September 7: Academies, Kent TV and members interests (again)
Comments |
Like many, I'm ambivalent about the merits of
the Government's school academy programme. It has always struck me
as slightly odd that ministers believe that the prospects and
education of children might somehow be enhanced by virtue of the
fact that their school has, for example, a football club as a
sponsor.
While Kent has been among the authorities enthused by the
concept of academies, it seems to be rowing back on that initial
enthusiasm, possibly because it sees that the redevelopment of
schools under the Government's Building Schools for The
Future initiative as achieving pretty much the
same thing.
The government's inititative has been underpinned by the
notion that there is something intrinsically good about the
idea of getting private sponsors involved in running
schools.
Actually, I suspect that where academies have proved
successful, it is as much to do with the amount of money thrown at
them.
Direct tens of millions of pounds at any school, build
some stunning new facilities and allow them to offer more money to
attract staff and throw in a super-head and you'd expect to
see some improvements.
The academy concept is as much about providing a way of
re-branding formerly poorly-performing schools as anything else.
And there's nothing wrong with that.
But academies - which often end up with the same intake - are
just like other schools. Some will do well, some will do less well
and for all sorts of reasons.
Giving them an academy badge won't change that.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Our
story about a suggestion from the campaign group
Comprehensive Future about how selective schooling in areas
like Kent has drawn quite a few comments on both sides of the
argument.
Cllr Kevin Lynes has posted on his blog his thoughts, which
take aim at the group's chairman Fiona Millar
pointing out that she was a benefit of the selective system.
I'm always rather mystified by this line of criticism, I
must admit. I hold no brief for either side but why should the fact
that you've been to a selective school somehow undermine or
invalidate any views you might hold that a different system would
work better?
In what precise way is the advancement of any argument against
selection somehow intellectually compromised if you went to a
grammar school?
I wasn't around at the time but it's worth noting that
Margaret Thatcher as Conservative education
secretary did as much to scrap selective schools as any politician.
Her school? Kesteven and Grantham Girls' Grammar School in
Lincolnshire.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
What did the
Kent TV board make of the
criticisms (reported by my colleague Trevor Sturgess) made
by one its members, the media pundit Martin Jackson?
The board had a meeting scheduled for last Friday. But Mr
Jackson's thoughts did not get an airing or a discussion.
The meeting was apparently postponed because too few members
could attend.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It seems that whatever gremlins interfered with the Kent
County Council website that meant you could only view the register
of interests for members on the council before the June election
has been fixed.
You can now see them by following
this link to elected councillors.
Tuesday, September 08 2009
The KM Group does not moderate comments.
Please click here for our house rules.