Showing posts with label teaching. Show all posts
Showing posts with label teaching. Show all posts

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Layer 386 . . . Europe, Britain, Ireland, Germany, Schools, Ofsted, Teaching, Learning, Education, Gove and Miliband

.
Traffic News


More evidence of the insanity on Britain's roads. Yesterday, heading up the M1, I had to sit for nearly an hour almost completely stationary, as a result of 5 cars smashing into one another. The police, as usual managing the 'incident' with excessive ploddery, wouldn't let the traffic start to flow past until all 5 cars had been loaded on to transporters. Not even ONE lane open. 'Ealf ansafety.

Today there was a two mile queue of vehicles trying to leave the M6 to get on to the A14, which of course completely jammed up the M6. This is down to the roadworks at this junction taking forever to complete, and NO proper traffic management measures being taken to prevent this sort of congestion. Temporary relief road? You must be joking.

Meantime the radio was full of reports about the M1 northbound traffic again being at a standstill with a massive tailback - this time as a result of a lorry overturning at the Hemel Hempstead junction. How do you overturn a bloody lorry on a motorway?

I was intending to go round the M25, but then heard reports saying there was a jam from junction 24 to junction 28 as a result of a lorry smashing into the central reservation.

To cap it all there was a complete standstill as soon as we got to the 20 mile long 50mph limit average speed check area on the M1 opposite Bedford. What to do? Leave the motorway, use satnav to cross over to the A1(M) and then trudge through the ghastliness of outer North London to get home in about twice the time the journey WOULD take if there were no roadworks, no congestion, no fuckwit lorry drivers and no hundreds of traffic lights all on red.

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

Das Musik

Talked with a friend today about the crucial importance of music in people's lives, and singing, and dancing. But how many people seem never to need or enjoy music? ANY music.

We also talked about the uselessness (for me) of 5 years learning German, given that I've been to Germany and will never go there again. Probably. And if I do it'll be with someone who speaks German. Possibly to take a look at Berlin.

Also, I've no wish ever to go back to either Austria or Switzerland. Those massive mountains are not for me. Give me the Lake District or the Massif Central any day.

Coincidentally Mark Lawson on R4's Front Row today interviewed James Last. I've no idea why. Dear Hansi - he's as dull, boring, witless and humourless as his entire musical oevre. And yet he's made an unbelievable fortune from arranging and orchestrating the very worst pop music he could find. The very nastiest, pappiest, most awful songs ever written. Take a terrible tune, play it with an orchestra, and somehow make the original even worse. And his albums sell by the zillion. Over 100 million, apparently. Never overestimate the taste of the masses. Apparently he has 'fans' who travel to his concerts all over the world. Bonkers.

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

Weak teachers the biggest problem in schools – Ofsted

'Dull and uninspiring' lessons hold back pupils, report finds

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/nov/23/weak-teachers-schools-ofsted

The headline in the paper version of this article is, "Dull teaching is letting pupils down, says Ofsted chief inspector".

Either way, it's true that so much of what goes on in schools is dull, uninspiring and boring. And whose fault is that? we may well ask.

Of course Ms Gilbert blames the poor bloody teachers. We have a generation of teachers who have been trained to make learning dull - to unthinkingly and uncritically follow 'national strategies' and to teach by numbers.

Even the few older teachers that remain have been bludgeoned into subject-based teaching and teaching to the tests.

And it's Ms Gilbert's Ofsted 'contractors' (not HMIs) who have been sent out as enforcers of government policies.

Children are being subjected to "dull and uninspiring" lessons, the schools inspectorate warned yesterday. On the eve of an education white paper proposing a shift in teacher training from colleges to classrooms, Ofsted's chief inspector, Christine Gilbert, said low expectation of pupils and teachers' poor grasp of their subject have led to confused lessons.

And this is how Ms Gilbert's mind works. She thinks in Gradgrind's terms. You can see her as an Mchoakumchild figure. She needs to understand that children shouldn't be stuffed with 'imperial gallons of facts' in didactic 'lessons'. Lessons indeed.

Teaching unions pointed out that inadequate teaching remained "the exception rather than the rule". Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: "Our classroom teachers do an amazing job day in day out in often challenging circumstances.

"If there is anything that is 'dull and uninspiring' in our schools it is a curriculum that is narrowed by the series of hoops that schools have to jump through in order to satisfy arbitrary targets which can change with alarming regularity. This often results in a narrowing of the curriculum and teaching to the test, simply because schools are fearful of slipping down in the school league tables."

Dr Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers said: "Criticising hardworking teachers and failing to understand the challenges that teachers and pupils in schools in deprived areas face will do nothing to drive up standards."


More on schools, education and Gove's White Paper tomorrow.

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

Ed Miliband keeps his head while all around him lose theirs. But it's not enough.

No matter how admirable serenity may be, Miliband must get on with the job of opposition – starting with a critique of the cuts

by Jonathan Freedland

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/23/ed-miliband-keeps-head-but-its-not-enough

As a matter of temperament, I can't but admire Miliband's apparent serenity – able to incant a gentle "om" while those around him panic over the ticker on Sky News – but as a matter of politics, I lean towards those who reckon the new leader needs to define himself sooner rather than later. But how?

A thick sheaf of policy papers is not the answer . . . What is needed are a few signature moves that reveal the direction of travel, symbolic stands that tell the voters what kind of government you would lead.

I reckon Freedland hasn't been paying proper attention. Ed has already said what needed to be said about direction of travel. (See previous blogs)

Still Freedland's  not wrong when he goes on to say,

Above all, he needs to shift the emphasis of Labour's economic argument. Right now, the party begins with the concession that, yes, there have to be cuts – and then offers quibbles about the timing and degree. That doesn't work. The only way Labour can punch through is by saying that the coalition is taking a reckless gamble with the British economy – with Ireland as a warning from hell – and that any cuts in spending should wait until the return of growth. Otherwise it simply won't get heard.

So it's a necessary strength of Miliband's that he can keep his head. But it is not sufficient. He needs to lead a regular, devastating critique of the government.

And he's not wrong about Ireland being a warning from hell.

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

Regarding the previous blog's comments about Europe and Europeans - take a look at this piece by Jonathan Jones:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/23/european-union-written-in-stone-christendom

Europe has been building a secret community of culture

Political union is entering its darkest days, to the Eurosceptics' delight. But our shared history will keep us together

Some time soon Europeans who believe in a common identity need to stand up and proclaim the unique richness and openness of our culture.

It is not idealism to believe in Europe; still less is it a bureaucratic abstraction. If you see history in its living colours, you see how deeply European we are and how profound are the roots of that common identity.
.

Tuesday, November 23, 2010

Layer 384 . . . Finding A Voice, Teaching Writing, Education, Traditions, Enlightenment, Zen Socialism, Ed Miliband and the Labour Party

.
Personal Voice

So why are some of us keen to write, whilst others run a mile from the idea? The esteem we have for 'proper' writers is both a magnet and a deterrent. We grow up thinking and believing that novelists, playwrights, biographers, journalists, columnists and writers of learned tomes are all special people. Some people have large enough egos to see themselves  as potential and future members of the writers club. Others just think they have no voice worth listening to.

Teachers and educators like Harold Rosen pioneered the idea that every single one of us has stories to tell, thoughts worth sharing and a voice worth listening to. What's more, children should discover their personal voice as soon as they are able to talk, and write.

Such radical ideas were starting to gain some traction in schools in England in the 1970s, 80s and early 90s, and then along came the New Labour national literacy strategy with its glib prescriptions, and which, in its stupidity, turned the clock back decades - thereby pretty much eliminating all ideas about young people finding a personal voice, writing for their own purposes, writing for audiences and writing for 'publication' - and enjoying writing as a thing that had personal meaning and utility.

We now have a generation of young people who have rarely completed an entire piece of writing which they chose to write as an expression of their own thoughts, memories, feelings and ideas. Or indeed any piece of writing. We have thousands of young people who know how to construct long sentences full of 'connectives', adverbial phrases and "wow words", but they can't actually write well, and on the whole they choose not to. Lacking motivation to write, they don't do it unless they have to.

Wow words? Don't even ask.

I probably feel more angry about the way the  teaching of writing has been perverted by the NLS (New Labour Shitheads) than about anything else in the crazy world of schools and education. The harm that's been caused is immeasurable.

And why did this happen? Because schools were pressurised into doing it - in order to improve test scores and achieve government targets. Because school managers were desperate to improve test results - tests that awarded marks to pupils  for . . . guess what? Scatterings of connectives. Fistfuls of adjectival and adverbial phrases. Shitloads of wow words.

Oops - non-standard English. Short sentences. Must try harder.

After all, this is what proper writers do - innit? Write in long sentences, fill them with subordinate clauses, and use lots of flowery language. Brilliant.

