Here is a snap shot of views and reports over the last decade of our education system, there are many more but some more negative other more positive. In the next few months we the parents will be asked to make our own decisions based on how it has been and is for our children. It would be good to have a debate on Parentsoutloud so we have some informed views. Look up other commentaries read these and let’s discuss:-

In 1997 “Mr. Blair promised that his “government’s passion” would be “education, education and education. Then, now and in the future.” In a speech outlining the next steps of the government, Mr. Blair announced a further investment of £710m in new technology. And he announced that the specialist school scheme Mr Blair also committed the government to a “transformation” of secondary schools. This would mean more specialist schools, an increase in access to computers, catch-up lessons for 11 to 12 year olds and an overhaul of further education, said Mr Blair. And arguing for a “learn and earn” society, he said the government was turning around a legacy of underfunding in education. (BBC News Sept 2000)

Failed! Political interference is damaging children’s education, report The biggest inquiry into primary education for 40 years concluded yesterday that Labour’s tight, centralised control of England’s primary schools has had a devastating impact on children’s education. Micromanagement, meddling and a succession of ministerial edicts have killed the spontaneity in the nation’s classrooms. Teachers have been stripped of their powers of discretion. And the net result of a decade of new Labour “reform” has almost certainly been a decline in the quality of education that the young receive. It would have been better, concludes the Cambridge University-based Primary Review – an ongoing inquiry into primary education in England – if the Government had done nothing at all. The four reports published today follow 18 earlier reports that have painted a devastating picture of government interference in primary schools and laid bare ministers’ obsession with testing and desire to dictate the minutiae of classroom practice. They say government influence in the classroom has increased since 1997 to such an extent that English primary schools are now subject to a “state theory of learning” in which teachers are not only told what to teach but how they should teach it. The quality of primary education has declined in the past 20 years because of the “narrowing of the curriculum and the intensity of test preparation”, the research warned. The result is that educational standards may actually have fallen in recent years as teachers become experts in coaching children for tests. The latest report follows yet more government announcements that have called on schools to squeeze even more into their curriculum. Schools will now be expected to provide five hours of cultural activities a week as well as five hours of sport, including after-school clubs. Yet the lesson emerging from the Primary Review is that schools need less, not more, interference. The reports conclude that government control of primary classrooms began in 1988 under the Conservatives with the introduction of the national curriculum but has strongly increased since Labour came into power in 1997.The quality of interaction between pupils and teachers has been particularly “negatively influenced” by Labour’s national strategies, introduced from 1998 onwards, which tell teachers exactly how to teach literacy and numeracy in primary schools, the study found. Teachers are no longer thinking on their feet, adapting lessons to particular needs. Instead, the school day is choreographed from Whitehall. The introduction of high-stakes testing – which sees primary schools ranked in national league tables according to the performance of their 11-year-old pupils in English, math’s and science tests – has also led to a narrowing of the curriculum as schools focus on literacy and numeracy at the expense of other subjects. Even primary science – which had been one of the success stories of the post-1988 national curriculum – has been in “marginal decline” since 1997 because of the excessive focus on literacy and numeracy. The focus on the tests in English, maths and science taken by pupils aged 7 and 11 is “driving teaching in exactly the opposite direction to that which research indicates will improve learning”. Results for the national SATs (standard assessment tests), taken by 1.2 million primary pupils every summer, improved rapidly between 1995 and 2000 but then “largely leveled off”. That was probably because “teachers were initially unprepared for national testing, learnt very quickly how to coach for the tests, hence results improved, but any benefit to be squeezed from the system by such coaching has long since been exhausted”, the study found.
A second study for the Primary Review by Maria Balarin and Hugh Lauder, from Bath University, reinforced the depressing findings. “Since the arrival of New Labour, central control in key areas of educational action has been strengthened,” it concluded. “The Government has strengthened its hand through what may be called the “state theory of learning”.” This reflected a belief by the Government that a combination of “the repeated high stakes testing of pupils”, a national curriculum and “mandated” teaching methods in English and maths would raise standards. Clearly, the approach hasn’t worked, and the calls for a total rethink of government education policy are now coming thick and fast. David Laws, the Liberal Democrat children’s spokesman, said yesterday: “The Government’s attempts to micromanage schools are clearly deeply damaging. Ministers must stop their constant meddling in the curriculum and cease dictating to schools how they should educate our children.” “An absence of trust in teachers is fuelled by not one, but two ferocious accountability systems. I urge the Government now to review its whole method of evaluating schools.” spokeswoman for the Department for Children, Schools and Families dismissed the research as “recycled, partial or out of date”.”We do not accept these claims,” she said. “We are currently engaged in a review of the primary curriculum, as set out in the Children’s Plan, which will build on a decade of success in raising standards – success that has been validated on numerous occasions by independent experts. The Government does not accept our children are over-tested.”
How the state took over The national curriculum was introduced in England, Wales and Northern Ireland in 1988. It was intended to ensure that certain important topics were studied by all pupils. However, it quickly grew to fill the entire teaching time of state schools. National curriculum tests were also introduced to hold schools accountable for pupils’ progress. But these tests did not come to dominate the work of schools until after Labour came to power in 1997. Labour set challenging targets for improving results, In 2006 ministers announced schools would be required to teach reading using government-approved methods. (Independent February 2008)

