Conservatives want independence for high-performing schools

[Penguin_Factory]

This independence would include power over their own budgets, curriculum, discipline and staff.

Tories would also allow community groups, charities, philanthropists and education federations to set up new state primary schools to give parents of 4-11 year-olds more choice.

The Conservatives have already promised to extend the Government's academy programme to the bulk of secondary schools, but the new policy goes further in offering the same independence within the state sector to thousands of primaries.

Mr Gove said: "Academy freedoms for secondary schools have already helped thousands of disadvantaged children by driving up standards in the state sector. We want to allow the same thing to happen in primary schools.

"Making schools genuinely accountable to parents by freeing them from political interference and giving them control over budgets, curriculum and staff could make a real difference to the opportunities for some of the most deprived children."

Unveiling details of the proposals ahead of this weekend's Conservative Spring Forum in Cheltenham, Mr Gove accused the Government of letting a generation of children down.

He highlighted official figures showing that four out of ten children leave primary school in England unable to read, write and add up, and that 34,000 11-year-olds have a reading age below that expected of a six-year-old.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/4/20090425/tuk-tories-want-academies-for-children-dba1618.html

Guess who's going to jump all over this? I'm not saying the people proposing this are pandering to creationists or have anything but good intentions, but you can see how this could turn out.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Oh, don't worry... "free market" sociopaths will also jump all over this. Now that the transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich is nearly complete, the rich want to make absolutely sure that the poor don't have any sort of way to change their station through education. Seeing as how this is in the UK, I'm sure there's an anti-immigrant element to this as well.

 

[richi1173]

I would do this not only to successful schools but all schools. Allow principals (headmasters) to set up their own curriculum, have power over their budget, school rules and staff.

However, I also think the school process should be democratized. Let the voters from a particular school zone decide which principal to pick for running the school and have him be re-elected on a two year basis. Also, I would give teachers a set of the power, allowing them to ratify, make additions to and propose budgets, school rules, and most importantly, the curriculum. This would counter the power of the principal.

Staff picks should be handled by both the principal and the head of each corresponding department. The head of the mathematics department, lets say, should have as much influence on the choice for a new mathematics teacher as the principal.

The schools still must be public and the government (local, state, and federal in the states) would provide the funds for each school. The funds should be divided equally among the schools. However, I do think that a substantial incentive must be provided for successful schools.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

I would do this not only to successful schools but all schools. Allow principals (headmasters) to set up their own curriculum, have power over their budget, school rules and staff.

However, I also think the school process should be democratized. Let the voters from a particular school zone decide which principal to pick for running the school and have him be re-elected on a two year basis. Also, I would give teachers a set of the power, allowing them to ratify, make additions to and propose budgets, school rules, and most importantly, the curriculum. This would counter the power of the principal.

Staff picks should be handled by both the principal and the head of each corresponding department. The head of the mathematics department, lets say, should have as much influence on the choice for a new mathematics teacher as the principal.

The schools still must be public and the government (local, state, and federal in the states) would provide the funds for each school. The funds should be divided equally among the schools. However, I do think that a substantial incentive must be provided for successful schools.

That's a recipe for disaster. Democracy is no way to run a school district... unless you don't care whether or not children actually learn things. We really can't trust individual teachers and schools to decide what and how they want to teach.

 

[richi1173]

That's a recipe for disaster. Democracy is no way to run a school district... unless you don't care whether or not children actually learn things. We really can't trust individual teachers and schools to decide what and how they want to teach.

So, what your saying is that 7 elected "experts at everything" should keep running the curriculum over an entire county. That is what basically the board of education is.

Teachers at least have a bachelors degree in whatever field they are teaching and the incentive to better the school is in the higher pay allotted in a higher budget.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

So, what your saying is that 7 elected "experts at everything" should keep running the curriculum over an entire county. That is what basically the board of education is.

As opposed to hundreds of "experts at nothing" elected based on local politics, under pressure from their neighbors? Sure.

Teachers at least have a bachelors degree in whatever field they are teaching and the incentive to better the school is in the higher pay allotted in a higher budget.

Yeah, but their definition of "better" might include teaching creationism, racism, Holocaust denial... and higher pay be damned. Or do you think offers of higher pay and budgets is the only thing people ever consider?