What a stupid culture. What a mean, ridiculous, hopeless society. What a pathetic, ignorant, uncaring system.

Pity the poor kids who now have to unlearn all that bullshit about what good writing consists of. Poor bloody kids who've been bored to tears by meaningless coaching for pointless tests. Poor kids who've never enjoyed writing a single word in their entire lives, let alone enjoyed sharing their thoughts, their ideas and their imagination, in written form.

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

How do we expect kids to articulate their thoughts competently when they rarely, if ever, have either opportunity or encouragement to do so? Let alone individual coaching and mentoring in how to express themselves in their personal voice.  All of which takes time, and empathy, with proper attention being paid to what the child is trying to say - not 'all eyes on the teacher and on the whiteboard' methodology, and exhortations to write in longer sentences and use more flowery language. Because that's what adults do, n'est-ce pas?

In order to say something, there ought to be something worth saying. Most of the writing assignments handed out in schools have no meaning whatsoever for the kids who are forced to carry them out. And the pupils aren't fools either - they know that the writing tasks are not genuine or useful, except in terms of preparation for tests. They're well aware they're just pawns in adults' political and professional games. And they're right to feel bloody resentful about that, even as they beaver away at their exercises and worksheets.

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

Keeping Up Traditions

"You need to conserve your traditions in this country", said David Ginola, a decent and thoughtful man, and a sometimes brilliant former footballer, speaking on TV this week.

Is that really so? I can think of quite a few traditions we could happily lose. Too many to mention, really.

But what David was talking about was 'foreign' ownership of football clubs, and 'foreign' managers.

Since football's now just a business, and a branch of the entertainment industry, I guess we could say the same about any other business. Maybe we should be hankering after the distinctively British type of management that brought our major industries to their knees, and for that matter collapsed the banking and finance system. What a triumph for Anglo-Saxon ownership, leadership and management that turned out to be.

If you're a European by birth, is someone from another part of Europe a 'foreigner'? When will people learn that it's not the nationality of people and businesses that matter - it's the degree of enlightenment, creativity and imagination that's important. Worldwide we can all learn from one another in order to make a better planet.

The amusing thing at the end of the Ginola discussion was seeing the people who were taking part in it realise that Ginola is, well, foreign. And the gimp who presents the programme is Irish.

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

Right now, the Labour party needs Ed Miliband's Zen socialism

Labour's leader should not listen to the goading of the coalition and media. He needs thinking time to plan the fightback

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/nov/22/labour-ed-miliband-zen-socialism

by Jackie Ashley

What is the Labour party for?

That's the question being flung at Ed Miliband by almost every newspaper and by many of his own MPs.

Look around at the political reporting of Labour just now. It's as if a spew of lava has buried the landscape – a molten river of anger, burning lakes of score-settling and an ash-cloud of bitterness under which everything else has vanished.

Miliband's first job is to make sure that the angry, self-destructive mood of the moment does not wreck his leadership too. He attempted to put a line under the past, to give New Labour a decent burial and proclaim a new generation.

Miliband, I can report, is almost surreally relaxed, displaying the sang-froid that has so struck people in the Commons. He simply won't engage. He won't take sides, align himself with old quarrels or even listen to passionate explanations of what when wrong before.

They need to return to the party in the country, and the many who deserted Labour – and really listen to them.

They need to get inside the banking system and try to understand it from within.

They need to discover how to get more good people into local government, and how to strike a better balance between targets and bureaucracy.

They need to go back, rather humbly, to Labour councillors and party workers who felt snubbed and ignored during the years of New Labour, and discover how hard it became to mobilise and enthuse people. And then they need to rebuild policies from the bottom up, not simply watch what the coalition does, and say the opposite.

I hope Miliband holds his nerve. I suspect he will – some kind of Zen socialism we haven't come across before.

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

Ed Miliband sets out 'profound' changes to Labour party

Exclusive: Labour leader reveals plans to review organisation and policies in first full interview since winning leadership contest

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/nov/21/ed-miliband-profound-changes-labour

Ed Miliband today launches his party on "the hard road back to power", saying it has to move beyond New Labour and commit to changes in policy and organisation as profound as those introduced by Tony Blair in 1994.

He also appears to clash with the shadow chancellor, Alan Johnson, by saying a 50p tax rate for those earning more than £150,000 should be permanent, as a way of creating greater equality in Britain. Making the country more equal, he says, is one of the issues that gets him out of bed in the morning.

He warns his party not to expect a quiet life, saying: "I am talking about change as profound as the change New Labour brought because the world itself has changed massively, and we did not really change fundamentally as a party, or come to terms with the changes, and have not done so since 1994."

Miliband dismisses suggestions he has been too low-profile since becoming party leader, saying: "It's about digging in, and it's not about short-term fixes, nor shortcuts to success. There is a long, hard road for us to travel." He does not accept that the deficit is the product of over-spending by Labour, but says British politics has not come to terms with the 2008 banking crisis and the economy's over- exposure to financial services.

He appears to disagree with Johnson, who has described the 50p top rate as only "right for now". Asked if the 50p rate was simply necessary to cut the deficit, Miliband says: "No, it's about statement about values and fairness and about the kind of society you believe in and it's important to me."

He sticks with Labour's plan to halve, as oppose to eradicate, the deficit by the end of the parliament, insisting he will not concede that the Labour government overspent before the 2010 election.

"I don't agree with what the Tories say about us overspending. They are on a mission and we know what their mission is and we have got to take them on. Their mission is to say 'This deficit is not the result of an international banking crisis, it is the result of a crisis in government'."

He also rejects suggestions he has been shifting to the centre since becoming leader in September, arguing: "I said during the election I was the person who would take us beyond New Labour. That's the way I ran as a candidate and that is the way I am going to run the party. We've got to recognise that in terms of who we stand up for – we as New Labour lost touch of people's hopes and aspirations."

The overarching task, he says, is to examine "how you can create greater social justice in the economy without having to rely only on redistribution and the welfare state.

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

The Labour party can count itself itself extremely fortunate to have elected a leader who has some of his father's socialism in his soul, and is prepared to speak out for the founding principles of the Labour party. This is in contrast to brother David who sold his soul to New Labour and its scheming, triangulating, mealy-mouthed creatures of the night, most of whom were 'intensely relaxed' about the filthy rich getting even richer. Talking of which, there's a documentary on Mandelson being screened on TV this week - The Real PM. I do hope it focuses on his desire to become as filthy rich as his already filthy rich friends.

All power to Brother Ed, therefore, and his principled efforts to create a credible progressive party whose main aim is to transform society into a proper social democracy - a party that cares about social justice and creating greater equality, and isn't merely hungry for power for power's sake. For Britain to become more like Denmark, for example, would be extremely beneficial.

I'm beginning to think that Ed decided to try for the leadership of the party when he realised that it would otherwise fall into the hands of his NuLab brother, and hated to think what keeping on the New Labour path would do to Britain and to British politics.

He can take a lot of comfort from the fact that under his leadership Labour is already ahead in the polls . . . and things can only get better.
.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Layer 336 . . . The Politics of Education, Graduates, Sweat, Debt, and Disillusionment

.
Oh well, it's back to keeping up with politics, beginning with the politics of education.

Peter Preston, loud-mouthed supporter of SATs and league tables, and scourge of trendy lefty teachers, as he imagines them, is suddenly concerned about children and students actually enjoying life. Why? Well wouldn't you know it - he's been awarded an honorary degree (why?) and he wants us to know about it. Being at a graduation ceremony has caused him to focus on real students and their experiences of the education system.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/25/university-not-just-exam-slog

University: learning to enjoy life


Witnessing the hope of a graduation day, I remember that education is about more than sweat and debt

He remembers!!! At last!!

Actually this piece is only concerned with university students, and I suppose it's too much to expect him to think laterally to what also goes on in schools, and whether pupils enjoy their lives within them. To do that he'd need to actually go into a school, having been awarded an honorary GCSE or maybe an honorary Level 4 in English.

So what does he have to say about learning and enjoying life?

University isn't a mere staging post to a well-paid job . . . Nor is it just an investment in Britain's future, so we can compete with Beijing by 2020. It isn't wholly a practical slog, either, a skill box of computer or engineering skills. University is an experience, often a life-changing one. You leave school a spotty child, and three years later, you're sort of grown up. You have friends you'll probably never lose. You've looked after yourself. You've sweated through exams. If you're lucky, you've learned how to think – the best boon of the lot.

Yes Pete, old duck, IF YOU'RE LUCKY. Because even at undergraduate level there's still no priority given to learning how to think. What we have is still a grim determination to force young people to swallow a curriculum, memorise its content, and regurgitate it in exams.

In fact, this happens even at postgraduate level! A friend's very bright son decided to bale out of his Masters course as soon as he realised that there was still no scope for self-directed learning and research, and it was still a bloody boring exam treadmill.