Pupils failed by ’shameful’ education system, CBI leader warns
Britain should be “ashamed” of the extent of academic underachievement among schoolchildren, Richard Lambert, director-general of the CBI, has said in a withering attack on the state education system. Mr Lambert said that despite the Government pumping millions of pounds into education, its constant “messing around” had left a generation of pupils without the relevant skills to succeed in business. He sympathised with head teachers who he claimed have had to grapple with a “kaleidoscope” of “very complicated” changes to the education system in recent years.
As a result, youngsters’ education has suffered, meaning that Britain is now lumbered with one of the highest proportions of Neets (people not in employment, education or training) in the world, he warned. Children from poor backgrounds are being particularly failed, Mr Lambert said.
In an interview with The Guardian, Mr Lambert said: “If you look at all the data you see as a country we spend a lot on educating kids, but the outcomes aren’t great. “There’s a very long tail of under-performance. I think this is more than an educational issue, it’s a social and cultural issue as well.“Part of the story is the correlation between deprivation and poor academic outcomes, which are more marked in this country than we ought to be able to contemplate. We ought to be ashamed of the numbers.” Earlier this month a breakdown of GCSE results suggested Britain has enjoyed sustained improvements over the past three years. However, figures released by the Tories last month disclosed that just one-in-10 children in the most deprived communities leaves school with good GCSEs. A study by Reform, the think tank, also warned that pupils in England are lagging behind those from other countries after being failed by an “intellectually deficient” education system. Mr Lambert said he believes that the problems are rooted in a “culture of low aspiration” that has pervaded over the past five decades. He said he felt compelled to raise his concerns because employers are struggling to recruit people with the right skills, despite greater competition for jobs amid the recession. Some employers have been forced to provide remedial classes to bring staff up to speed in the 3Rs, he said.
Mr Lambert added: “The OECD ((Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) figures show we have more drunkenness in students than any other country in the OECD. “We have the fourth highest cohort of Neets after Turkey, Italy and Mexico, that can’t be something we can be proud of.
“I would be critical of the government in the way that policy has seemed like a bit of a kaleidoscope. There are lots of initiatives, quite complex initiatives like the diplomas programme. Very, very complicated. “I would hate to be a head teacher having to handle diplomas and GCSEs and A-levels and not quite knowing the extent to which they are going to be sustained or not sustained. I do think there has been a lot of messing around.” Ed Balls, the schools secretary, denied the claims saying that English schools were now performing well compared with those in other developed countries, in maths and sciences. (Telegraph January 2010)