quote:

ORIGINAL: ToGiveDivine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

True. This is why I would review it on a 5 year basis - although perhaps that should be done more frequently since markets and the economy changes very swiftly these days?

The Soviets had 5 year plans - it didn't work out so well for them ;-D

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

"At some point, we have to assess - and that will always lead to errors and oversights with the numbers to be dealt with."

...only if those assesments are set centrally. If we simply trust teachers to make local assesments then there is no number issue to deal with. The problem with the National Curriculum is that it neutered local decision making and replaced it with a national agenda. Fund the schools adequately and allow them to make their decisions based on those children they are responsible for.....in other words, decentralise education. It would lead to a wider range of possible solutions, but each solution would be based on local circumstances, not national generalisations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

4) REPEAT STUDIES OPTIONS/OBLIGATIONS
Children may choose to remain in school post 16 for up to two more years, if they would like to receive further education in subjects which for whatever reason, they did not succeed in previously - both academic and tradeskills. Children who have not achieved at least grade C at GCSE English and Maths, will be obliged to remain in school for up to two more years, and thereafter to attend evening classes at adult college until they have so achieved, unless there is agreement by qualified professionals that due to some medical/psychological condition, they are unable to achieve this.

Passes in individual subjects should be done away with and diplomas given out for graduating in all subjects to a high enough level and repeating a year should be compulsory to those children that fail.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kisshou

There have been alot of proposals here for commercialized education. Owned and run by business instead of the government. What we really should be aiming for is every student getting a private school education.

What if each family was gibven a certain sum per child and they got to choose and pay for the school? If you really think about it , it would work.

edited to add: they call it the voucher system here, it had alot of support but I have heard that the Teacher's Union which is a strong political body was opposed and has had it shot down each time it comes up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

In Holland they have three different schools at different levels, streaming if you like, the top one is for university education, the second is for higher education and the bottom one which is colloquialy known as The Spinach Academy. It's not a rigid system or class based like the old Grammar school system but the Dutch don't go in for political correctness. If you don't work at school, its your tough luck, its not a seen as a problem of class but YOUR problem. You have to pass your diploma in eight subjects. You can later take the diploma higher if you are in one of the lower levels but you have to stay on school an extra year.

But doesnt this simply result in a lower quality system for some? Or does the Spinach Academy (did Popeye attend one of these LOL!?) offer a different type of education? My problem is with the idea of streaming based on academic achievement you see - implying that anyone who doesnt achieve academically can be tossed some rubbish education and excluded. I try to remind myself, that if streaming were done on practical skills measurements, and these were held up as ideals, I would have been bottom of the class throughout school. I feel we need a thorough system which produces good lives for all - different lives, because thats inescapable, but good lives.
 
If people are given opportunities they cannot use (ie a practical person taught Old Greek for instance, and failing at it), then it is not acceptable to say it is their fault for not passing and living a successful life.

And just for NG, there are 19% ethnic minorities here and if they want or need extra lessons they can have them. In their own time. My daughter spent a year in a class for children who speak Dutch as a second language. This year my daughter is in the university stream with Dutch children and phoned me tonight to say she has come top of her class in Dutch, beating all the Dutch children and she only started learning Dutch barely two years ago. Yep. I am boasting.

Uitstekend! Uw dochter heeft goed gemakt! (OMG my Dutch is bad LOL!)
Nogmal moet ik vragen - waar is der heer van norden?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

I know that in my county they spend an ungodly amount per student to achieve far bellow the national standards. Something on the order of 16,000 per student per year. Hell at that rate we could be outsourcing their education to private schools, and have money left over. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
Richer parents would undoubtedly use their wealth in terms of "donations" to the businesses running the school or the school itself, to get a place for their child - that or by way of negotiation on the golf course. And there would arise better schools and consequently worse schools where parents dont have the ability to make the same donations or dont move in the same circles.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kisshou

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen
Richer parents would undoubtedly use their wealth in terms of "donations" to the businesses running the school or the school itself, to get a place for their child - that or by way of negotiation on the golf course. And there would arise better schools and consequently worse schools where parents dont have the ability to make the same donations or dont move in the same circles.

I know you have private schools there also, so the richer parents have already opted out of public schools. Their children attend private day or boarding schools. Do a comparison of a private vs a public school and you will find a huge difference in quality of education, teacher/student ratio, supplies, technology etc.