Pete goes on:

When did we begin to forget such things?

When did YOU forget, you old bastard? Some of us have been saying this stuff forever. Beginning with primary schooling.

He goes on to blame education ministers for making "degree courses seem like tests for national survival."

This is the man who talks about Primary tests and league tables as though they're essentials to national survival!

And there's more. He concludes:

Is school, and then college or university, there as an obstacle race, a slog of tests and hurdles? Is it just a rehearsal for 50 years of frustration, sweat, debt, disillusion and staffroom tears?

The danger is making education seem unutterably grim. The hope – see that beaming [graduation] queue of something achieved – is that happiness has a part to play. For learning in this crunched, short life means learning to enjoy yourself, too.

Thanks to people like Peter Preston, Melanie Philips, Chris Woodhead and their politician friends, schools and universities HAVE become unutterably grim results factories where pupil and student wellbeing, as well as their social, emotional and spiritual intelligences, have been increasingly neglected and marginalised - in the rush to "drive up standards".

Learning to enjoy yourself? How can you enjoy yourself when you're racking up debt doing stuff day in and day out that's basically cramming for exams, with little or no opportunities for self-directed creative experience?

What a fucking idiot.

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

There's more evidence of the university system being useless and actually harmful to young people's life chances reported in the education section of the Guardian this week.

Should universities teach students how to find a job?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/jul/27/graduate-job-crisis

Sarfraz Manzoor has been following the fortunes of six young people who graduated last year. How well do they feel that university prepared them for today's economic realities?

The class of 2009 left university knowing they were facing the toughest battle for jobs in a generation.

That was, at least, the dire prediction, but what was the reality? I have spent the last year documenting the post-graduation lives of six students who are among the class of 2009. The six studied at the University of Leeds and Leeds Metropolitan University, and agreed to keep audio diaries throughout their year in which they recorded their hopes for the coming year as well as their reaction to the reality.

By the end of the year, the six students were scattered around the world and were far more cynical about the value of a university education than they had been on graduating.

For a start off it's interesting that none of the six was interested in using knowledge gained from their degrees - they all wanted to pursue careers in areas like sales, journalism and the media - careers that had nothing to do with the subjects they'd been studying. Given the likelihood that they'd originally chosen those subjects for their interest and enjoyment, what does that say about the universities making them somehow utterly tedious and uninspiring?

Page and Ali both left the country to seek work in Cyprus and Saudi Arabia, while Del Core found the soul-crushing business of being rejected hard to take. "I've looked for jobs in newspapers, at the job centre, on the internet, and by word of mouth," she says. "I've had several interviews, some of which I got to the second stage, but I never got past that. It has been quite disheartening – some positions I applied for were more the dream job than a means to an end, and I was very upset when I didn't get those. I was in tears."

Having spent time with the graduates, I was struck by how much they seemed to have believed, at least at the start, that they were entitled to a well-paid and fulfilling job simply because they had been to university. "When you look at the people who are going to university," explains Professor Kate Purcell, of Warwick University's Institute for Employment Research, "they have been encouraged to think that education has given them employability skills, so as well as learning about history or English or business studies they are also learning problem solving, developing communication skills, so they are pretty confident about themselves."

This confidence is not necessarily well founded.

A lot of people go to university for the sake of it because they think it is the right thing to do. So that makes lots of graduates. Universities are still selling the idea to people that if they go to university they are guaranteed a great job at the end of it, and that is just not the case any more.

The increasing number of graduates entering the job market has meant that employers are often insisting that prospective employees pass psychometric tests as a way of selecting candidates, and it has also led to claims that too many young people are being herded into university.

"When I think about a university course, I think of something that teaches people a skill so that they are qualified to do a certain job," says Gerrard. "But, in reality, after my degree I don't feel qualified for anything – degrees don't indicate someone's common sense or people skills, and I don't think you can get through many interviews without a little of both."

Just a little? It's pathetic really - these young graduates aren't even properly aware of what they're lacking. Common sense? What's that? People skills? Such as?

What's more, it's not their fault. They've been told since Primary school that high attainment is all that matters - and too late they find it isn't. What's more, they don't really know what does matter. And they're not the only ones. Politicians and university bosses don't know either. Their assumption is always that a first class honours or a 2.1 degree will get you anywhere in life. Beyond that, they haven't a clue. Well - that's what got them a meal ticket to their high status, was it not?

And it's no wonder that employers put more trust in 'psychometric tests' than university attainment in subjects whose facts and figures they won't be using anyway. The poor bloody students think that having a degree tells people they're "bright". Actually it doesn't. It's just as likely to say they're a dull swat, a boring little library-goer, a self-regarding 'academically able' nonentity with little experience of life, proper work, or real people. Possibly a dull conformist who's unable to think for themselves, unable to think creatively and imaginatively, unable to work well in a team, or communicate effectively, or write well, or show any empathy, intuition or instinctual intelligence. Common sense indeed.

The New Learning Revolution is about developing all of these intelligences and skills. How come the people who run education in this country don't realise that yet? How many more generations of our young people will go through our education system deprived of the sorts of learning that are taken for granted in countries much smarter than ours?

What's more, they're deprived of their human right to enjoy learning for its own sake, and to be free of undue pressure and stress within the education system.

This country used to be known for its creative and innovative approaches to teaching and learning. Not only have other countries overtaken us, we've actually been going backwards for the past 20 odd years.
.

Saturday, March 27, 2010

Layer 274 . . . Philosophy of Education, Warnock, Questa, Morris and Brighouse

.
Talking of Philosophers . . .

This week we heard that schools are increasingly failing to provide opportunities for children to carry out proper scientific investigations - such is the apparent pressure to cram them with facts and do practices for tests and examinations. There's also a question of large classes, too few resources and poor teaching. So increasingly kids are expected to memorise scientific "knowledge", but have no experience or real understanding of how scientists are supposed to behave, from hypothesis through fair testing to drawing conclusions on the basis of real evidence. Sounds very New Labour. There's never been any proper evidence to support their approaches to education.

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

Children are being deprived of the chance to conduct experiments in science lessons because teachers say there isn't time, or youngsters are too naughty, poll reveals

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/mar/26/no-time-practical-science-experiments

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

Baroness Mary Warnock spoke about her concerns for science teaching, and for teaching in general, on the Today programme, after having written about them in Questa magazine:

http://www.philosophy-of-education.org/uploads/questa/questa_warnock.pdf

Download Issue 1 of the emagazine (published by the Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain) here:

http://www.philosophy-of-education.org/uploads/questa/questa_complete.pdf

Questa aims to create a meeting ground or forum in which philosophers and non-philosophers can reflect and engage in conversation. It is a space in which philosophers, practitioners, journalists, parents and policy-makers will hopefully sustain a high quality, carefully reasoned debate with the power to influence future policy in positive ways.

In this issue, we are focusing on the 2010 general election with contributions from writers including Mary Warnock, John White, Richard Pring, Richard Smith and Fiona Millar. The magazine can be downloaded as a whole, or the essays can be downloaded individually.

http://www.philosophy-of-education.org/

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

Lady Warnock says:

Three reasons for hope in a new Age of Austerity

Mary Warnock wants no more platitudes about Education as Investment. Instead she welcomes the recession as a chance to shake off the chains of centralisation.

 It is wrong to think that efficiency economies will be enough. We need radical change to avoid waste, and not only of money, but of the talents of children who all too often find nothing to engage their interest once they have left their primary schools.

In one way we can count ourselves better off than they were in 1945: we have more mistakes to learn from; and centralisation has been one of the biggest mis­takes of all. We must, forthwith, abolish targets, league tables, and compulsory curricula. We must, if necessary by primary legislation, untangle education law from anti-discrimination law, so that local authorities, gover­nors and headteachers can regain control of the variety of schools that they want to be responsible for.

The whole exam system must be changed, if we are to see value for money. There should be one set of exams only, to replace GCSE, taken at the end of Year 9, whose purpose would be to ensure that good standards of reading, writing and comprehension had been achieved over a wide range of subjects, including mathemat­ics, science, history and a foreign language, ancient or modern. This could be examined within the school, by the appropriate subject teachers, and monitored by teachers from other schools (appropriately paid), and sporadically by Ofsted. Thereafter there would be no common exams.

Huge sums of money would be saved by the abandon­ment of externally-examined GCSE and A-levels, graded tests being substituted, over all the courses, to be taken when the student was thought, by himself or his teach­ers to be ready. These tests would be externally admin­istered, modelled on those already existing for music, ballet, drama and languages. Admission to higher educa­tion would be the business of individual institutions which would rely on graded test results and interview.

All these changes would streamline education, and save the money now wasted on the academic bias that still bedevils our educational system. It would motivate children by allowing them to do whatever they do best and enjoy most, and by treating them as grown-up, when they feel that they are so, largely taking charge of their own lives but within a formal structure. These changes, if they could come about, would be grounds for hope.

