Let's make a 2008 resolution, politicians and polemicists together. Let us
renounce certain chippy clichés when talking about schools and social
mobility. Let it become a mockable offence to refer — as Michael Gove MP did
yesterday — to “the sharp-elbowed middle classes” who “colonise” the best
schools. Let professors of education like Alan Smithers feel a stab of shame
when they take an easy pop at academies getting “taken over by ambitious
parents”. Let columnists beware of jeering at the “stupid spawn of the rich”.
Fun though it may be, it is all a wicked distraction from the main task: the
improvement of all British schools — yes, all — and an absolute intolerance
of the shoddy, the dull, the undisciplined and the woolly. The new figures
hauled out by the Conservatives only reinforce a swath of others, which make
it clear that, after ten years of Labour government, the gap between rich
and poor children's attainment is actually widening.
But jeering at “sharp-elbowed middle classes” is a pure distraction technique,
blurring the inconvenient truth that many of our schools are (if not
actually chaos) intellectually unambitious and overburdened with irrelevant
duties. It leads to such class-war fatalism as the ridiculous theory that
places should be allocated by lottery: which implies accepting that some
schools will always be rubbish, so let's spread the misery around by ballot.
No: it won't do. How dare a professor of education sneer at “ambitious”
parents? Would he prefer it if they didn't give a damn? How dare a
Conservative MP criticise conscientious middle-income parents as
“colonists”, and suggest that their “sharp elbows” deliberately disable the
poor?
Is it wicked for parents to want their children taught well in calm
surroundings? Is it wrong to do your best? Most families are beset by
worries about mortgages and redundancy and recession; they are not making
war on the disadvantaged, but just doing what they can. They may kick off if
rowdy children cause distraction and intimidation or sell drugs in the
playground, but that is not class war. Any private school head will tell you
that disruption and drug dealing occur in every echelon of society, and that
parents protest just as fiercely when the Hon Freddie gives their child
grief as when Charlie Chav does.
There are many roots of our school problem, and middle-class elbows are the
least significant. One — fading now, thank God — is the legacy of the early
comprehensive movement, which reacted against the cruel 11-plus by
denigrating cleverness, precocity and academic passion in favour of mixed
ability and rigid age groups. Then there has been a 25-year mania of central
governments to interfere with every detail of the curriculum and keep moving
the goalposts, thus de-professionalising and demoralising teachers.
Meanwhile a well-intentioned new sense of children's rights has led, through
timidity and confusion, to an absurd erosion of teachers' authority — so now
we need actual parliamentary edicts to enable staff to confiscate mobile
phones in class. At the same time the mishandling of numerous cases of false
sexual accusation, with adults guilty until proven innocent, scared many men
out of the profession, creating a feminised, boy-hostile atmosphere. And now
we have evidence that unpredicted, unmonitored and unresourced immigration
leaves some schools unable even to teach the newcomers English.
On top of all that, there is a terrible fashion for loading on to schools the
responsibility for inculcating things that are not facts or skills at all,
but social desiderata — citizenship, sex education, diversity. This is
largely a waste of time: note that while sex education has “improved”,
teenage motherhood and abortion have climbed. It is now causing another
ruction because of the equally loopy obsession with faith schools. Barry
Sheerman, chairman of the Education Select Committee, is at odds with the
Bishop of Lancaster who has (surprise, surprise) decreed that Catholic
schools must not teach “safe sex” and contraception in a morally neutral
manner, nor support Red Nose Day.
Mr Sheerman and assorted secularists are up in arms, asking why the state
should fund “indoctrination” (do they think Muslim schools teach free love,
then?). But they miss the main point, which is that this is froth. A State
that really cared about the core of education, and its ability to raise and
inspire poor children, would not faff about making schools teach citizenship
and condom technque. If sex education is so important, force every
12-year-old to do a holiday course run by nurses. If citizenship is
important, then support local youth groups instead of closing them down
because their kitchen isn't up to scratch or they can't afford enough
slow-motion criminal records
checks. Let schools just teach — properly, to an exam standard that cannot be
fiddled, and with a focus on real subjects, whether that means astrophysics
or practical woodwork.