Very true. But private schools are also able to deal with a set number of pupils for the school and a limited teacher/pupil ratio (10 per class), because of the private funding. My youngest brother won a funded place at a private school and did extremely well - before him I was the only one out of four up to him in my immediate family (and out of eight if we include cousins), that had done well at school, but he surpassed me.

What would concern me if we switched to the system you propose, would be that we would not have enough teachers to maintain the ratio advantage (its 30-40 per class in state schools), and that certainly in the UK we dont have anywhere near enough funding per pupil in state schools - I believe something like GBP5k per year per pupil in high schools. To provide private education costs something like three times per pupil more than this.
 
The quality of education would no doubt rise if all received private schooling, and the cost to do so would be prohibitive in terms of getting it done in my opinion when it came to taxpayer approval. I see properly funded education as a priority, but I doubt that many would go in for a large tax rise to cover it.

Private schools can also demand that parents volunteer so many hours each term. This forces all parents to be involved if they want their child to attend school.

In theory, this is great. However, many parents are simply too busy or not interested in such participation in my experience - the latter most usually because the system failed them and they saw education as something to get through rather than something to benefit from. My mom is on the PTA (Parent Teacher Association) at the school I attended - my sister is there now, and they are always trying to get parental involvement in fundraising etc to buy the luxuries on top of a state education (like books, for instance, would you believe it?) - but next to no one is interested from the bulk of the parents on the sink estates, and next to no one in the one private estate has the time because of work commitments.
 
Since all children would have to be placed somewhere and since some parents simply do not care about and place no value on their child's education, there would have to be some schools that would have to take these children, even under a totally private system. What business would take on such a situation? I think though that if we combined your proposal with the wider curricula tailored to children's aptitudes and aspirations, then it might just work. The presently disinterested parents might be better disposed to involvement if the school was not of the overtly academic kind which failed them in the first place perhaps?

Think about the funding source, if it is the parents themselves, what will happen if a school does not measure up? They will pull their child out. Parents would  now have the power to make a choice and act upon it. Right now you do not have the choice to send your child to private school if it is out of your economic reach. The US economy is based on free enterprise and competition.

This is the possible flaw in the proposal though I think. There are only so many schools, and so many classrooms in them. If children are going to be take out of failing schools and the better schools are full, then where are they going to go? I can see some very long trips for children to get to a good school, and parents moving house to be near a good school, just like now. Of course, there is the possibility of obliging the business running the failing school to be bought out by more successful businesses and improving the failing school in that way, but doesnt that then affect the children's education, when their teachers are anxious about their jobs and the principal about his/her future in such a case? In the UK, we identify failing schools in the state system and close them - reopening them with new staff etc, in a similar way to such a buy out - it always seems to disrupt things for the children.

If the mechanism of funding is business based than a business that does not measure up would fail. This would naturally do away with sub-standard teachers and schools because they would be driven out of business by the competition.

See above re number of teachers and failing schools.

Free enterprise gives parents alot more choice and control. If you know your child has loved to kick a ball around since age 15 months you will pick a school with a great sports program. If your child has an innate ability for drawing you might choose a school that teaches through art. Currently every square peg is forced into  a round hole unless the parent is wealthy enough to afford private education.

True, but I'm still not convinced that changing the funding mechanism would change the symptoms or prognosis so much. But we do need to get the peg/hole thing sorted!

As long as there are two educational systems in place then there will never be equality for the population of children as a whole.

Absolutely - but then is equality even possible when children are all so different? We need rather, equitable funding and opportunity for each child to shine in their own way IMO. And the wealthy will always manipulate whatever system there is to get to best for their children anyway?

kisshou

PS: Sign  language is considered a foreign language here  and can be taken as a course. :)

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

...the rise in NVQ's is an attempt to rectify this. There has been a conscious effort in both compulsory and adult education toward skill based qualifications, as opposed to academic ones, in recent years.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyEllen

What would concern me if we switched to the system you propose, would be that we would not have enough teachers to maintain the ratio advantage (its 30-40 per class in state schools), and that certainly in the UK we dont have anywhere near enough funding per pupil in state schools - I believe something like GBP5k per year per pupil in high schools. To provide private education costs something like three times per pupil more than this.
 
The quality of education would no doubt rise if all received private schooling, and the cost to do so would be prohibitive in terms of getting it done in my opinion when it came to taxpayer approval. I see properly funded education as a priority, but I doubt that many would go in for a large tax rise to cover it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kisshou

Then isn't your original OP putting the cart before the horse? Instead of focusing on that why not focus on properly funding education, different ways to accomplish that goal and changing public opinion about that funding.