Turn on thread page Beta

    Gordon Brown’s announcement of extra cash for education will be welcomed by parents and teachers -
    but many will be wondering why it’s taken so long to deliver extra funding when education was meant
    to be New Labour’s top priority !

    Brown says he wants to tackle “past decades of chronic underinvestment”. Well successive Governments
    - including his own - have certainly left schools underfunded and understaffed. Most of Brown’s
    promised £15 billion will be needed just to repair the damage done by years of underfunding. It will
    still fall well short of the 7 per cent of national income even Blairite Peter Mandelson has
    admitted is really needed.

    Schools have only been kept going by teachers putting in 50-60 hour working weeks. Small wonder many
    are quitting the job. Only a guarantee of manageable workload and decent pay will reverse the
    haemorrhaging of qualified staff. But Education Secretary, Estelle Morris, calls a 35 hour week for
    teachers “potty”.

    Brown also made clear that he has no intention of rewarding the staff that are keeping our public
    services going, demanding “responsibility in setting public sector pay”. Councilworkers and teachers
    need to take united action to win the salary increases they deserve.

    Teachers are also being driven out by the drudgery of lessons driven by the demands of National
    Curriculum tests. Yet Brown’s cash will be dependent on schools meeting even more targets. This will
    mean more pressure to concentrate on sterile “teaching to the test”.

    “Successful” schools will be rewarded with more money
    - like the specialist schools New Labour propose to use to break-up comprehensive education. Other
    cash will be directed to divisive schemes like City Academies. But it’s the schools at the bottom
    of the league tables, in areas of greatest poverty, that need the most support. Instead Brown
    threatened them with closure, apparently resurrecting the discredited “Fresh Start” scheme.

    Of course, while state schools struggle, independent schools can rely on better resources and
    smaller class sizes ! Every child should have the same chance of a decent education as the sons and
    daughters of the wealthy !

    Instead of using funding to help further break-up comprehensive education, the Socialist Party
    demands proper investment without strings attached. Unions must demand that Gordon’s extra billions
    are turned into decent pay and conditions for staff - the only way to guarantee decent learning
    conditions for children.

    ******************************** *********
    socialistteachers.tripod.com
    ******************************** *********

    User1951 wrote:

    [q1]> Gordon Brown?s announcement of extra cash for education will be welcomed by parents and teachers -[/q1]
    [q1]> but many will be wondering why it?s taken so long to deliver extra funding when education was[/q1]
    [q1]> meant to be New Labour?s top priority ![/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> Brown says he wants to tackle ?past decades of chronic underinvestment?. Well successive[/q1]
    [q1]> Governments - including his own - have certainly left schools underfunded and understaffed. Most[/q1]
    [q1]> of Brown?s promised £15 billion will be needed just to repair the damage done by years of[/q1]
    [q1]> underfunding. It will still fall well short of the 7 per cent of national income even Blairite[/q1]
    [q1]> Peter Mandelson has admitted is really needed.[/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> Schools have only been kept going by teachers putting in 50-60 hour working weeks. Small wonder[/q1]
    [q1]> many are quitting the job. Only a guarantee of manageable workload and decent pay will reverse the[/q1]
    [q1]> haemorrhaging of qualified staff. But Education Secretary, Estelle Morris, calls a 35 hour week[/q1]
    [q1]> for teachers ?potty?.[/q1]

    Then why not axe all those school holidays ? Teachers work too many hours a week but not enough
    weeks in a year.