I do not have the answer to every educational problem. Nobody does. I just
know that one place where the answer certainly does not lie is in sniping at
imaginary “middle-class” elbows. Stop doing it. Leave the poor sods alone.
If all the schools were good, they'd soon stop manoeuvring, with a sigh of
relief. Worried parental behaviour — if indeed there is anything wrong about
it — is due to the deficit in the school system. It's a symptom, not a cause.
More than any other factor, it's divorce that mitigates against a child's education. This has been proved in survey after survey, yet governments are not willing to grasp this unpopular nettle.
It's interesting to note that it's boys who sweep everything before them in "Junior Mastermind". So far every mastermind has been a boy. The competition is like a TRUE exam; it measures what you know not what you can regurgitate of someone else's work.
It's also interesting that fathers are well in support of the young boys who enter the competition. Family court judges - please note. Also we urgently need more men in teaching.
David Hughes, Newport, UK
Libby you are quite right, "jeering at “sharp-elbowed middle classes†is a pure distraction technique", and no, ambitious pushy parents are not the problem.
But just what is? Not sex education (which we need more of, and better) and not other "non-core" subjects. Schools shouldn't just teach what is useful to business or "the economy".
The fact is that we must properly fund ALL schools so they can provide the best education for ALL pupils. Which will mean more resources, and more teachers, because, for instance, this standard of education can only be provided classes smaller than 30+ at a time.
But to do this we need political parties to commit themselves to spending enough year on year, decade on decade. And that will mean people having to GROW UP AND FACE IT: we will have to pay for it by higher taxation.
But that will mean middle class parents paying more tax. And there's the rub. They would much rather use their elbows, or move to a house nearer the school, or go private...
Simon Midgley, Huddersfield,
Bravo.
Committed parents - of whatever class - contribute more to children's education than any other factor.
Furthermore, those who are themselves without aspiration and produce children without aspiration do most to undermine the system as a whole.
It is not anything to do with money or class per se; save that those who aspire to achieve in one field are likely to do so in others.
Children at 'middle class' schools are succesful because of the ethos of their parents and teachers. Statistics show that the many bright children who remain in other schools rapidly fall back, because they are discouraged by the attitude to learning of those around them.
This unfairness done by the present system to disadvantaged children needs to be addressed. However, this is not done by maintaining the disadvantage and just having a lottery to see who must bear it.
Bill Rispin, Hessle, E Yorks
What a brilliant piece of writing. I agree wholeheartedly. In my opinion it is The Bean Counters otherwise known as Spin Doctors who are running the country, and they have to impliment change to justify their otherwise unearned salaries. I attended an ordinary infant and junior followed by Secondary Modern Senior. We could all read write and spell to an acceptable standard when we left at 15. We can not all be high flying execs. and it is wrong to lead children into believing they can be whatever they want to be. If any of the changes introduced since the 70s had been necessary why are we in such a mess now. Common sense needs to be exhumed.
Trevor, Birmingham, England
I agree. Without ambition, we would all still sitting around in the Rift valley.
Issue education vouchers and allow the market to provide autonomous schools, all competing against each other for the best pupils.
While we can currently import brains from abroad, it is not a long term strategy: the brains will go elsewhere if the tax burden increases due to a growing number of non-workers. We need to develop our own brains to invent the new industries before somebody else does.
Alas, I fear UK politicians are arguing about the politics of the 1960s, ironically the time when Eastern Europe, India and China were making themselves backwards with their own politics.
roger, london,
Bravo.
The truth, after decades of well intentioned but ultimately misguided doctrine by too many professionals and governments, who have never had exposure to the rough and tumble of the real world which lies outside of their taxpayer funded comfort zones. Too much interference, confusion and too many unintended consequences.
If we were honest enough and brave enough to accept Libby's assessment it would be a great leap forward in the education of our children.
Steve, Coleshill, UK
Yes John has 'hit the nail on the head'. Libby, you are essentially an excellent sleuth - MI6 need youre skills.