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

In the anti-philosophy and pro-faith camp this week we have Estelle Morris and , sad to say, Tim Brighouse. These are both, no doubt, extremely pleasant people who have a genuine understanding of and sympathy with pupils and teachers, but are both politicians to their core, and as such they are mealy-mouthed and lacking in the courage to speak truth to power. They may well speak more plainly to their many politican friends behind closed doors, but their public utterings are rather pathetic. We, the people, are the ultimate source of power, and they ought to have the courage to speak to us in straighforward, plain language about crucial issues of education policy. Instead they write feeble little missives in Guardian Education, carefully avoiding any overt criticism of their New Labour chums.

Morris says this in her column this week:

It is his [Michael Gove's] "return to children sitting in rows and rote learning" that worries me most. It's not just that those teaching methods failed to engage so many young children in the past; it's the assumption that the huge body of evidence built up over recent years on what constitutes good teaching and learning is of no value.

It reveals the shallowness of his party's pledge to trust teachers. If teachers can't be trusted to arrange their own classroom and seat their pupils in the way they think best, they shouldn't hold out much hope for professional autonomy under a Tory government.

Does she really not see that New Labour have done everything they can to promote didactic teaching and passive learning, and to get Primary kids back in rows facing interactive whiteboards? New Labour have failed to trust professionals on ANY issues, and have micromanaged and controlled schools to death.

The huge body of understanding about what constitutes good teaching and learning that had accumulated before New Labour came to power (for example regarding the teaching of reading and writing) was totally disregarded in their rush to implement centrally-directed 'strategies'. Unbelievable!!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/mar/23/education-reform-conservative-plans

As for Tim Brighouse,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/mar/23/tim-brighouse-first-time-voters

this is about as mealy-mouthed and waffly as you can get. I just wonder why he's not had the balls to speak out against the New Labour 'reforms', instead of just running around pretending to be an education 'commissioner'.

Come to think about it, it was Brighouse who started the craze to impose 'challenging targets' when he was Birmingham's director of education.
.

Friday, March 5, 2010

Layer 260 . . . Finding Our Voices

.
As I was saying in the last blog, I don't want my children, or other people's children, to sound like automatons, androids, cyborgs, or brainwashed products of a quasi-military production system. I want them to develop their own individual voices which they use to articulate their own individual thoughts and feelings; and I want them to feel like individuals with minds, souls and spirits which they themselves understand and feel comfortable with.

I've recently returned to a book written by Lucy McCormick Calkins called "Lessons From A Child". The subtitle is "On the Teaching and Learning of Writing".

In her introduction she says,

Thankfully my first teaching experiences were in an urban high school where attendance averaged 60% and students weren't afraid to ask hard questions. "Why am I supposed to learn about Egypt?" they'd ask. "This is crazy stuff. Why are we doing this? So what?" When my year was over, I asked myself the same questions. "Why am I doing this? So what?"

In search of a vision, I began teaching first in Oxfordshire, England, and then in an alternative public school in Middlefield, Connecticut. Those readers who visited the British Primary Schools at their best will recognise ways in which their emphasis on collaborative learning, student initiative and craftsmanship have been re-discovered and extended within the context of the writing workshop. I agree with the great British educator, Charity James, who urges us to remember the roots of our innovations:

We are apt to think of our innovations as a new growth of the human spirit, which indeed they are, but this aspect in isolation can make the whole work seem too exciting, too perishable, for its own good. We must see ourselves also in this period as holding the line, as helping to maintain, through our new relationships with students and our new hopes for their learning, an older humanism which the march of matter, the parade of power, would otherwise destroy.

It was Donald Graves who showed me that beneath every research project there are human beings with stories to tell. "Every child has a story to tell," he often said, quoting Harold Rosen. "The question is, will they tell it to us?"

The answer was yes. Children, teachers, principals told us their stories because Graves showed us how to listen, how to see the significance in what others might think was ordinary.

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

So it's voices; it's speaking, and it's listening. Do we grade our students on the power, the clarity, and the expressiveness of their individual voices? Of course not. Thankfully not.

[We care only about the length of their sentences, the number of 'connectives' they use, and whether they deliberately use plenty of 'wow words' - designed to demonstrate a working knowledge of multi-syllabic 'colourful' and 'sophisticated' English adjectives and adverbs.]

Do we grade them on their ability to listen to one another, and their ability to respond and to feed back, and to engage in open and genuine dialogue? Of course not.

We don't value these things - and is it any wonder therefore that we're so useless at them? And the pity is that no-one even cares, or even thinks it matters.

We value what we can measure, and we measure the things that don't even matter. Not any more. That's if they ever did.

Write an account of life in ancient Egypt. Say why their religious and political systems were important.

Fuck off.

Write an account of this week's soccer international between England and Egypt.

Ah yes. Now you're starting to interest me.

Say why John Terry was booed, why he's been deprived of the captaincy, and what this says about our current value systems and so-called morals.

Mmmmmm. Quite interesting.

Write an account of life in a contemporary British city. Describe the variety of lifestyles, the points of difference, and why they exist.

Describe why you're pissed off with the pressure of constantly being tested and graded and told that you're not 'on track' to reach the 'expected grades' in tests and exams. Say why you're so fucking bored and angry with this waste of your life, and why you hate school and our exam system so much. Say whether you're writing as a member of an 'advanced' set or 'stream', or from the point of view of someone who failed to become a 'high achiever'.

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

Tuesday, December 1, 2009

Layer 233 . . . We Are The People . . . and All Our Futures

.
And so to the movie – We Are The People We've Been Waiting For

Trailer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRi8_fXz1D8

A very impressive piece of work. Respect to Caroline Rowland who directed and co-produced.

A quick summary of its points of view?

We currently have a system of education that was shaped by 19th Century ideas that are now bankrupt as ideas suitable for the 21st century.

We still see a teacher as the person who 'knows it all'. Schools are full of 'static knowledge'. We should be preparing pupils for the emerging issues of our time. We live in a rapidly changing environment. Education should be the key to solving all our problems. Does our current schooling help? Does our education prepare children for the rest of their lives?

What is the best education? A love of learning for its own sake? How are children supposed to choose the right path for them to follow? What should they pursue? What experience and knowledge do they have of the world? Should they just stay safely in the mainstream?

Children are the planet's best natural resource. They need to be able to question what they see in the world around them – not just do as they're told. Our system programmes children to be compliant and to conform. We don't develop their creativity. We let their talents go to waste, remain undiscovered.

Thoughtful children believe they should be able to choose their own pathways. They should be able to find success in life in spite of academic failure. We fail to focus on children's strengths because of our obsession with the academic. We concern ourselves principally on their weaknesses, and try to address those academic weaknesses to the exclusion of all else. We are obsessed with standardised tests. Do we really want to turn out kids who have 10 'A' stars who are in many other respects complete 'toe-rags'?

We teach kids how to take tests -  we don't educate them. (Ken Robinson says our whole purpose in education seems to be to produce university professors.) The system is geared towards selecting small elites at the cost of the failure to properly educate all the others. We should be drawing out what is within our children, not stuffing inappropriate things into them.

No wonder so many of our children, both the able and the less able, lack engagement with their own learning and are sometimes physically and often mentally truant.

30,000 British kids leave school each year with NO GCSE passes. 140,000 leave with no grades higher than a D. They've effectively wasted their time in school.

In the USA each year there is $8 billion of crime related costs. 7,000 kids a day drop out of high school. Kids burn down schools  - resentful of their lack of opportunities and their wasted childhood. But they KNOW they have talents. We should be helping them to find the things they're good at, whilst helping them to overcome their weaknesses. They need to engage with more relevant and exciting forms of learning.

The head of education at Unicef says that education is merely used as a political football in unenlightened countries. We need to do something radically different. We need to reinvent our approach to education.

We need confident and creative thinkers. We need holistic education and learning. It's what affluent parents are already choosing for their children.

Too many children have family histories of total academic failure. We need to 'bring children back to life'. (Ken Robinson) We need 0% drop-out rates. We need intrinsic motivation to learn, and choice in our pathways to learning. We need 'mind and hand' learning together. The practical and the theoretical. This is how children learn best. Learning through doing.

We need to design new systems. We need to capture and channel children's instinctive spirit of risk-taking, and help them to become more independent and entrepreneurial. In our culture most children think only of 'getting a job'. This is even true for the most able. We need innovative and pro-active thinkers who know how to harness their own talents. Practical learning should have equal esteem with the theoretical and the academic. Why should practical skills have less respectability and esteem than essay-writing? Law and medicine, after all, are vocational qualifications. Children need theoretical AND applied knowledge.

