Labour (and its running dogs like Ofsted) in its “refusal to tolerate low standards” or indeed to tolerate, let alone support, those who have tried to offer real education to their children rather than focus exclusively on the “outputs” demanded by the system we now have in this country. As I once heard a senior bureaucrat say, “Level 4 is the be-all and end-all”.

One thing’s for sure though. As of today there are going to be a lot of Directors of children’s services and their senior management colleagues who will be tearing around like the proverbial blue arsed flies in a frenzied determination not to have the double act of Ofsted and Balls do a Shoesmith on them at the drop of a hat. Lightning inspections will demand lightning and unceasing pre-emptive preparations.

I’d suggest that people in children's services departments who detect public money being wasted on this sort of self-preservation activity should do some whistle-blowing - but maybe we need to bear in mind what’s happening right now in the Damian Green affair, and consider that this might not be a wise move. Maybe someone should set up an anonymous call line, like Childline, for distressed civil servants and all those who work in the public services, who truly care about the public good, and in particular care about the wellbeing of children.

Maybe it’s time to think the unthinkable, to say the unsayable, and suggest that it’s only when people at the grassroots become activists in pressing for systemic change and in insisting on proper involvement in running our public services, that we’re likely to see a curb put on the wasteful and self-serving activities of the top bureaucrats, with their incessant conferencing and awaydaying and senior management huddling and cuddling.

But whilst you might get 60 or more people to speak out in favour of someone they like and think is doing a good job, just try getting even 6 people to put their heads above the parapet and publicly say something critical of those who hold the levers of power and who appear to be in a position to make their lives difficult.

--------------------------------------------------

Whassa Matta You? Itsa Not So Bad!

There’s an incredible centre-page photograph in the Guardian today of St Mark’s Square in Venice flooded to the level of café table tops, with the water flowing over the steps of St Mark’s Cathedral and the Doge’s Palace. Apparently 99% of Venice is flooded.

A high tide and strong winds have created a water level that’s a meter and a half above normal - the highest level in 22 years.

The conservation society Italia Nostra said that the flooding was proof of the inability of politicians and officials at all levels to manage Venice’s serious problems. This event would seem to be the equivalent of the failure of British weather forecasters at the time of the great gale of 1987, but given that the whole world’s been talking about rising sea levels it’s a bit much to say “we had no way of knowing”.

The Guardian reports that the city’s mayor, Massimo Cacciari, ‘ a philosopher by profession’, has shrugged off calls for a declaration of emergency. He’s reported to have said, “There were no deaths or injuries, and none of the buildings fell down”.

----------------------------------------------------

Given the grimness of what’s happening in the world it’s good that we can still turn to people and places where a good laugh is guaranteed.

From the current edition of Private Eye:

A cartoon of a grinning Sir Ian Blair walking to the bank carrying a massive kiss-off cheque for £400,000, over the caption The Laughing Policeman.

An old tramp warming himself next to an open fire by throwing on to it copies of Heat magazine.

A speech bubble coming out of Obama’s mouth saying, “Can the media hype me up any more?”, with another speech bubble at the side saying “YES WE CAN!”

2 skinny aliens standing in front of a flying saucer saying to an enormously fat guy, “Take us to you larder!”
--------------------------------------------------

Chris Rock’s latest show was broadcast on Channel 4 this week, and was, as expected, brilliant. He’s a complete original, pacing the stage for two hours, totally in command and never once resorting to comic cliché. His only ‘catchphrase’ is “There - I said it!”, which is what he says when he says the unsayable. Which he does on a regular basis. I love this man. He focuses on the topical, the real and the relevant, and makes people laugh till they cry at the outrageous absurdities we see around us every day.

He does a brilliant bit about rap-friendly white folks who rap along to the lyrics of the great rap artists, but choke when they get to the word ‘nigger’ - whenever they’re with him, that is.

Chris says it’s actually OK to yell it out in that context, but as to whether white folks can copy their black friends who use the N word in other contexts, the answer is “Not really”.

Not unless they’re saying, “Fuck me harder, nigger!”

Though he agrees that if you’re getting into a fight with someone it’s fair enough to pick on their defining characteristic, like being one-legged or black, since it’s unreasonable to expect someone to show respect for someone they’re in a fight with.

Sorry, Christine. That really is a horrible wrinkly little cat’s arse of a mouth you’ve got there.

--------------------------------------------------

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article5161092.ece

.