These supposedly 'middle-class colonised' schools across the UK. are not a CAUSE of a raw deal for the working class kids getting a raw deal - its a SYMPTOM of the very fact that she identifies: teenage people have misaligned rights in an educational setting that disarms teaching staff from pursuing teaching for the essential part of their hourly lessons.
Until its acceptable to 'considerately' remove pupils from teaching rooms when they 'kick-off', beatifully comforming working class kids will never get their fair and deserved right to be taught by their teachers. How dare governmant officials SAY its the quality of the teachers at these mediocre acheiving atate schools in poor areas of Britain.
The politicians have made the state school setting dysfunctional to allow learning to take place.
(I have teenagers and have worked in high schools for 8 years
Jay, lancashire,
We have four children and due to my husband's work we have moved to the extent that our youngest child ( now 20 ) has attended 10 different schools in five countries. We have experienced 3 international schools, 4 private schools , 4 state schools ( not Grammers ) and a secondary education college.
We know without any doubt what makes a good school and it has absolutely nothing to do with money. It is high expectation from the teachers who are the best quality, strict discipline, streaming in ability and a respect for excellence.
Religion is irrelevant , race is irrelevant and so is the background of the children. These are all just excuses for the Labour government's failings. Libby is correct that persecuting the parents who have a desire to give their children the best education they can find is immoral and hypocritical. Even Diane Abbot the left wing Hackney MP sent her child to a private school and the sanctimonious Harman sent hers to selective schools along with Blair.
Deb Hoyle, Banchory,
A superbly analysed and argued article clearly fro some one who has firsthand understanding and knowledge of what she is talking about; unlike Paul from Birmingham who obviously has no first hand experience of faith schools.
Chris, Billericay, Essex
I suspect our secondary school system would improve considerably if the output of our primary schools was better! It's a national disgrace that so many 11 years olds arrive at secondary school unable to read or write to a standard that enables them to progress in the secondary system. Improving primary school standards must be the first priority. Children who cannot read or write at 11 are an immense burden to society. They account for a disproportionate number of the future criminals, drug addicts and those who need special social security help for the rest of their lives. My wife is a special needs assistant in a good local primary school. Even so it is appalling just how difficult it is to get proper support for those children who need it. Children of 5/6/7 years old are eager to learn. We should be investing in them. Instead the Government wants to force reluctant teenagers to stay on at school until 18 - what a waste. Invest more in primary schools - catch them sooner!
Kevin Miller, Tonbridge,
middle class white people seem to be the perennial soft target around the western world with ethnic minorities and semi literate white trash as the favourites of a society founded and supposedly run by intelligent white christian european people.
Neil, Chessington, Surrey
We emigrated to the northeastern US originally temporarily but now permanently largely because our kids will get a better - more useful- education here and a wider range of options afterwards than they could ever have in Britain. I was never a fan of British-style comprehensive education but there is no reason why you have to build seperate schools to cater for all abilities - why can't a physics high school major also take a sewing class? You can't beat growing up in a community where 90% of the local children - blue- and white-collar (what exactly IS middle class?) attend the same local state schools. Here, if a school is crap, it's because the locally-elected representatives have failed to fund and manage them in a way that keeps local parents happy - and if enough of them are unhappy they can change things quite quickly through the local ballot box, whether they have sharp elbows or not. Waiting for central government to make things better is like waiting for Godot.
Delilah, Maryland, USA
if the poor want more for their kids then maybe they should have tried harder at school themselves so they could give their kids more and not expect everyone else to do it for them. Good schools will always be in good areas because intelligent good kids tend to come overwhelmingly from intelligent good families. You dont like that? Tough that's life, it ain't gonna change.
Neil, Chessington, Surrey
Socialism ALWAYS works to level everyone to the lowest common standard. They believe they are cleverer than everyone else, but that everyone else should remain inferior.
Humans have the inbred NEED to achieve and improve themselves ..... socialism blocks this, except where it suits them.