We need to work with industry and businesses of every sort to show children the opportunities that are available to them, and to help them realise that  through lifelong learning they don't have to stick to one trade or craft or profession throughout life. Not if they are flexible, curious and eager to learn. Not if they are able to USE knowledge and have the ability to make good choices.

Why do we have hierarchies of subjects we study? Why are music and dance regarded as irrelevant and marginal? Why is maths so revered? Why can't young people choose studies that reflect their interests?

We need teachers who can communicate their passion and love of knowledge and learning, not subjects. We need teachers who are skilled in creative thinking and can pass on those skills.

We need a different pedagogic model. Are our teachers ever excited about what they do? We need teaching to be a highly respected profession, as it is in places like Finland.

The headteacher of Summerhill school believes schools should be helping children to grow into real people who are confident , self-assured and realistic. They also need to learn to take responsibility for themselves and their actions, their decisions. They need the confidence to research and to experiment.

As one pupil said, “It's nice being creative.” Having discovered the joy of creativity in one area, children begin to realise they can be creative in many areas, not 'stuck down one path forever'. Hairdressers can also be poets. Textile designers can also be singers and dancers and entrepreneurs.

We need to build a more suitable model of education. We need to consider the role of technology in unlocking potential. Technology can also empower teachers. School is no longer the source of information – it's a portal. We have to help pupils to find their own ways to learn. We need to provide different ways for pupils to reach their own goals. We need to make schools pupil-centric. We need mass customisation and the ability to tailor learning experiences.

Key skills and attitudes must include pride in oneself, ambition, self-direction, persistence, resilience and determination.

We need more than change. We need transformation. We need attention to human and spiritual needs.

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

Congratulations to Caroline Rowland – the film's director and co-producer, and head of Moongate Films.

Having explained to Brother B in Nigeria my enthusiasm for the film, and having run through its key messages, he said, “So what? We knew all that already didn't we?” Indeed we did. But the film did a brilliant job in images and sound of bringing to life important ideas that can seem difficult and abstruse to non-specialists, to non-insiders. I just wonder what impact the film might have on the thousands of Guardian-reading professionals who take the time to sit down and watch it. Most young teachers, hothoused through their PGCEs, will never have encountered such a powerful evocation of what proper education can be like, and will never have been exposed to such a powerful challenge to re-imagine how schools might operate. Will they now demand change?

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

Of course Oxzen has blogged about these ideas many times, and commended to readers Ken Robinson's arguments in favour of a transformation in the way we run schools and the curriculum. See also All Our Futures, especially Sir Ken's personal introduction.

Layer 171 – Education: A Whole Lot To Answer For.
http://oxzen.blogspot.com/2009/06/layer-171-education-whole-lot-to-answer.html

Layer 169 - . . . The Nuffield Review . . . (How Children Became Customers)
http://oxzen.blogspot.com/2009/06/layer-169-drummers-biddles-blears-and.html

All Our Futures – note – this has now been taken off the government website for education!  (http://www.dfes.gov.uk/naccce/index1.shtml)

Look here instead - 
http://www.cypni.org.uk/downloads/alloutfutures.pdf
http://www.culture.gov.uk/PDF/naccce.PDF

The Purpose of this Report
 In 1997, the Government published its White Paper Excellence in Schools. It described education as a vital investment in 'human capital' for the twenty-first century. It argued that one
of the problems in education is the low expectations of young people's abilities and that it is essential to raise morale, motivation and self esteem in schools. The main focus of the White Paper was on raising standards in literacy and numeracy.
But this will not be enough to meet the challenges that face education, and the White Paper recognised this. It also said:

If we are to prepare successfully for the twenty-first century we will have to do more than just improve literacy and numeracy skills. We need a broad, flexible and motivating education that recognises the different talents of all children and delivers excellence for everyone.

It emphasised the urgent need to unlock the potential of every young person and argued that Britain's economic prosperity and social cohesion depend on this.

By creative education we mean forms of education that develop young people's capacities for original ideas and action: by cultural education we mean forms of education that enable them to engage positively with the growing complexity and diversity of social values and ways of life. We argue that there are important relationships between creative and cultural education, and significant implications for methods of teaching and assessment, the balance of the school curriculum and for partnerships between schools and the wider world.

Our aim is to urge the need for a national strategy which engages the energies of all of these to provide the kind of education, in substance and in style, that all young people need now, and to enable them to face an uncertain and demanding future.

The business community wants education to give a much higher priority to promoting young people's creative abilities; to developing teamwork, social skills and powers of communication.

New technologies are providing unprecedented access to ideas, information, people and organisations throughout the world, as well as to new modes of creativity, personal expression, cultural exchange and understanding. The opportunities are considerable: and so are the difficulties.

Issues of creativity and of cultural development concern the whole of education. They are influenced by much more than the shape and content of the formal school curriculum. These
influences include methods of teaching; the ethos of schools, including the relationships between teachers and learners; and the national priorities that underpin the education service.
Our consultations suggest some tensions in current provision.

The key message of this report is the need for a new balance in education: in setting national priorities; in the structure and organisation of the school curriculum; in methods of teaching and assessment; in relationships between schools and other agencies. Over a number of years, the balance of education, in our view, has been lost. There has been a tendency for the national debate on education to be expressed as a series of exclusive alternatives, even dichotomies: for example, as a choice between the arts or the sciences; the core curriculum or the broad curriculum; between academic standards or creativity; freedom or authority in teaching methods. We argue that these dichotomies are unhelpful. Realising the potential of young people, and raising standards of achievement and motivation includes all of these elements.
Creating the right synergy and achieving the right balance in education is an urgent and complex task, from national policy making to classroom teaching.

Education throughout the world faces unprecedented challenges: economic, technological, social, and personal. Policy-makers everywhere emphasise the urgent need to develop 'human resources', and in particular to promote creativity, adaptability and better powers of communication.
We argue that this means reviewing some of the basic assumptions of our education system. New approaches are needed based on broader conceptions of young people's abilities, of how to promote their motivation and self-esteem, and of the skills and aptitudes they need. Creative and cultural education are fundamental to meeting these objectives.

There are many misconceptions about creativity. Some people associate creative teaching with a lack of discipline in education. Others see creative ability as the preserve of a gifted few, rather than of the many; others associate it only with the arts. In our view, creativity is possible in all areas of human activity and all young people and adults have creative capacities. Developing these capacities involves a balance between teaching skills and understanding, and promoting the
freedom to innovate, and take risks.

Creativity can be 'taught'. Teachers can be creative in their own teaching; they can also promote the creative abilities of their pupils. The roles of teachers are to recognise young
people's creative capacities; and to provide the particular conditions in which they can be realised. Developing creativity involves, amongst other things, deepening young people's cultural knowledge and understanding. This is essential both in itself and to promote forms of education which are inclusive and sensitive to cultural diversity and change.

Assessment and inspection have vital roles in raising standards of achievement in schools. But they must support and not inhibit creative and cultural education. There is a need for a new balance between different types of attainment target in the National Curriculum, and between the different forms and criteria of assessment and inspection. Raising standards should not mean standardisation, or the objectives of creative and cultural education will be frustrated.

We are not advocating creative and cultural education as alternatives to literacy and numeracy, but as equally relevant to the needs of this and of future generations. We support the need for high standards of literacy and numeracy. These are important in themselves. They can also enhance creative abilities: equally creative teaching and learning can enhance literacy and numeracy. These are complementary abilities, not opposing objectives.

Ability comes in many forms and should not be defined only by traditional academic criteria. Academic ability alone will no longer guarantee success or personal achievement.

Children with high academic ability may have other strengths that are often neglected. Children who struggle with academic work can have outstanding abilities in other areas. Equally, creative and cultural education of the sort we propose can also help to raise academic standards. The key is to find what children are good at. Self confidence and self esteem then tend to rise and overall performance improve. High standards in creative achievement require just as much rigour as traditional academic work.

We live in a fast moving world. While employers continue to demand high academic standards, they also now want more. They want people who can adapt, see connections, innovate,
communicate and work with others. This is true in many areas of work. The new knowledge-based economies in particular will increasingly depend on these abilities. Many
businesses are paying for courses to promote creative abilities, to teach the skills and attitudes that are now essential for economic success but which our education system is not designed to promote.

We are advocating a new balance between learning knowledge and skills and having the freedom to innovate and experiment - a system of education that fosters and channels the diverse abilities of young people and which gives everyone the opportunity to achieve on their own merits.

In publishing this report we believe with even more strength than we did at the outset, that the tasks we identify are urgent and the arguments compelling; that the benefits of success are enormous and the costs of inaction profound.

The foundations of the present education system were laid at the end of the nineteenth century. They were designed to meet the needs of a world that was being transformed by industrialisation. We are publishing this report at the dawn of a new century. The challenges we face now are of the same magnitude, but they are of a different character. The task is not to do better now what we set out to do then: it is to rethink the purposes, methods and scale of  education in our new circumstances. This report argues that no education system can be world-class without valuing and integrating creativity in teaching and learning, in the curriculum, in
management and leadership and without linking this to promoting knowledge and understanding of cultural change and diversity. The arguments and proposals that follow are to help set a course for the next century while addressing the urgent demands of the present.

