Political Polarisation Has Stifled Education Improvement In The UK For Decades
Whether you're pro-selection or against, it's clear that our existing system is doing little to enhance young people's learning
Had it not been for the Education Act in 1944 I would not have attended a grammar school. The act meant my parents did not have to pay.
For nearly seven decades I had never questioned the title ‘grammar school’. That was until a few months ago when I asked myself: “Did it mean that we were only being taught the intricacies of verb declensions and punctuation?”
No, we were taught a range of subjects; and very well too, by excellent teachers. There were no additional staff such as teaching assistants, behavioural specialists or learning mentors either.
Put simply, the education received at The Gateway was the passport to gaining almost uninterrupted satisfaction in work and life.
But I accept that many of the secondary modern schools did not provide adequate education for those who failed the 11-plus exam.
It’s clear from England’s dismal ranking in the regular PISA tests that it’s extremely important to find a new education formula. But sifting through the many reports and articles in the professional and national press over the last two years reveals a nation divided in two – those who believe that selection should not be allowed, and those who believe that without some sort of selection it will prove impossible to improve our PISA ranking.
Why is raising our PISA ranking important?
There is now solid evidence that the UK education system is not producing anywhere near enough students attaining Levels 3, 4 and 4+.
The economic answer is that the UK faces serious shortfalls in graduate engineers (69,000 each year till at least 2022), GPs (this data is more difficult to obtain, but one report indicates a shortfall of 12,000) and teachers (in November last year the TES reported we are short of over 1,000).
The social answer seems to be that teachers should provide an education aimed at fulfilling the pupils’ desired careers, irrespective of whether there will be jobs available in the areas sought by the pupils.
How do children decide what they want to do when they leave school/college?
Isn’t it likely that their aspirations are influenced by what they see on television, online and in film, as well as by their social activities? Is it any wonder that many children want to become pop stars, sports stars, fashion designers and hairdressers?
It is a fair bet that many children do not gain an insight into the work done by construction engineers, GPs, nurses, accountants, aeroplane engineering designers, politicians, journalists and many other jobs requiring the higher levels cited above.
And in spite of successive changes over the last 70 years by Labour and Conservative governments; from introducing comprehensive schools through to academies, England is still ‘flatlining’ in 26th place in the PISA rankings.
The main reason for this failure, I now believe, is political polarisation.
Why are people surprised that since starting to replace grammar schools with a single type of secondary school all attempts have failed to improve education standards?
The comprehensive schools have not achieved this aim and the move to convert all schools to academies is showing signs of cracks already. I believe there are flaws in Theresa May’s proposed “Schools that work for everyone”.
Instead of dividing pupils into ‘Success’ and ‘Failure’, why not create several categories of secondary schools? The titles of these categories should be non-emotive, and the word ‘grade’ must not be attached. They should all be regarded as being of equal worth.
As an example: • EZH School: Pupils aspiring to performing arts, media, journalism, law
• KWB School: Pupils aspiring to craft skills, such as plumbing, vehicle servicing, hair dressing, building, carpentry etc
• JFM School: Pupils aspiring to medical practice, engineering, accountancy, teaching
• VGA School: Pupils aspiring to sport, ballet, physiology
Further categories could be worth considering.
No selection system will be 100% accurate, so means to enable pupils to transfer at later ages – as exist now – must be retained.
In 1949 our grammar school began admitting ‘late developers’ at 14, while our son transferred from a secondary modern school at 15 to an independent school, gaining A-Level and S-Level in maths.
The Engineering Institution I belong to (although the recommended route to chartered membership is either the four-year MEng degree, or the three-year BSc degree) has always provided paths for late developers to gain entry.
All people should have equal opportunity, but people are not equal in every facet of life, for which we should rejoice.
Derek Newport is a Chartered Engineer and worked in manufacturing industry for over 30 years. He has taught for periods on a part-time basis at two FEs and two universities and for the last 15 years has visited secondary schools regularly under the Young Enterprise Initiative and latterly as a STEM Ambassador.
His book Savour the Fruits of Mathematics is available in print and as an eBook
