Education reform, good or bad idea?

[Garp]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6974558.stm

I found this quite interesting.. and I'm rather in two minds about it.
Great, hold back kids a year or two at primary school if they're failing the basic skills. Might ensure the standard of education improves generally. On the other hand all it may do is convince the kids they're stupid and worthless, something that is a serious issue at the moment, according to a lot of youth workers I've spoken to (MB might agree, not sure what its like in his area?) It also may just lead to the bigger older kids picking on the younger smarter ones in their year.

The bit that more concerns me is that of paying headteachers extra money to teach poorly behaving kids.
I'm all for universal education, a staunch supporter, and going well above and beyond the call of duty to teach kids but I find it hard to believe this will achieve little more than ensure disruptive influences will remain in a class and damage the education of the other students.

What do you guys think?

[Matblack]

I think its the tories clutching at straws again, thats not to say I don't support it as an option open to teachers however as a blanket move to do this to any child who does not achieve just isn't practical and could as you point out be detrimental. However if you use these measures in conjunction with extra tuition, vocational options, alternative teaching methods and more teaching support they they could work.

What people have to understand is there is no cure all, you can't just make a kid resit a year if they are going to slack for another year is a pointless exercise and as you say its likely to increase bullying and disruption, something that the tories will apparently have a zero tolerance policy on , presumably they'll put all the kids who misbehave in Borstal (expensive) or kick them out (more uneducated kids on the streets).

Something tells me they haven't thought this through

MB

[Stan_Lite]

Originally Posted by Matblack

Something tells me they haven't thought this through

MB

What? The Tories not thinking a policy through? - Perish the thought

I, personally, think this is a bad idea, for similar reasons as those given here and in the BBC article, I think it will only stigmatise children, increase class sizes, put extra strain on an already overworked system and cost more money.

I think the solution lies in rethinking the way these difficult to teach children are taught and encouraging the parents of these children to help, instead of relying on teaching staff to do all of the work on top of their usual work.

At the end of the day, some kids are just thick and no amount of teaching will ever make them clever, we can only do the best we can with them.

[Lynnie_pitch nee Leigh]

For me even the threat of this happening could be a good thing tbh a new scare tatic (detention is crap!)

We have far too many pupils coming up from primary who can't read / write as well as they should / can just because they are lazy! (some cases it's not because of that, there are genuine reasons)

I think this would be a great insentive to the lazy kids to buck there ideas up.

It could work but every child would have to be assessed on their individual needs, like MB said some people need / deserve extra help (but this costs money), laxy little buggers just need a kick up the backside and detention does sod all

"We need to intervene early rather than holding kids back." And a government spokeswoman said Mr Cameron's claim that 43% of children leave primary school unable to read, write and count properly was "quite wrong".

I don't think its down to the schools alone, parents just don't read to their kids anymore. They prefer to stick them in front of a tv / game and have some quiet and don't spend time with their kids.

Also the threat of having your child kept back a year may make parents pay more attention to their children (not all parents are like this, but some do my head in!)

The problem comes when there is a kid of 10 with the reading age of a 5 year old with genuine problems, what do you do with them? Holding them back wont help, progressing into main strain secondary education doesn't help. The problem is they've closed down the specialist schools and are now trying to think of ways to keep inclusion but improve results.
It's upsetting when you see these kids though, (not the lazy little buggers) they try so hard to fit in / achieve and they just can't in main stream schools

[After_8]

Originally Posted by Bigstan

At the end of the day, some kids are just thick and no amount of teaching will ever make them clever, we can only do the best we can with them.

That is not true. Some children will always learn slower than others but if you put the effort in, they will still learn. You can certainly get them up to a good enough level to be useful members of society. It's also worth noting that the VAST majority of low achieving children in schools ARE capable of achieving higher - this is particularly evident in secondary schools where the problem is often one of motivation.

Originally Posted by Lynnieleigh

I don't think its down to the schools alone, parents just don't read to their kids anymore. They prefer to stick them in front of a tv / game and have some quiet and don't spend time with their kids.

This is a major problem - many parents are not taking any responsibility for their own childrens' education these days. I blame the consumer culture that's developed in this country for this: "I pay for the school through my taxes, so the school should do its job and teach my son?" as well as the fact that good parenting skills in general don't seem to be being passed down.

There is a stage, of course, where a child will be old enough to be responible for themselves and you can't blame the parents any more, but unfortunately by the time you get there, it's often very difficult to undo the damage that's already been done.

[Garp]

Originally Posted by After_8

That is not true. Some children will always learn slower than others but if you put the effort in, they will still learn. You can certainly get them up to a good enough level to be useful members of society. It's also worth noting that the VAST majority of low achieving children in schools ARE capable of achieving higher - this is particularly evident in secondary schools where the problem is often one of motivation.

Part of the problem is you can't possibly cover all learning types. When I joined the college there were two students who'd started that year who had failed all GCSEs by a good margin and were supposedly 'too stupid' to get an education. Having started at college they were enrolled on NVQ courses instead, along with extra english and maths GCSE classes. It was the vocational courses that changed their lives. For once they were being taught in a way that they could learn. Over their time at the college they also got support to help them learn how to work to their strengths and deal with their weaknesses so they could learn from other styles with a bit more work. Four years later they left the college with strong grades in IT and headed off to university, one off to Warwick to study Computer Science, and the other off to Cambridge I think it was, again to study Comp Sci. These were two guys that had been written off by the time they arrived at the college but were now showing themselves to be exceptionally gifted and intelligent kids, just not ones capable of learning in the manner with which they'd been taught at school. I remember on results day seeing tears pouring down the face of the lady that had mentored them throughout their time at the college when she heard what they'd got and where they had their placements.