It makes you wonder what the impact of this report would have been had someone bothered to make a film like this when All Our Futures was first published.
…................................................................


Pycnopodia – the seastar – the star of this week's edition of 'Life' on BBC. A truly horrendous creature.

http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&safe=off&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&hs=6Wx&resnum=0&q=pycnopodia&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=D3QUS4u9ApKv4QaMzvzgBg&sa=X&oi=image_result_group&ct=title&resnum=4&ved=0CBkQsAQwAw

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

The Art of Spain – Andrew Graham-Dixon

It seems incredible now to think that Franco kept Spain locked in a fascist dictatorship for the best part of 40 years, and the very first time I went to Spain he was still in power.

Last night's film about Spanish art highlighted the fact that Picasso lived and worked for most of his life in France because of Franco's dictatorship.

The film claimed that both Gaudi and Picasso produced work that focused on the tension between spirituality and sexuality, or carnality. Well it seems to me that's a whole blog in itself – does there have to be 'tension' between those two life forces, or can each of them be a direct pathway to the other? Aren't we all designed to be spiritual, sexual and 'intellectual'? Isn't the very interplay between those forces and faculties at the root of creativity? Isn't creativity itself an attempt to celebrate both spirituality and sexuality? And can't the warped and distorted expressions of each of them often inhibit and prevent the proper expression of the others?

I prefer 'interplay' to 'tension'.
.

Monday, August 24, 2009

Layer 184 Ashes, Auras, Theosophy, Blavatsky, Steiner, and Krishnamurti

.
The End of an Aura

So England have won back The Ashes. Is this important? No.
Was it enjoyable? YES!

And there's no question that the retirement of Australia's two outstanding bowlers – Warne and McGrath - brought about the end of an era, as well as an aura. [This is a kind of in-joke for cricket-loving anoraks and saddos.]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/blog/2009/aug/23/andrew-flintoff-ashes-test-farewell

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

Auras

“The Buddhist flag, first hoisted in 1885 in Sri Lanka, is a symbol of faith and peace used throughout the world to represent the Buddhist faith.

The six colours of the flag represent the colours of the aura that emanated from the body of the Buddha when He attained Enlightenment under the Bodhi Tree. The horizontal stripes represent the races of the world living in harmony and the vertical stripes represent eternal world peace.

The colours symbolise the perfection of Buddhahood and the Dharma.

The Blue light that radiated from the Buddha's hair symbolises the spirit of Universal Compassion for all beings.

The Yellow light that radiated from the Buddha's epidermis symbolises the Middle Way which avoids all extremes and brings balance and liberation.

The Red light that radiated from the Buddha's flesh symbolises the blessings that the practice of the Buddha's Teaching brings.

The White light that radiated from the Buddha's bones and teeth symbolises the purity of the Buddha's Teaching and the liberation it brings.

The Orange light that radiated from the Buddha's palms, heels and lips symbolises the unshakable Wisdom of the Buddha's Teaching.

The Combination Colour symbolises the universality of the Truth of the Buddha's Teaching.

Therefore, the overall flag represents that regardless of race, nationality, division or colour, all sentient beings possess the potential of Buddhahood.”

The flag was invented in 1880 by an American journalist, Colonel Henry Steele Olcott. Olcott was a fascinating character. A former soldier and lawyer, he set up the Theosophical Society of New York. He arrived in Sri Lanka with the renowned spiritualist Madame Blavatsky on 17 February 1880 - a day which was subsequently celebrated as Olcott Day in independent Sri Lanka. He founded the Buddhist Theosophical Society, devised a Buddhist catechism, encouraged Buddhist versions of Christmas carols and cards, and inspired the founding of Buddhist schools and and the YMBA - the Young Mens Buddhist Association. There are six colours in the flag, but the human eye can see only five. They are described in the Scriptures as emanating from the aura around the Buddha's head.

Olcott felt that local Buddhists in Sri Lanka needed a symbol to rally around. His flag acheived that: it became the emblem of the international Buddhist movement and is flown today worldwide in Buddhist buildings and at Buddhist celebrations.

http://flagspot.net/flags/buddhism.html

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

Theosophy

Theosophy is a doctrine of religious philosophy and metaphysics originating with Helena Petrovna Blavatsky (1831–91). In this context, theosophy holds that all religions are attempts by the " Spiritual Hierarchy" to help humanity in evolving to greater perfection, and that each religion therefore has a portion of the truth. Together with Henry Steel Olcott, William Quan Judge, and others, Blavatsky founded the Theosophical Society in 1875. - Wikipedia

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

As far as I can see Theosophy tried to be a movement whose aim was to show that all religions were basically attempts to say something important about the metaphysical aspects of the human condition, in terms of the existence of spiritual intelligence, as I'd call it.

Obviously they were on to something, but created a rod for their own backs by proclaiming their beliefs as some sort of a new pseudo-science, and making the whole thing over-complicated and untenable for people of either a) a religious persuasion, or b) a complete lack of interest in such obscurantist and esoteric views. Keep it simple, dudes!

“Rudolf Steiner created a successful branch of the Theosophical Society in Germany. He focused on a Western esoteric path that incorporated the influences of Christianity and natural science, resulting in tensions with Annie Besant (cf. Rudolf Steiner and the Theosophical Society); these were seriously exacerbated by Steiner refusing members of the Order of the Star of the East membership in the Theosophical Society's German Section. Steiner was vehemently opposed to The Order of the Star of the East's proclamation that the young boy, Jiddu Krishnamurti, was the incarnation of Maitreya (who was believed to have "over-shadowed" Jesus Christ).

(Krishnamurti later repudiated this role and left the Society to pursue an independent career of spiritual teaching.) In 1913 Steiner founded his own Anthroposophical Society; the great majority of German-speaking theosophists joined the new society, which grew rapidly. Steiner later became most famous for his ideas about education, resulting in an international network of " Steiner Schools," also known as Waldorf schools. Other influences of anthroposophical thought include biodynamic agriculture, anthroposophic medicine and the acting techniques of Michael Chekhov.

Theosophy was closely linked to the Indian independence movement: the Indian National Congress was founded during a Theosophical conference, and many of its leaders, including M. K. Gandhi were associated with theosophy.

The present-day New Age movement is to a considerable extent based on the teachings of Blavatsky, though some writers have described Alice Bailey as the founder of the "New Age movement". However, the term was used prior to Bailey; a weekly Journal of Christian liberalism and Socialism called The New Age was published as early as 1894. James R. Lewis and J. Gordon Melton, in Perspectives on the New Age wrote, "The most important - though certainly not the only - source of this transformative metaphor, as well as the term "New Age," was Theosophy, particularly as the Theosophical perspective was mediated to the movement by the works of Alice Bailey."

Mahatma Gandhi met Madame Blavatsky and Annie Besant in India in about 1889, shortly after Besant had joined the Society. He declined invitations to join, but said the meeting induced him to study his own background in Hinduism. He mentions this, and his further study of Theosophy during 1903 as published in his autobiography, The Story of My Experiments with Truth (1927–29).

L. Frank Baum , a notable member of the Theosophical Society, wrote The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (1900), which some see as an allegory of theosophical tenets. Many of the story's oft-cited parallels to mysticism—the rainbow and the ruby slippers, for example - actually originated with the 1939 MGM musical adaptation. There are Theosophical elements in all fourteen Oz books, with Tik-Tok of Oz (1914) particularly strong in Theosophist symbolism.

Van Morrison's song "Dweller on the Threshold," has Theosophy concepts at its core. He also mentions Theosophy in the song "Rave On, John Donne".

Artists and authors who investigated Theosophy, aside from the musicians listed below, include Aldous Huxley, Wassily Kandinsky, Piet Mondrian, Franz Kafka, William Butler Yeats, George William Russell (Æ), Owen Barfield, and T. S. Eliot.

Steiner

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

Rudolf Steiner (25 or 27 February 1861 – 30 March 1925) was an Austrian philosopher, literary scholar, educator, architect, social thinker, playwright and esotericist. He gained initial recognition as a literary critic and cultural philosopher. At the beginning of the twentieth century he founded a new spiritual movement, Anthroposophy, as an esoteric philosophy growing out of European transcendentalist roots with links to Theosophy.

Steiner led this movement through several phases. In the first, more philosophically-oriented phase, Steiner attempted to find a synthesis between science and mysticism; his philosophical work of these years, which he termed spiritual science, sought to provide a connection between the cognitive path of Western philosophy and the inner and spiritual needs of the human being. In a second phase, beginning around 1907, he began working collaboratively in a variety of artistic media, including drama, the movement arts (developing a new artistic form, Eurythmy) and architecture, culminating in the building of a cultural center to house all the arts, the Goetheanum. After the First World War, Steiner worked with educators, farmers, doctors, and other professionals to develop Waldorf education, biodynamic agriculture, anthroposophical medicine as well as new directions in numerous other areas.

