The three main political parties are putting together their manifestos for the next general election. This mean there now is the time to share your opinions on practical and vocational learning, and how it can prepare young people for successful futures. Have your say and we'll make sure the policy makers hear your voice.
Posted by: Tim | 09.02.2010 04:19pm
Problems in the education can only be counted by the bucket load. The sources of the problems are fortunately not so numerous:
1. Politicians should not be so closely involved in setting policy. They have not got students best interests at heart. Instead they have a burning desire to be seen to be doing something and that the 'something' should tweak the system to make results look good so they can win the next election to say in power for a further 5 years and repeat the process regardless of whether the system really improves or not. As long as the figures improve it MUST be good!
2. Educationalists and lawmakers have gradually changed things over the years to the extent that teachers have less rights than the youngsters they teach. This has led to a condition where teachers are not people looked upon with respect and thus their ability to command a class has gone.
3. Parents used to tell their children to go to school to learn - and they had better behave OR ELSE... Also, they used to say to children that learning was the way to get a better life with the hope that their children would be more successful and happier than they were. Nowadays the attitude has changed. Too many parents tell their children that they have to go to school because the government says so and they think it is a waste of time. Way to go! You only need 10% of children to have this attitude handed down from parents to infect all the other children like a virus.
4. Policy makers - apparently seem to ignore the old adage about learning from history or be doomed to repeat mistakes of the past. It is apparent that many policy makers have not studied the landmark Education Acts of the past. The 1870 Act, the 1912, heck there was even one written in 1944 whilst the war was still being fought, so important was Education in those days. True, none of these Acts got it 100% right - with hindsight that is even more clear than it could have been at the time. However, it is clear if one studies the history of the education system that there was a belief in what was being done. It is only really in the last 40 years that education has become the plaything of politicians to the extent it is now.
The Answer.
Sorry, I wish I could give a simple one paragraph answer for all the ills of the education system. Even if I had the answer the policy makers and politicians (not all policy makers are politicians, though they may be the majority and the rest may be in their pockets - has anyone checked recently) would not listen. Such is their nature.
The few things I can say, whether they be popular or not include, but are not limited too:
Not all children are the same. Some love academic subjects and can excel in them. We need this group. Some are never happier than when they are using their hands in more practical subjects. We probably are more beholden to this group than the first group.
This does not mean one group is better than the other. I know a number of brilliant guys on the academic side who are absolute dunces when it comes to anything practical - they can't even change a light bulb, let alone a car tyre. They can be so far removed from the real world at times that you wonder if they are smart or just eccentric. The results of their work can be world changing at times. At other times you wonder why anyone listens to them, but then, maybe we just don't understand them.
I also know, and have watched for hours one guy who can take a sheet of metal and recreate any part of a car body, no matter how intricate with a block of wood, a couple of small hammers and some vice grips. Another I know takes a block of wood, a couple of chisels and a home made mallet and knocks out carvings in a couple of days that sell for a few thousand US dollars each. They are truly amazing pieces of art. Neither of these two had much schooling but when I see their work I bow to their superior skills.
So what am I saying here? Well, there was an Education Act written for England and Wales that wanted to introduce a system of education that was best suited for each individual student. As a result the Secondary Modern, Technical and Grammar schools were born and the 11+ exam was to decide which of the three schools pupils should go to. The problem was that the way the 11+ was designed, written, handled, perceived (you get the idea) was wrong. It was seen that only failures didn't go to Grammar school, so we ended up with a school system with built in elitism. Some years later the Comprehensive system was brought in to 'solve' all this, and what a disaster that has been.
Lets look at this from another viewpoint: For a number of years now we have read in the new papers that highly qualified professionals have been giving up their jobs to go to a Tech College to learn to be a plumber - and then promptly get work earning far, far more than they were in their previous jobs where they needed MBA or more to enter the door. Todays society looks at money rather than the old fashioned social status (otherwise singers and footballers would not get awarded MBEs), so now you can see that the correct training can lead to a good career, even if it is not a job 'in the city'.
