Education system could be completely privatised by 2015

[matt_swinburne]

England's education system risks being completely privatised within three years, the leader of one of the country's largest teaching unions has predicted.

Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers (NUT), whose union will strike in the capital over teachers' pensions on Wednesday, said the trade union movement could be haunted by "the spectre of a completely privatised education service by the end of the coalition's first term in government" unless it took significant action.

Blower said she was alarmed by the pace at which ministers wanted schools to cut links with their local authorities and become academies and free schools.

Academies and free schools are accountable to the education secretary, rather than their local authority and have greater freedom to change the timings of the school day, teachers' pay and the subjects they teach.

Some 40% of secondary schools in England are now academies, and Michael Gove, the education secretary, has recently come under renewed attack for forcing Downhills, a primary school in north London, to turn into an academy.

Blower said: "Unless we, as the trade union movement, in conjunction with community campaigning, are able to mount a significant campaign … to put the brake on this and unless the Liberal Democrats start behaving consistently with their own policy, which is to oppose academies and free schools, there is the spectre of a completely fragmented and privatised [education] service that is not in anybody's interest," she said.

Blower said her union was examining whether it was possible to use the tribunal system to challenge the government's moves to force schools to become academies.

Delegates at the National Union of Teachers' annual conference in Torquay next week will call for industrial action against academies in some parts of the country. Others will argue that academies represent "the biggest attack yet on comprehensive education by any national government".

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...sed-2015-union

[mouseITup]

The education system system needs to focus on the needs of the children being educated not the teachers. Teaching, like nursing, use to be a vocation not a path to union pay demands and a comfy index linked pension when they decide to retire early with "stress".

[matt_swinburne]

Originally Posted by mouseITup

The education system system needs to focus on the needs of the children being educated not the teachers. Teaching, like nursing, use to be a vocation not a path to union pay demands and a comfy index linked pension when they decide to retire early with "stress".

How is that paragraph at all relevent to the article? How is privatisation of the education system going to focus on the needs of the children educated?

Tell you what i'll delete the irrelevent 2nd half of the article to make it simpler.

[mouseITup]

Originally Posted by matt_swinburne

How is that paragraph at all relevent to the article? How is privatisation of the education system going to focus on the needs of the children educated?

Tell you what i'll delete the irrelevent 2nd half of the article to make it simpler.

When Christine Blower says .."privatised [education] service that is not in anybody's interest," she means not in the interest of her union and that is the only thing ahe is interested in.
She can't say it's bad for childrens education because its not and she knows it so she wraps in all into irrelevant waffle about "the biggest attack yet on comprehensive education by any national government".
What she is really saying is "God forbid, we allow schools to select teachers based on their ability to teach children rather than their ability to be loyal union members who we can call out on strike.

[beuwolf88]

This is disgusting.

It's the corporate takeover of the nation state.

[Dat1111]

Originally Posted by mouseITup

When Christine Blower says .."privatised [education] service that is not in anybody's interest," she means not in the interest of her union and that is the only thing ahe is interested in.
She can't say it's bad for childrens education because its not and she knows it so she wraps in all into irrelevant waffle about "the biggest attack yet on comprehensive education by any national government".
What she is really saying is "God forbid, we allow schools to select teachers based on their ability to teach children rather than their ability to be loyal union members who we can call out on strike.

Thats part of the problem a big part. Hiring a teacher or firing them should be based on how well they do. Basically unionizing them says oh well its not the teachers fault its the kids so the teacher should be able to keep there job. Nomatter how bad the education they maybe giving the students.

Your ability to keep your job should be based on performance

[matt_swinburne]

Originally Posted by mouseITup

She can't say it's bad for childrens education because its not .

lol in your uninformed opinion\guess. What the process has showed us so far is that when an academy has a child who doesnt perform or is hard to control they try, and do, force and pressure the parents to remove the child from the school in order to boost their performance figures. This means that the private system fails the difficult children leading them to a future of exclusion and under-education. If you want more riots and more unemployment then you keep on parroting your opinion\guess regardless of the already mounting proof that a section of society will not benefit from a privatisation of eduction.

Its easy to pretend your great when you get rid of anyone who cant make the grades

[mouseITup]

Originally Posted by matt_swinburne

lol in your uninformed opinion\guess. What the process has showed us so far is that when an academy has a child who doesnt perform or is hard to control they try, and do, force and pressure the parents to remove the child from the school in order to boost their performance figures. This means that the private system fails the difficult children leading them to a future of exclusion and under-education. If you want more riots and more unemployment then you keep on parroting your opinion\guess regardless of the already mounting proof that a section of society will not benefit from a privatisation of eduction.

Its easy to pretend your great when you get rid of anyone who cant make the grades

'Fraid I'm not buying that for a second if only because academy/free schools operate under the exact same legal requirements, rules and guidance when it comes to pupil suspension and exclusions as local authority run schools so how can they 'force and pressure' parents to remove any child from school?

[ericredbeard]

Originally Posted by beuwolf88

This is disgusting.

It's the corporate takeover of the nation state.

Right there.