Steiner advocated a form of ethical individualism, to which he later brought a more explicitly spiritual component. He derived his epistemology from Johann Wolfgang Goethe's world view, where “Thinking… is no more and no less an organ of perception than the eye or ear. Just as the eye perceives colours and the ear sounds, so thinking perceives ideas.” A consistent thread that runs from his earliest philosophical phase through his later spiritual orientation is the goal of demonstrating that there are no essential limits to human knowledge.

Krishnamurti

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

Jiddu Krishnamurti or J. Krishnamurti (Tamil: கிà®°ுஃசுணமூà®°்த்தி ) , (May 12, 1895–February 17, 1986) was a renowned writer and speaker on philosophical and spiritual subjects. His subject matter included: psychological revolution, the nature of the mind, meditation, human relationships, and how to enact positive change in society. He constantly stressed the need for a revolution in the psyche of every human being and emphasized that such a revolution cannot be brought about by any external entity whether religious, political or social.

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

Phew!!!

Well – you have to do something whilst listening to TMS and the climax of the 2009 Ashes.

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

School of Rock

This feel-good little gem of a movie was repeated last night. The review of it in Wikipedia really fails to get to grips with it or to do it justice.

For a start, Jack Black is wonderful. As are the kids.

And it says important things about the purpose of schools, about approaches to teaching and learning, about motivation for learning, about art and creativity, about respect for children, about the attitude of fee-paying parents, about pressures on school management, about having reasons and real purposes for learning, and developing every aspect of the self. It says things about the power of collaboration, and teamwork, and cooperation instead of competition, where each one uses their special gifts and talents for the good of the group.

In a moment of triumph Jack tells the swatty girl that she can have 8 gold stars, and she replies, “ I didn't do it for the grades!”

The scene where Jack takes the head of the school to a bar and she gets somewhat sozzed on half a glass of beer is excellent. She says, “I've never been to this side of town before”, and you can feel something awakening, or re-awakening, in her. She says, with real feeling, “I wasn't always like this, you know. There was a time when I was fun! I was funny! Those parents! That pressure! I can't afford to make a mistake!”

Jack puts a song on the jukebox - “Edge of Seventeen”, by Stevie Nicks, which he knows is going to do things to her, and for her. It's a rocking song, great rhythm, and she goes with it, back in time to when she was young, and real, and passionate, and she sings along . . . connecting with something buried deep within . . .

Just like the white winged dove...
Sings a song . . .

The music there it was hauntingly familiar
And I see you doing what I try to do for me
With the words from a poet and the voice from a choir
And a melody . . .
Nothing else mattered

And the days go by...
Like a strand in the wind...
In the web that is my own...

Can she change herself? Can she change her school? Can she change the parents?

Right at the end, the little band they've created is getting ready to rock, and Jack tells them which song he thinks they should perform – one that the kid who's the guitarist has written. And then he says, “But that's just my opinion. This isn't my band. This is OUR band”.

The kids have a right to their opinions, and to adults' respect for their opinions. Learning and creating together – they all have a voice, and a say in what they do.

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

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Layer 172 Young & McGuinn, Working for the Teachers, Working for the Government.

.
Neil Young is a monster. A great, lurching, raucous bear of a man. Headlining at Glastonbury this evening he ended his set with an amazing version of 'A Day In The Life'. Where the hell did that come from? He made this Beatles classic - this Sergeant Pepper climax - rock and roll in a way the four moptops would never have dreamed of. He blasted and crashed his way through it, ending in a cacophony of noise, with the strings of his black Gibson totally busted and broken. That's something I've never seen. I've seen guitars that were beaten up, smashed and dead, but this was something quite different. A guitar that was still intact, only with all its strings snapped and zapped.

Having watched Neil's power and emotion and originality it was almost impossible to deal with the rest of the TV coverage of today's acts at Glastonbury – a horrible bunch of derivative prats wailing and whining their way through their 'original' compositions – every single tune instantly forgettable, as were the performances.

Bruce Springsteen is the headline act tomorrow, and the press seems full of condescending articles proclaiming that Bruce is suddenly, somehow, COOL! In his 60th year the tossers who inhabit Planet Rock these days have seemingly latched on to the fact that The Boss really is the boss. How has that happened? Where was the crack that allowed reality to creep into the consciousness of these lickspittles, these cringe-making creeps? As if Bruce gives a toss what they think anyway.

Oh dear. Oh dear. A bunch of schoolkids called The White Lies just tried to perform 'Dancing In The Dark'. Not cool at all. Fine maybe for their local youth club, but surely not the nation's premier music festival, on national TV. Oh dearie me. They just did a song called Death.

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

Interestingly, Roger McGuinn had name-checked the Beatles several times during his set at the Cadogan Hall, just off Sloane Square, earlier in the evening. He did a retrospective of his musical life and times, playing and singing solo, using an acoustic 7-string Martin and a beautiful electric 12-string Rickenbacker. He acknowledged the influence of the Beatles in his arrangement of Dylan's Mr Tambourine Man for The Byrds – their first monster hit. He kept referring to the 'Beatles Beat' in all his early songs and arrangements of folk tunes. Dylan gave him the lyrics for 'Ballad of Easy Rider', knowing McGuinn would Beatle them for the film. He ended his set with a magnificent version of Eight Miles High. Excellent.

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

Prior to the concert I'd had to drag my old friend J out of the panini bar where he'd taken refuge from the Sloanes. Initially he refused to budge, claiming he was too tired to go back out into the heat of the evening and the weirdness of the streets. However, after I'd made it clear there was no way I was staying in a soulless bloody sandwich bar when I was desperate for a pint of decent ale he decided to tag along to the pub we managed to stumbled upon a few streets away where we had portions of chicken cassoulet - a two for a tenner deal. The beer was excellent.

Chelsea is bonkers. Straight out of the tube, which had transported me from the real world to the Emerald City via the circle line/whirlwind, I came across a huge black Jag limo driven by a gorgeous chauffeuse wearing black gloves and a miniskirt. Not too many of those in the East End . . .

J, meanwhile, on the other side of the square, outside the Peter Jones department store, had been practically knocked off the pavement by several flunkeys carrying rolls of fabric from the store out to parked limos in which rich old biddies were sitting, waiting to examine the wares.

By the way, according to J, who's of the faith, it's impossible for Jewish people to catch swine flu, since it's not Kosher. On the other hand, gefilte fish flu is apparently causing havoc, and as for the chicken noodle flu epidemic . . .

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

Martin Shaw was on Desert Island Discs this morning. His choice of music was complete pants, but this is what he said about his education:

“I loathed school. I had the impression I was working for the teachers – not for myself. There were only two enlightened teachers. The rest were idiots, and why would I work for them?”

As I said in Layer 171, we need to “agree on how children should get access to the best and most relevant curriculum, and how they should learn.”

  • Why are so many teachers 'idiots' – whatever that might mean?
  • Is it right that children should feel they're not doing things for their own benefit, only for the teacher, the school, the LA, the government, etc?
  • Why do so many children loathe school?
  • How much ability and talent is under-developed and wasted because children aren't allowed to travel their own pathways, on their own learning journeys?

It's a complete outrage that children have been badgered and bored by teachers in the name of 'driving up standards', and certainly have not been working and learning for themselves. In a word, they've been USED. And abused.

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

Martin Shaw also spoke about “Yearning for something outside the physical”.

It's also a matter of needing, not just yearning. Does anyone seriously doubt that humans need to connect with the metaphysical and the spiritual?

If we agree on this need to connect,

  • How can we go about it?
  • Does it need to involve “God”?
  • How do we equip people, through education to begin their quest for the metaphysical, and become better able to engage with it?
  • Do schools even attempt to do so, beyond tokenistic RE lessons and ritualistic assemblies?
  • How many children leave school without even knowing the terms 'metaphysical' and 'spiritual', let alone understand what they might mean?


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

Martin Shaw again -

“The great philosophers and teachers have said, Know Thyself.”

Our schools don't, by and large, give a damn about enabling children to know themselves. Where does it say in the national curriculum that children should know themselves? And so they don't get any opportunity or encouragement to look within, to meditate, to reflect, to perceive themselves through their own eyes, as well as the eyes of others. How can they be expected to understand themselves without time, opportunity or encouragement?

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

From today's Guardian:

Labour to junk Tony Blair's flagship school reform

Headteachers to get more powers as era of centralised control ends.


The government is to abandon the most significant education reform of the New Labour era in order to end the centralised control of schools and grant headteachers more powers, the Guardian has learned.

