Lazy Students » State Schools

The trials of Tom Daley explain what’s wrong with state education

Duncan Robinson — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 11:18:10 +0000

Tom Daley about to get towel whipped to within an inch of his life...

Do you remember Tom Daley? The little chap who was very good at falling with style from a very high platform into a deep pool of water at the Olympics? Apparently, as soon as he returned to his state secondary school he had the crap bullied out of him. Thus, after someone threatened (quite seriously, one must suppose) to ‘break his legs’, Daley’s father thought it was time for his son to go. Where to? The private sector.

This might not seem a particularly big or important issue, but it is. Yes, kids are bullied all the time, in both state and private schools. After all, children are horrible. They’re shits. I can say this with authority as, from the age approximately 11-15, I was a horrid, little twerp. It’s inevitable that some kids will get picked on. But why pick on Daley? The answer is simple: Daley was/is extremely successful. And why will he better off in a private school? Because private schools, unlike state schools, do not have a culture where success is abnormal, and thus something to be attacked over.*

In state schools, if you stick your head above the parapet – by being too clever, too funny, too good at something – there will be a crowd of people ready and willing to pelt rotten fruit at you. Now why is this?

This is not because state schooled kids hate success; it’s because there is a culture of mediocrity that surrounds most state schools. Teachers do not care about turning A’s into A*, they care about turning D’s into C’s. Mixed ability classes mean that clever kids have to slow down, dumb kids still struggle and mediocre kids do, well, mediocre. A lot of state schools simply don’t bother pushing kids to apply for the best universities.

It’s a dull argument, and one often repeated by boorish fools with whom I have no wish to be associated, but I think it rings true. Daley having to move to a private school simply because he was successful is a sad indictment of the state education system in Britain as a whole, where mediocrity is cherished and children – rather than being viewed as individuals – are simply a clump of 5 A*-C results waiting to happen.

Tom Daley is just one very talented fifteen year old, but the state sector can’t afford to lose talented kids. The whole point of comprehensive education is that people of all abilities and all backgrounds go to school and mix together. If state schools don’t stop being so anti-talent then the gap between the private and state sectors will not close.

*N.B I went to a state school. It was alright. Not good, but alright. Please note that many state schools are wonderful, and really push pupils. Likewise, some private schools are dreadful shitholes that would be closed if they were in the public sector.

Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Secondary Schools* (*But Were Afraid to Ask)

Duncan Robinson — Fri, 22 May 2009 16:13:30 +0000

A teacher who filmed her pupils in a secret documentary about the standards in state schools was last month suspended for a year by a General Teaching Panel.

The documentary itself (viewable here) was an expose of mismanagement and bad behaviour in failing (and ‘successful’) schools. For six months Alex Dolan filmed herself teaching and talking to other staff members as she taught as supply in 16 different schools.

I’ve just watched the documentary in full, and parts were indeed shocking. Students swore at teachers – not under their breath, but directly to the teacher’s face (“Piss off” What did you say? [Looks directly at teacher] “Piss. Off.”). Fights broke out in the middle of class. Management sometimes didn’t give a fig. And in many classes, spectacularly little was learned.

But my main reaction was to chuckle gaily and say: “Ahh, them were the days.” It cannot be a surprise to anyone who has ever been to a state secondary school that supply teachers are nearly always poorly-prepared, easily tricked and weak discipline wise. They are pushovers – mainly because they are in a nearly impossible position.

You cannot expect someone to do a competent job when they are dumped into a new school, in front of thirty new faces (with nearly all of them ready and willing to make the teacher’s life as difficult as possible) with next to no notice. Supply teachers, in other words, suck.

Ostensibly, the worst part of the documentary was the fiddling that went on behind scenes during Ofsted inspections. It was pretty basic tactics wise: take all the bad kids, and send them on a field trip for the day. Et voila, a better Ofsted report. Mysteriously, Ms Dolan also received a lesson plan for the first time on inspection day.

It’s not the teachers’ fault for doing this. Heck, they’re just doing what is best for the school. But it’s not honest and it’s not good for those being taught. Give people targets and they will cheat to achieve them. Especially if you allow them to by giving schools prior notice of inspections.

Chris Woodhead – chief schools inspector from 1994-2000 – came on and pompously declared that he knew that all these tricks went on. Which begs the question: why the hell didn’t he do anything about it when he had the power?

For those who have been through or are familiar with the state school system, what occurs in the documentary is generally pretty humdrum. Students refusing to take off coats. Lessons taking 15 minutes for people to settle down and teaching to begin. IT lessons spent sneakily playing playing games. Most schools are like this some of the time, some are like it all of the time. The sad thing is that schools will remain like this until there is radical reform of the school system in this country.

The most annoying thing about the documentary, however, was Ms Dolan herself. Her smugness throughout was almost unbearable. Her comments released after the tribunal said it all: “This is a sad day for investigative journalism.” Well, lucky you’re a teacher and not an investigative journalist, then, isn’t it? I’m glad she has her priorities right. Ms Dolan abused the trust of her pupils and is entirely deserving of her suspension. The system needs whistleblowers, but not desperate fame seeking ones.

(*A school I am well acquainted allegedly did this too. Allegedly. Allegedly, allegedly, allegedly.)

A*? It won’t get you far.

Duncan Robinson — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:43:07 +0000

There’s a big hoo-hah over the new A* grade at A-level – and it’s all over nothing. The new grade is meant to distinguish between very clever teenagers and fantastically clever teenagers. Basically, if you get over 90% in your A2 year, you get an A* and a big sticker saying NERD.

On the face of it, this doesn’t seem ridiculous – and it’s not – but it is pointless. Universities already have access to your individual module results at AS level. They can already see who is getting around 90% and is thus likely to do so again at A2. The new grade serves no real purpose.

All this new grade will result in is clever students wasting more time wringing the last few marks out of papers – which is not education, but jumping through hoops. This is not the answer to improving standards at A-levels. To use a bicycling metaphor, all the government is doing is making kids pedal faster, rather than moving up the gears by making tests more difficult. You still get from A to B (or, in this case A to A* – *chuckles*), but it’s not the right way of doing it. Britain’s education system needs bold reform, not gimmicks.