Intelligent people challenge Socialism because they realise that it works to reduce their wealth, prosperity and the happiness that comes from personal (achedemic) achievement.
paul, newbury, uk
Libby asks why schools are used to teach sex education and citizenship - but doesn't question (or even supports) the teaching of religion. Why? What business do schools have to promote a particular religious viewpoint? Surely that is the job of the churches. Oh, I forgot - in the words of the Arcgbishop of Canterbury "faith schools are church". But in the words of me - why?
Barry Henderson, London, UK
Wish I could find a private school that only charges £5000 pa.
Mollie, UK,
Why do some people think the Middle Classes want to "TRAMPLE" on everyone else ..... this is simply stupid.
The middle classed generally became middle class, by hard work, making the effort to learn and as a result they want the benefits for their own children.
I am (technically) working class, but I have spent a substantial amount of money to put my children through PRIVATE paid school , simply because the educational system run by the STATE is absolutely ruined.
I don't get the money allocated, by the state, to my children so I effectively pay twice. The State allocates approx £5000 per year to eduation ...... surprise surprise, for the SAME money private schools provide a quality of education better than the Grammar schools that Labour closed down (under their blackmail scheme of only funding the schools who lowered their standards to the present low levels) and is why anyone wanting a decent education for their children has to pay as the Governement removed their subsidy.
paul, newbury, uk
Ah Libby Purves,
The seasoned education commentator, who happily denigrates the comprehensive system without ever having set foot in a comprehansive school. I often wonder what Libby's qualifications are for speaking, so often, with such vehement authority, about a landscape neither her, or her off-spring will ever encounter.
Phil B, Penge, England
'The best schools ARE in more affluent areas so this automatically excludes the poorer of society but the argument of 'I'm alright Jack' is truly morally corrupt' (Jim)
Jim, have you considered the possiblity that the schools in affluent areas are good because they're full of the relatively bright, well motivated and well behaved children of the middle class?
Janet Davis, Sydney, Australia
If everyone, parents, governments, and now Times columnists, sees schools as mainly vehicles for social ambitions, then the schools won't be very good. Certainly they won't be happy places.
Malcolm McLean, Bradford, UK
I agree with much of what Libby says, but I am the only one that thinks the education debate almost always confuses cause and effect? Economically poor areas tend to have worse schools than middle class areas. Private schools tend to do better than state schools. The deciding factor is the economic profile of the children's parents, which affects the expectations and attitudes of the children.
Education policies of both main parties look to compensate for economic differences instead of accepting that the deciding factor in a child's education takes place outside of their school and in their home. Growing differences in educational outcomes suggests growning differences in wealth. It's simply really, but the politics of inequality are hard to solve, so everyone peddles the myth that education can compensate for inequality if only the right formula is found.
craig, East Kilbride, UK
The government has destroyed the best of education with all its crazy ideas. Why will they not accept the blame for a failing education system? It is easier to blame people who want the best education for their child.
I would fail in this private education system because I value a quiet, well disciplined environment to learn. It is impossible becasue the government has taken away all discipline from teachers.
Now, the teachers have a plethora of languages to cope with.
No special schools for children who need them. The government's answer is to close the few remaining special schools. One school left in London which uses British Sign Language to teach deaf children .The government wants to close this school but provide no extra resources for deaf children. This government has many failings but it is ust easier to blame middle class parents for ALL ITS FAILINGS.
Sue, Southampton, UK
I couldn't agree more with Libby Purves' comments about Michaels Gove's reference to 'sharp elbows'. Apart from sounding exactly like Old Labour (just whose votes are the Conservatives trying to win back?) he is rubbishing precisely the kind of aspirational behaviour that he wants the working classes to adopt.
Katharine Elliott, London,
Phillip Collings, well said.
Why do we trust the state to deliver education? Why do we allow this failed soviet-style system of education to continue? When consumers have no choice the product never improves.
paulo, coventry, UK
Jim says: "If the middle classes had their way the poor would be exterminated".