 

[richi1173]

As opposed to hundreds of "experts at nothing" elected based on local politics, under pressure from their neighbors? Sure.

Yeah, but their definition of "better" might include teaching creationism, racism, Holocaust denial... and higher pay be damned. Or do you think offers of higher pay and budgets is the only thing people ever consider?

Your not getting it. The system is meant to check the power of the elected principal by a legislature of teachers at each school who specialize on the topic. For example, a majority of science teachers are not creationists. Therefore, if a measure by a teacher to put creationism in the curriculum is put in, the principal will veto it or the teachers will vote it out. If the principal decides the put any one of these, the teachers will vote it out.

I can see what your saying, its a waste of time to constantly have to battle creationism or Holocaust denailism. I think an addition to the system will be a forbidden list of topics that a teacher cannot teach, like creationism, put in place by the state.

Finally, a typical teacher is not an expert at nothing. The position requires that you have a bachelors degree in the topic that you will teach. For example, if a teacher wishes to teach biology, he/she better have a B.S in Biology. This bring me to this point, all of the board members in a particular county do not have a B.S in Biology, many don't know what evolution is or how it works. Yet we trust them to ditch out a curriculum for an entire county based on their ignorance in biology.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Your not getting it. The system is meant to check the power of the elected principal by a legislature of teachers at each school who specialize on the topic. For example, a majority of science teachers are not creationists. Therefore, if a measure by a teacher to put creationism in the curriculum is put in, the principal will veto it or the teachers will vote it out. If the principal decides the put any one of these, the teachers will vote it out.

I can see what your saying, its a waste of time to constantly have to battle creationism or Holocaust denailism. I think an addition to the system will be a forbidden list of topics that a teacher cannot teach, like creationism, put in place by the state.

Finally, a typical teacher is not an expert at nothing. The position requires that you have a bachelors degree in the topic that you will teach. For example, if a teacher wishes to teach biology, he/she better have a B.S in Biology. This bring me to this point, all of the board members in a particular county do not have a B.S in Biology, many don't know what evolution is or how it works. Yet we trust them to ditch out a curriculum for an entire county based on their ignorance in biology.

Oh wow...

 

[richi1173]

Oh wow...

???

 

[Gnomesmusher]

Democracy on how a school district should run and it's curriculum may look great on paper but I agree it's a disaster when put in practice. Too much room, even more so than there already is, for such garbage as Creationism to be accepted as science. And you can't really call it democratic if you already decide certain subjects cannot be taught right? So that won't work either.

 

[richi1173]

Democracy on how a school district should run and it's curriculum may look great on paper but I agree it's a disaster when put in practice. Too much room, even more so than there already is, for such garbage as Creationism to be accepted as science. And you can't really call it democratic if you already decide certain subjects cannot be taught right? So that won't work either.

Like I said to ImprobableJoe, we already have a democratically elected school system. The Board of Education is directly elected by the people of each county.

You are right in the respect that it allows pseudo-sciences like Creationism to creep in but that has already been addressed in the previous posts.

 

[Gnomesmusher]

Yes it's already a democratic process and that's why I said there's already too much room for garbage to be voted in. Complete independence would be a disaster.

 

[richi1173]

Yes it's already a democratic process and that's why I said there's already too much room for garbage to be voted in. Complete independence would be a disaster.

That is what check and balances are for. In my view, teachers should check the power of the principal.

 

[Canto]

Teachers will not and can not be the check against a principal's power. The Principal does have quite a bit of say/sway in wether or not a teacher has a job. Unless you are proposing that teachers be elected too, which would be utter bullshit.

I'm finishing up my degree in History and education myself and can pretty much not think of a WORSE way to destroy the already lacking educational system.

 

[richi1173]

Teachers will not and can not be the check against a principal's power. The Principal does have quite a bit of say/sway in wether or not a teacher has a job. Unless you are proposing that teachers be elected too, which would be utter bullshit.

I'm finishing up my degree in History and education myself and can pretty much not think of a WORSE way to destroy the already lacking educational system.

The way I think of it, the teacher should be promoted based on both the principals and the head of the department's judgment. The head of the department is appointed by the teacher in that department.