So, when is it going to be considered okay to say that pupils are not all cut out to study in a completely academic environment. We all know it is true, lets just admit it then perhaps we can move forward and look at developing the education system in such a way that students and industry BOTH benefit. In this way the country also benefits - and the population is the country, not the politicians.
I went through a Comprehensive school. It was Hell.
I then went to a Six Form College. It was much better.
Next I went to university. I really developed whilst there. It was great. Actually, I think I learned more out of the classroom/lecture hall than in. I had a number of jobs whilst there and learned a lot about life, which is just as well as my degree really did not prepare me for work in the real world. I had to do that on my own in order to survive, let alone prosper.
I now live abroad. Remember Norman Tebbit saying 'On yer bike' telling people to go find a job somewhere else if there wasn't one next door? I did and have now lived abroad for over 20 years. It is interesting to note that during these 20 years I have watched and listened and whereas in the 1980s a British education was perceived as the best and parents of students overseas would mortgage their homes to send them to study in UK, since the tinkering by the Blair and now Brown administrations, this image is fast dying. Even people not living in the UK can see what a mess is being made of the system, so I suppose the first part of the answer is to get rid of those doing the most damage to the system. This will not solve the problem but it will stop the decline so that it can be restored, resurrected, rebuilt and generally be rescued.
This is fast turning into an essay rather than a bit of an article. Under the present system it is almost enough to be considered a dissertation for an MBA so I'd better stop here...
Posted by: Anonymous | 31.01.2010 01:23am
schools are forcing students to take ocr nationals because they bump up their scores in league tables. My son who was academic and who wanted to study politics and history at university was forced to take a vocational qualification. When I asked why, I was quoted that 'the government wanted students to take vocational qualifications'..outrageous i will never vote for the labour party again.
Posted by: Alex Powell | 19.01.2010 09:06pm
CONFIDENCE THAT THERE IS AN END POINT TO LEARNING
I have worked as tutor for three years at an inner city college. I recognise Guy Claxton's observations that we need to develop student’s resilience for learning. Many of Guy Claxton’s techniques have been utilised but in my experience we now need to look at his idea of self-efficacy (scientific studies have shown that learners perform better if they know there is an end point to their tasks, Claxton, Wise Up).
The problem is that if you flag wave for vocational learning then the end point will inevitably be interpreted as "get a job, earn money" or a variation. This cannot be the end point to learning because it is incorrect and will fall flat. Learning has intrinsic value because it concerns the validation (cause to effect) of observed phenomena - this is validity. But this idea cannot be utilised very easily. For example who or what learns when there is no scientific validation of "a self". We need to look at what confidence means without the unnecessary idea of a self through Emotional Intelligence initiatives. Ever since Wittgenstein it has been understood that we learn language concurrently with behaviour.
Our children are not learning our language. Learning a vocation may be very productive in this regard but without a firm theoretical basis bolting on psychological schemas of the self is always going to be the easiest option, undermining confidence to understand the world scientifically. We must promote learning with CONFIDENCE THAT THERE IS AN END POINT TO LEARNING (through emotional literacy), that it is intrinsically purposeful, and that it is therefore a valid course of action/behaviour. Any attempt to do otherwise does not address true confidence in anything, cannot teach true confidence in anything and is therefore not scientific because it is without a valid theoretical standpoint. Alex Powell
Posted by: Maria | 14.01.2010 05:34pm
The best thing policy makers can do to change education is for them to change themselves and their assumptions about what it means to have an education, for what purpose are our children being aducated,what do they understand for success. What is more important the individual or the economic system etc.....
Posted by: Albert Waterfield | 12.09.2009 03:54pm
Recent governments have lost their way over technical education. The closure of practically all Technical colleges has resulted in a loss of both facility and instructors who were able to teach the subject matters. The concept that these can be taught in colleges of further education is quite farcical and as yet unproven.The NETs target for university education has lost sight of the fact that apprentices need to be both intelligent and enter the world of work early to develop the soft skills that the workplace demands as well as linking these life skills to technical development. The basics of technical knowledge that can only be taught in the work place are difficult to deliver to an employee with a university education. As a result of this it is easier to develop employees who have been in work and are looking for an entrance into industry from other jobs.