This is the mentality that has ruined the education system over the past 30 years - drag the good schools down the the lowest common denominator . If the "middle classes" have any thing decent, drag it down into mediocrity, lets ALL live in slums !
With people like Jim still living in the 19th century what hope is there for this country ?
John, Warminster, UK
The homeschool experience in the US is not without problems. However in my family it has worked and I am now seeing my son work his way up to Medical School. My daughter is more artistic and unsure and has opted to stay out of the system and teach herself. I felt uncomfortable for many years as parents around me put me on the hotseat for taking my kid's education in my own hands. Yes we have a homeschool rep. who keeps suggesting politically correct extras which we have never accepted.
Some level of responsibility must be accepted by parents if a child is to go forward. Sometimes the best thing an educator can do is to know when to stand aside. How you structure public schools in UK has little to do with how your abandoned children function. Yes, most parents abandon their children in some form or another and leave them to the wolves. God help the poor teachers who more than not end up as baby sitters for your kids who depend on each other more than teachers for knowledge.
Greg, Des Moines, Iowa US
Well done Libby. I fully agree with your sentiments. Why should parents with resonsible attitudes to education who support and encourage their children be made to feel guilty. Encourage achievement and learning, help the schools and support children and their teachers. All too often modern Government encourages attitudes and expecations that can never be realised. Doctors will always heal me Teachers must teach my children etc Encouraging a population to push expecations onto other people is wrong, and individuals will shirk their responsibilities. One final point; are people in middle england rich? Many I know make significant financial sacrifices for their family and have significantly less disposable income than some families described as poor .
A Brunning, Chelmsford, Essex
It's sickening the way the middle classes justify their trampling of the working class/poor by saying it's for the good of everyone. The best schools ARE in more affluent areas so this automatically excludes the poorer of society but the argument of 'I'm alright Jack' is truly morally corrupt. If the middle classes had their way the poor would be exterminated or even better they would be forced in to servitude and expected to like it.
Jim, Uppingham, UK
We are 2 of the, so called, ambitious parents. If the ministers concerned could take a closer look at the said parents perhaps they would reconsider their endless rant against the middle class. We both come from working class backgrounds, both went to Grammar school and know first hand what divisions that system causes in a family, when siblings do not end up with an equal education. My husband went to university, I didn't but we were both brought up to believe our only way to progress in life was through a good education. Having progressed to a reasonable level ourselves we are now endlessly castigated for having the same aspirations for our children. Both our daughters' went to state co-educational comprehensive school, both have gone on to university. Were we wrong to chose an area where there are good schools, long before we had children? We encouraged our children to work hard & supported their schools as much as possible. We are now classed as pushy, middle class & elitist.
Pauline Devey, Crawley, West Sussex
Well said both Libby Purves And John from Exeter. It`s time the Government stopped blaiming parents and took responsibility for interfering and demotivating very hard working teachers. The teachers i know are talented, creative and v. committed to their pupils. let them teach and stop blaiming parents and teachers for their own inappropriate meddling.
A.C., Nottingham,
This is a good column which makes some reasonable points, and as one of the many bitter-and-twisted academically-able pupils who was 'educated' within the state system I agree with most of them. However, please can you desist from reinforcing this lazy 'feminised education' stereotype? I've lost count of the number of times a columnist or other commentator has trotted this one out, often embellishing it with the 'fact' that plodding mediocre girls love coursework while brave, risk-taking boys benefit from exams, but have yet to see in either experience or research any strong evidence that these proclivities are strongly gendered. If schools provide an environment ill-suited to good education it is because they are poor schools, not because they are 'feminised' or any other such nonsense. It frustrates me enormously when intelligent women - especially those with the privilege of a voice in a respected national newpaper - collude with this kind of lazy, anti-woman thinking.