In a totemic break from the Blair years, next week's education white paper will signal the end of Labour's national strategies for schools, which includes oversight of the literacy and numeracy hours in primaries. The changes will strip away centralised prescription of teaching methods and dramatically cut the use of private consultants currently employed to improve schools.

They will give schools more freedom and establish new networks of school-to-school support to help drive up standards in what will be described as a "new era of localism".

Ed Balls, the schools secretary, has masterminded the plan, which could save the government up to £100m a year on its contract with the private company Capita, which delivers the national strategies. It forms part of an efficiency drive to slim down government bureaucracy.

So there we have it. This isn't for the benefit of the children. This is to save money. What a bunch of shits. They will never, ever, admit that the national literacy strategy has been a total waste of money, time and effort. Worse than that, it's fucked up decades of hard work trying to help teachers appreciate what subtle and sensitive practices are required in order to help all children become fully literate and absolutely passionate about reading and writing.
.

Wednesday, June 10, 2009

Layer 168 Michael Rosen, Jim Rose, Ed Balls, Jim Knight, Uncle Tom Cobley and All.

.
Michael Rosen has always been a man to appreciate and admire. As was his dad, Harold. His two-year stint as Children's Laureate has just come to an end, and to mark it he had an article in yesterday's EducationGuardian. As a poet and a writer he has a genius for spotting and summing up the essence of things, for showing us the little things that say such a lot about the state of the world, or humankind, or whatever.

For example, in this latest article he starts with this anecdote:

“Now here's one of the nice bits ... going round the classrooms and having a quick chat in each room ... open the door ... in ... this is a year 4 group ... and the teacher says that she's been working with one of my poems ... little heart-flip of pride ... yes, she says, the "quicks" have been making up poems of their own and the "slows" have been doing a wordsearch, using words from my poems. OMG! Quicks! Slows! I had no idea that poetry could be streamed! What do I say? I nod. I smile. I say nothing. I want to say something but I can't say anything because my mind is banging to the tune of 10 years' worth of government statements about "delivering the standards agenda" and "rolling out entitlement" . . . ”

Wonderful. Sums up the bloody sorry state of our Primary schools in one paragraph. He then describes meetings he's had with the likes of Jim Rose, Ed Balls and Jim Knight, and details their sheer incomprehension as to what schools should be doing and what the damn government's been doing that's wrong, bad and mad.

Jim Rose says to Michael, "We've got the alphabetical principle in place, now the next one to crack is how do we make books come alive?" For chrissake! “The alphabetical principle”! There's no such thing! What he means of course is that he believes Primary teachers have finally been battered into believing that “synthetic phonics” are the answer to overcoming slow progress in learning to read. Which is bollocks, of course, but Jim thinks he's fixed it, thanks to his rubbish report on the teaching of reading.

And “making books come alive”?

“I'm thinking, why is it a problem to work out "how to make books come alive". Teachers were doing this 20, 30, 40 years ago. There are shedloads of books on the subject. There are teams of advisers working out of local authorities or places like the Centre for Literacy in Primary Education who are training teachers to do this. There are hundreds of writers visiting schools doing this. He says he'll get back to me. He doesn't.”

He meets with Balls and Knight in the House of Commons:

To my left are several people who haven't been introduced, who are probably from "the department". We are talking about books. I say to the ministers that they've put in place a compulsory programme to teach children how to read, but there is no policy on reading books. They look at me blankly. Ed has half a mind elsewhere. The press pack outside want a bite of him. It's the Haringey child abuse scandal. I say that what's going on is discriminatory. Children who come from homes where books are being read get access to the kinds of abstract and complex ideas that you can only get hold of easily through exposure to extended prose. The rest are being fed worksheets.

Ed doesn't believe me.

"What do you want from us?" he says. "A directive asking every local authority and every school to devise its own policy on the reading of books. I've got a 20-point outline that you could send out as a guideline for people to adapt." "Send it to me," says Jim. "I have already," I say. "Send it to me again," he says . . ."

Moving on from stupid politicians who are too full of themselves to take any notice of what much cleverer and wiser people have to tell them, Michael writes with great affection and pride about his father, who worked as a teacher at Walworth Comprehensive and later became Professor of Education at the Institute of Education. This is from Wikipedia:

Harold Rosen (25 June 1919 - 31 July 2008) was an influential educationalist, particularly in regard to the teaching of English, a socialist thinker and a political activist, born in the USA but active mainly in the UK. He was a Communist activist in the 1930's; after World war II, he became an English teacher and later a teacher trainer; he became a major figure on the New Left after leaving the Communist Party in 1957; and he played an important part in debates and developments in the fields of language teaching and Primary education, particularly in the 1960's and 1970's.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Rosen_(educationalist

Michael writes:

"My father dies. He was 89. There seem to be so many layers to his life. To me and my brother he was the bloke on camping holidays singing French folk songs, telling rude jokes, or back home getting in a state about our homework not being done. But as the letters and obituaries are written, we are reminded of him as schoolteacher, as teacher-trainer, as storyteller, as "animator" of study groups.

An issue of the English teachers' journal Changing English appears that is entirely devoted to him and his work. Simon, one of his colleagues at Walworth comprehensive school in south London, has unearthed the English syllabus that my father helped to devise in 1958. I read: "Whatever language the pupils possess, it is this which must be built on rather than driven underground. However narrow the experience of our pupils may be (and it is often wider than we think), it is this experience alone which has given their language meaning. The starting point for English work must be the ability to handle effectively their own experience. Oral work, written work and the discussion of literature must create an atmosphere in which the pupils become confident of the full acceptability of the material of their own experience. Only in this way can they advance to the next stage."

I am overcome with feelings of admiration, sadness, regret and anger. I start to scribble a letter to the editor of Changing English, Jane Miller. How did the Thatcher and Blair governments succeed so quickly to wipe out years of such thought, theory and practice? Did my father, my mother and everyone else struggling to figure out how to give every single child the right to speak, write and read not lay out these kinds of theories clearly enough?"

No doubt Michael's asking a rhetorical question and in reality he's familiar with the Shock Doctrine, and with the neo-conservative idea that in order to defeat progressives and socialists it's important that right-wing prime ministers and presidents act with great speed and are ruthless in overturning the ideas of their opponents, claiming that there's a national crisis of some sort, an emergency, a need to fix a massive problem or to remedy a set of failures attributed to their opponents. Of course Harold Rosen and his progressive peers laid out their theories and their methodology, which they'd developed from actual experience of working in tough inner-city areas, with enormous clarity and cogency. Reactionaries like Balls and Knight don't need to engage with those ideas – as head honchos they just feel the need to act on their own elitist instincts, their pathetically limited knowledge, and their ludicrous assumptions about methodology and the learning process.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/jun/09/michael-rosen-creativity-in-the-classroom-teaching

http://www.michaelrosen.co.uk/index.html

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

Last year Michael wrote an article about SATs:

Sats: literally failing

The government is still wedded to Sats. Why, when the tests emphasise rote learning and cramp imaginations?

So, the government comes face-to-face with a failure. Someone better than me at basic numeracy might like to tot up the money spent on Sats, the various "strategies" and specific "hours", and Ofsted teams, along with the cost of schools closed and re-opened under new management. It's clear that Andrew Adonis is still wedded to the crumbling edifice of Sats, even though there is no evidence to suggest that the tests "lever up standards" as is claimed.

We know now that teachers teach to the tests. Every parent of a Sats-age child knows that the Sats year begins with your child's teacher announcing, "This is the year of the Sats", and sure enough, the lesson plans and homework soon come home. These are, in essence, mini-Sats full of the same kind of questions. In other words, the response to literature across the whole year (and indeed the whole school) is reduced to firing back answers on the facts in extracts in books, and reproducing the "sequence of events" as they put it. Literature is being shrunk into literacy.

The tragic fact is that [an] immensely potent way of giving children a reason to read and write has been turned into a series of dull, repeated exercises and tests, often conducted on books that are never read in their entirety – and all in the name of "delivering literacy". I suggest that whatever process of teaching children how to read is in place, this process on its own will never solve the problem of proving to children that reading is a worthwhile and interesting activity. In other words, any child might quite legitimately ask him- or herself, "why should I bother with this stuff?"

Ofsted inspects schools for literacy but not for whether children read often, freely and widely.

Only when all children are in a book-loving environment will they achieve literacy, yes, but a lot more: a confidence in handling abstract ideas, an understanding of a multiplicity of viewpoint and the complexity and diversity of human interaction that comes through reading widely and often. At the moment, the government is barking up the wrong tree. The regime of Sats, the literacy strategy and Ofsted will only carry on delivering failure.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/21/earlyyearseducation.sats
---------------------------------------------------

I've just discovered, almost too late, an excellent comedy series on Radio 4 – The Secret World.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00jsxhl
.