Starmer should acknowledge that strict schools are better for students
Keir Starmer today [published July 6th] set out Labour’s plans for education and he had plenty to say about the recruitment and retention crisis facing our schools. But pandering to Unions with bonus payments will only get him so far – a brave leader would acknowledge that one of the biggest factors driving teachers away from the profession is poor pupil behaviour.
Geoff Barton, General Secretary of the headteachers’ union ASCL has said that behaviour is ‘unrecognisable’ since the pandemic, and disruptive students are one of the most frequently quoted reasons for teachers quitting the profession early, along with weak and ineffective leadership which fails to tackle (or to even admit) bad behaviour. And the facts speak for themselves; themselves: last academic year, over 9% of the profession quit, of which only about one tenth retired whilst, on the day of writing, there are 713 vacancies for secondary maths teachers, 692 for science and 688 for English. It should be obvious that if pupils do not behave, they will not learn; if teachers cannot do their job, they will leave the profession.
The piece is quite short and worth reading, although what we already know of Starmer suggests he will never take on anything so politically difficult. He lacks the political courage, his party lacks the moral courage and the establishment doesn't care.
10 comments:
Seems similar to offering doctors loads'a money to stay in an uncomfortable NHS when they would rather take the extra dosh and retire early on the comfortable pension.
They cynically believe that conscientious people only work for money.
Starmer could do worse than to adopt a kind of socially conservative redistributive thinking that really favoured working class families. Discipline in schools, tough on crime, start enforcing drug laws, an end to immigration, and a public repudiation of Net Zero and woke nonsense. That would get the votes of lots of poorer people, even before he started on a bit of Robin Hood tax and spend.
He won't, though. He's a metropolitan liberal lawyer, and like so many politicians he doesn't actually seem to like people. The old "decent socialists" like Healey and Callaghan at least seemed to have feelings about working class people.
And perhaps it's too late, and he is merely recognising that most poor parents simply don't care enough any more.
Peas from the same pod, AKH.
From the Wikipedia entry about 'The Time Machine':
"...two separate human species: the fair, childlike Eloi, and the savage, simian Morlocks, distant descendants of the contemporary upper and lower classes respectively."
I rather suspect that Starmer considers himself to be an Eloi tending to the Morlocks. He is unlikely to engage properly with the Morlocks other than needing their worship to be elected.
Cynical moi?
I don't think there's any current politician that has the political will to tackle anything important and difficult, not just in schools. It's all who has the best soundbite or who wants to tax the rich more
The depressing thing is, people still vote for them
"behaviour is ‘unrecognisable’ since the pandemic": lying sod.
Behaviour is ‘unrecognisable’ since the hysterical overreaction to the pandemic by government and teaching unions. In this case, particularly the latter. The swine abandoned the kids and now they blame "the pandemic" for the results of their cowardice and laziness. And such needless cowardice too.
In addition, the acknowledgement of the need for stricter schools implies discrimination between good students and poorly behaving students.
The Labour Party, in common with other left wing political parties, is fundamentally against overt discrimination because 'people merely need to be indoctrinated with the correct viewpoint to overcome their failings'. This doesn't stop some Labour politicians sending their children to the better schools because in their heart of hearts they know that the glorious Utopia they dream of is some way off in the future.
And that's why Starmer cannot commit to overt discrimination.
@Sam Vega
"Discipline in schools, tough on crime, start enforcing drug laws, an end to immigration, and a public repudiation of Net Zero and woke nonsense."
It would work for the Conservatives too, and require less of a political climb down.
So they've noticed a marked deterioration in childrens' behaviour since lockdown have they? If they hadn't been 'frogs in the pan of warming water' for so long, they would have noted the marked deterioration since the mid 1960s.
You will never hear a union leader admit that it is the primary cause of teachers leaving the profession. It's always, poor pay, long hours, increasingly heavy work loads and government impositions.
Doonhamer - "They cynically believe that conscientious people only work for money." T think they do, Tony Blair certainly did.
Sam - if he thinks most poor parents simply don't care enough any more he's probably right. It would be interesting to know how cynical they are about something like that.
James - they are, it's one party.
DJ - I once read a science fiction on similar lines where an Eloi type class ruled the technical class which kept things going. I must look it up.
Bucko - yes that's the the depressing thing, people voting for them. They appear to see no other option.
dearieme - I agree, it was cowardly, lazy and should never be forgotten.
DJ - and of course it wasn't so much discrimination as the clarification of aptitudes. It was an approach which by now could have evolved into something even better and could have put a damper un useless university expansion.
Tammly - we have teachers in the family and the impression I have is that pupil behaviour is a major aspect of low morale, maybe the biggest aspect.
Post a Comment