Anne Ronald, Kidderminster, Worcs.,
As a secondary school teacher for twenty years plus, I'd rather have pushy parents than indifferent or worse, openly antagonistic ones. Also, I would prefer to teach children who are functionally literate and to be able to exclude disruptive pupils from my class. It would be a help if children did not know their "rights" without having their responsibilities reinforced and if I, as an authority figure, had some rights to go with my ever-increasing responsibilities, not to mention some support instead of being blamed for society's ills, that, too, would be of considerable assistance.
ex-Teacher, Bayston Hill,
Besides the socialism of the likes of B. Sheerman, the core problem is the culture of both teacher training colleges and those institutes which train the lecturers who work in these colleges.
These educational organisations are riddled with left wing, socialist, politically correct orthodoxy bordering on Marxism.
The teaching profession itself, since the 60's/70's, has played a large part in the dumbing down of education and in using it as a means of social engineering of individuals and society
David Cartright, Birmingham,
It seems for parents everywhere (not just the UK) the grass is always greener on the other side. Here in the US, parents whined and moaned about disciplinary actions in schools and now whine that they are too lenient. The "not MY child" montra could be heard loud and clear when it came to kids being distractions or the learning problems of some students and schools capitulated and watered down everything from daily work load, to recess, to competitive awards programs, and disciplinary measures. Now we have a parade of mediocrity with little to no emphasis on being "the best of the best". Just getting by is enough in today's society because it doesn't leave the NON-ambitions "feeling bad about themselves". This is a leftwing mindset that MUST be banished from society for us to pull ourselves from the hole we've dug for our children. So, for the most part parents as a whole (with a exceptions of course) ARE indeed part of the problem, in my opinion. They demanded it, they got it!
Angela, small town, USA
Well done Libby - I could have written your views myself. I despair of their being any Political party with the nerve to sort out the whole educational mess that misconceived continual tinkering with the system have produced. If only someone would realise that the standards and needs of generations of youngsters have been blighted by putting the beliefs of left- wing, misguided politicans of the 70's and more recently the Blair years before the maintenance of standards that used to mean something. Given the despair in the top Universities of this Country when they have to spend time teaching students time management, essay writing, spelling and indeed how to use a library because so much time has been wasted in the schools teaching social skills that are a parental duty no wonder they are reluctant to take State school pupils who demonstrate such poor literacy on their application forms and present themselves with exam passes that have no real credibility.
Mavis, Orpington,
Exactly!
Chris Wood, West Wickham, UK
Libby I couldn't agree more. I am so disheartened with the way politicians seem to be overcomplicating our education system. Teachers need to be left to teach the subjects and skills that children will need to survive. The profession is being dumbed down in favour of the cheaper option of Teaching Assistants whilst teachers 'plan' and 'monitor' etc. All families should have access to schools where they can ensure a consistently high level of education wherever they live in the country. All schools should be funded to provide the very basics at an excellent level including being able to provide care to children and support to families ie. resident school nurses, instead of expecting teachers and other less qualified staff with all sorts of fancy titles to fill the gap.
Carrie , Manchester, England
Well put. What on earth is wrong with wanting the very best for your offsping ,whatever station you hold in life? No one succeeds without hard work and the will to do better. Good basics are essential rather than frittering time, effort and money on things that belong in the parents domain.
Grania Davy, farnham, surrey
I've left England and am unlikely to come back to live.
My two young children do have British passports, but they may not find them important to pass to their children.
How sad.
Sam, Hong Kong, Hong Kong
As ever, some decent international comparisons would be useful. Are we really much worse than other countries (Europe, USA, Japan etc?) The problem is that there is no clear indicator of the size of the problem and so things just drift along. I suspect that most European countries do much better than us and will continue to do so while it is so easy to avoid objective comparisons. And of course governments go to all sorts of lengths to avoid being shown up as mediocre.
Colin , Shrewsbury,
We forget why we now have such a prescriptive education system. In the 70's and 80's many inner city schools in particular had effectively been taken over by the looney-left who were vigorously prosetylising in the classrooms. The public fully supported the then Tory government in calling a halt through the introduction on a national curriculum which helped tie the hands of these politically motivated teachers.
It's possible the time has come to relax a little in some areas. But in the state sector, we can afford to let go control only when the teaching profession has fully regained public trust and that won't be until they see children and their parents as their customers. Like in the private sector.