    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> Brown also made clear that he has no intention of rewarding the staff that are keeping our public[/q1]
    [q1]> services going, demanding ?responsibility in setting public sector pay?. Councilworkers and[/q1]
    [q1]> teachers need to take united action to win the salary increases they deserve.[/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> Teachers are also being driven out by the drudgery of lessons driven by the demands of National[/q1]
    [q1]> Curriculum tests. Yet Brown?s cash will be dependent on schools meeting even more targets. This[/q1]
    [q1]> will mean more pressure to concentrate on sterile ?teaching to the test?.[/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> ?Successful? schools will be rewarded with more money[/q1]
    [q1]> - like the specialist schools New Labour propose to use to break-up comprehensive education. Other[/q1]
    [q1]> cash will be directed to divisive schemes like City Academies. But it?s the schools at the[/q1]
    [q1]> bottom of the league tables, in areas of greatest poverty, that need the most support. Instead[/q1]
    [q1]> Brown threatened them with closure, apparently resurrecting the discredited ?Fresh Start?[/q1]
    [q1]> scheme.[/q1]

    They should be taken over by the military.

    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> Of course, while state schools struggle, independent schools can rely on better resources and[/q1]
    [q1]> smaller class sizes ! Every child should have the same chance of a decent education as the sons[/q1]
    [q1]> and daughters of the wealthy ![/q1]

    I what way ? Describe in detail.

    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> Instead of using funding to help further break-up comprehensive education, the Socialist Party[/q1]
    [q1]> demands proper investment without strings attached.[/q1]

    Why the Socialist Party ? Is that the one with Arthur Scargill as its leader ? Nobody supports
    yesterdays men like him anymore. Even the BNP would do a better job with comprehensive education
    than Scargill ever would.

    [q1]> Unions must demand that Gordon?s extra billions are[/q1]

    What extra billions ? We could save some money by kicking out all those bogus asylum seekers.

    [q1]> turned into decent pay[/q1]

    [q1]> and conditions for staff - the only way to guarantee decent learning conditions for children.[/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> ******************************** *********[/q1]
    [q1]> socialistteachers.tripod.com[/q1]
    [q1]> ******************************** *********[/q1]

    It baffles my why anyone nowadays still supports that failed socialist claptrap.

    User1951 wrote:

    [q1]> Gordon Brown?s announcement of extra cash for education will be welcomed by parents and teachers -[/q1]
    [q1]> but many will be wondering why it?s taken so long to deliver extra funding when education was[/q1]
    [q1]> meant to be New Labour?s top priority ![/q1]
    [q1]>[/q1]
    [q1]> Brown says he wants to tackle ?past decades of chronic underinvestment?. Well successive[/q1]
    [q1]> Governments - including his own - have certainly left schools underfunded and understaffed. Most[/q1]
    [q1]> of Brown?s promised £15 billion will be needed just to repair the damage done by years of[/q1]
    [q1]> underfunding. It will still fall well short of the 7 per cent of national income even Blairite[/q1]
    [q1]> Peter Mandelson has admitted is really needed.[/q1]

    The government needs to put money where its needed the most - like repairing leaky roofs, recruiting
    new teachers and buying new textbooks and equipment. What they don't need to spend the money on are
    all those sociology courses teaching kids about things like homosexuality or race awareness. Also
    far too much of the education budget gets spent on computers most of which are used for purposes of
    a dubious educational nature. ICT seems to be the in thing at the moment but in most cases all that
    it does is teach kids how to produce a newsletter or report with a software package from Micro$oft.

    "User1951" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
    [q1]> "Successful" schools will be rewarded with more money[/q1]

    What's wrong with that ?

    On Wed, 17 Jul 2002 16:08:03 +0100, "Dave Styles" <[email protected] o.uk> wrote:

    [q1]>What's wrong with that ?[/q1]

    This is an interesting idea. A school is successful and therefore needs more money. A school is
    having difficulties and therefore requires less. Does that sound like a good idea to you?

    If so how were you proposing to evaluate "successful"? I think a teacher who deals with profoundly
    "difficult" pupils and gives them a sense of self-worth and some modest educational attainments is
    "successful". But the inchworms of OFSTED can't measure it so it does not exist.

    ******************************** ********
    http://user1951.tripod.com Education Education Education
    ******************************** *********

    Gordon Brown is a ****

    Originally posted by jimbo
    Gordon Brown is a ****
    I heard that.
 
 
 
Poll
Did you get less than your required grades and still get into university?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.