Clive S, Crowborough, UK
Congratulations to Libby Purves for summarizing succinctly the realities here and exposing the posturing of the politically correct cabal that have done so much to undermine the effectiveness of the UK secondary education system over the last 30 years.
Despite New Labour claims of 21Billion pounds being made available to improve the prospects for poorer children over the last 10 years, quite the opposite has happened . This is because of their inability to understand and acknowledge the genuine aspirations and responsible behaviours of ordinary people when it comes to their own childrens education. The latter group of course includes many New Labour politicians and Ministers.
Robert Stern, Guildford, UK
I (and my brother) were lucky.We were able to get to Grammar School.(Would have turned out very differently if we'd failed the 11 Plus,I feel.) Our parents(both products of Grammars) stayed quietly in the background.They probably felt already that we'd pass ,as we'd always been in the A Stream.Only years later did my Mum admit she'd have worked overtime to send me to a local Independent if I'd failed the exam.It would have caused ructions, as my Dad was a dyed -in -the- wool Labour man and would have strongly resisted such a move( Harold Wilson was another Yorkshireman as well as P.M!) Thank God I passed!
H.D, WsM, UK
Thanks for this, Libby Purves. You put it so much better than I can. Wouldn't it be nice if the Cabinet had similar common sense? Just a pipe dream, I expect. We used to call them the Loony Left. Muddling middle and Silly Centre don't seem to ring out. Happy new Year!
Charles Bockett-Pugh, Sandhurst,
As has been proved elsewhere in various guises, vouchers plus school independence are the only way forward.
Why does anyone who shops for essentials in supermarkets or multiple retailers continue to presume that somehow the state can do a better job in providing this essential of life?
Philip Collings, Wallingford, Oxon
Well said. Railing against people who try to get their children into the best schools is like agonising against people who go to Marks and Spencers instead of Primark. Make all schools good and the problem ceases to exist. In the meantime, parents who seek out good schools are merely doing what politicians and bureaucrats are failing to do.
The Tories don't deserve their lead in the polls because they are so desperate to appear right on they have forgotten their principles. Some schools are poor because they are populated by the offspring of single mothers who choose to be single mothers because it pays to be so. The Tories know it but are afraid to say so.
As for faith schools, don't get me started, I may swear. How dare they? How dare they? We have the ridiculous situation that schools that spout lies and fantasies to our children have become the schools of choice because they believe in discipline. How did this happen? How did we let it happen?
Paul Owen, Birmingham, UK
As an educator of 40 years standing and a parent of two children (now adults) who have been through the state system, I can only applaud Libby Purves's article. As usual, she has cut through to the essence of the problem which is that, in our desire to help the disadvantaged, we have gone too far and the measures introduced have damaged the hopes of the majority. We have lost all confidence in standing up for our own culture in a desire not to 'offend' anyone new to this country. Common sense has been overtaken by political correctness. Teachers feel impotent and afraid that any initiative will breach some well-meaning regulation.
I am absolutely not reactionary or right wing but I believe fervently that we must allow public servants to get on with their jobs and show initiative without living in constant fear of breaching some regulation. The blame culture is severely holding back enterprise and initiative and the whole nation suffers.
John
John, Exeter, UK
I am reluctant to cavil at a column with which I basically agree, but I have to ask exactly who it was who has watched passively for the past 25 years while education quality was eviscerated? Who applauded as competition was banished? Who sabotaged the attempts to improve school food by smuggling in fast food? Who ranted on and on about "fairness" as quality dropped? Who physically assaulted teachers? Who elected and re-elected parties that had unrealistic ideological positions on education that were totally divorced from reality?
Yes, some parents are ambitious - and Thank God for them - but if you leave the fate of schools to "the parents" in general, they will never improve.
Democracy is not the solution here, but the problem. Education is by its nature elitist, and to improve British education we will have to go back a hundred and fifty years, to the Victorian years when teachers were not ashamed to be an elite, and when parents knew their place.
jon livesey, Sunnyvale, CA/USA