Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B343 - Primary/Secondary Education Reform Bill 2011 Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    B343 - Primary/Secondary Education Reform Bill 2011, TSR UKIP



    A bill to reform Primary and Secondary Education.

    BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

    1. For the Purposes of this Bill

    (a) MFL’s should be chosen by the students and can include Classics, Classical Greek etc etc.

    2. Behaviour

    (a) OFSTED may no longer fine schools for excluding pupils.
    (b) In the case of a student becoming violent - reasonable force is allowed to be used on said student.
    (c) In KS2/3, schools may issue detentions to students for up to and including 40 minutes without notifying parents.
    (i) For detentions above 40 minutes - schools must give 48 hours notice of such and occurance, and allow the parents to rearrange the detention for suitable reasons.

    3. Core Subjects

    (a) All schools that teach the Key Stage 2 and/or 3 curriculum must teach the following subjects as Core Subjects to all of their pupils with the aim of the pupil receiving a GCSE (or the equivalent) from at least 5 at A*-C:
    * English/Welsh/Gaelic
    * Maths
    * ICT
    * Science
    * MFLs
    * Physical Education BTEC

    (b) All schools that teach at Key Stage 2 and/or 3 level must teach the following subjects as KS2 Core and KS3 Option Subjects:
    * Geography
    * History
    * Religious Studies
    * Music
    * Games
    * Design and Technology

    4. School League Tables

    (a) School League tables in their current form are to be scrapped and replaced with ones based on Marks given by Ofsted.
    (i) The present school inspections are to be reverted to the previous framework, but will still remain.
    (b) Every year Ofsted must inspect each school for a period of at least 3 days once every year. During this period Ofsted are to mark each school on a number of areas, each area will have 100 marks.
    (i) The areas are as follows:
    * Teaching Ability
    * Standards of Attainment
    * Standards of Facility
    * Pupils Behaviour and the Schools control of that
    * The Schools ability to contact parents and guardians about their son/daughters progress.
    (c) The Department for Education is to give funding based on how each school does in the marks.
    (i) The DfE are to fund each school on a decreasing scale from the bottom schools up - meaning that the schools that do poorly get extra funding to try and make them better.

    5. Key Stages

    (a) The year groups for the Key Stages in England are to be as follows:
    * KS1 = Reception - Year 3
    * KS2 = Year 4 - 6
    * KS3 = Year 7 - 11
    * KS4 = Year 12 - 13

    6. Commencent, Short title and extent

    (a) This bill may be cited as the Education Reform Bill 2010.
    (b) This Act shall come into force in England upon Royal Assent or January 1st 2011 - whichever is later.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I don't agree with making a formal qualification in PE compulsory.

    And i don't think in year 7 you really know what options you want to pick.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I disagree with PE being compolsory as well. The bit I'm most confused about is not having to give parents notice for detentions under 40 min. I would see this as fine if these detentions were done during the day, but if a student is being told to stay behind after school for an extra 30 min the parents do need to be informed otherwise their plans may have to be changed. MFLs aren't clearly defined and 4ci is a massive disincentive. I'm sure that it was well intentioned, but as it is in this bill would be terrible. Making this come into power so fast is also quite dangerous. Just my quick thoughts on it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    You've said that schools that teach KS2 should make some subjects compulsory. I disagree with this, I certainly didn't know what subjects to pick at this age. It is also woefully vague - will subjects be compulsory from the start of KS3?

    Is the aim of this bill to give children more freedom over what they learn from a younger age?

    Overall not a terrible idea - something I could back, but the bill is vague and I just need a better explanation of what would happen.
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Not a good great bill at all tbh. It just seems a little arbitrary, amongst other things.

    "Games" - Lol.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    what happened to Science at 3a
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by robinson999)
    what happened to Science at 3a
    It does say Science....
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I've seen this in various guises before. I don't like any of it.

    The first bit is hugely problematic, what does it mean? MFLs should be chosen by the students - from ALL MFLs? The Bill doesn't even say what MFL stands for, by the way. So schools must be equipped to teach any modern foreign language? Laughable.

    The bit on detentions, allow schools to handle the discipline part themselves. It's not for government diktat to decide.

    On making subjects compulsory, I don't particularly like that they are, but if so it should only be the bare minimum that is compulsory. That is making children literate and numerate. Anything over and above that shouldn't be coming from whitehall. Naturally schools may make subjects compulsory, but that allows for variation and with other measures aimed at opening up school choice, allows children to have an education system more tailored to them.

    The funding is so backwards and creates a real problem here. You fund the worst school more, why? So let us imagine a school wants some extra funding for a project, coming up to the next inspection it aims to get as low marks as possible so as to gain that extra funding. No, I'd much rather see funding follow the pupil to whichever school they choose, that gives incentives for schools to do better and attract pupils, rather than do worse to get extra funding.
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by simontinsley)
    I've seen this in various guises before. I don't like any of it.

    The first bit is hugely problematic, what does it mean? MFLs should be chosen by the students - from ALL MFLs? The Bill doesn't even say what MFL stands for, by the way. So schools must be equipped to teach any modern foreign language? Laughable.

    The bit on detentions, allow schools to handle the discipline part themselves. It's not for government diktat to decide.
    Within reason. Broadly speaking the government of course needs to regulate discipline - unless of course you wish to return to the days of caning children for forgetting latin tenses or w/e.

    making subjects compulsory, I don't particularly like that they are, but if so it should only be the bare minimum that is compulsory. That is making children literate and numerate. Anything over and above that shouldn't be coming from whitehall. Naturally schools may make subjects compulsory, but that allows for variation and with other measures aimed at opening up school choice, allows children to have an education system more tailored to them.
    I don't want to turn this into a free-schools debate and I won't so I'll just say that, on principle, I have no problem with subjects being compulsory but i do find it a little lazy for the bill to posit that X and Y should be without offering justification in tandem.

    The funding is so backwards and creates a real problem here. You fund the worst school more, why? So let us imagine a school wants some extra funding for a project, coming up to the next inspection it aims to get as low marks as possible so as to gain that extra funding. No, I'd much rather see funding follow the pupil to whichever school they choose, that gives incentives for schools to do better and attract pupils, rather than do worse to get extra funding.
    I won't get into this again either :p:
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Can I start by just sincerely thanking you all for your constructive feedback. This allows us to tailor later drafts more closely to what you have said so thanks.

    I will answer all the criticisms later.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paddy__power)
    It does say Science....
    ok maybe i got confused

    education needs massive changes and i don't feel these are it
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    In one sense it looks like the Bill is trying to make education more of a choice for students and more liberal but then at the same time it forces them to do other things... authoritarian.

    Very confused as to what the message is from UKIP
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Section 1 is fair enough, although I don't think that classical Greek is a modern foreign language, and it could be interpreted to mean that such a language must be taught by schools.

    Section 2 I like most of, but if the detention is after school then I think that the parents should always be informed, as it can mess up transport arrangements etc.

    I like section 3, but what is "games"?

    I know nothing about section 4 since we don't have league tables here, nor do I know anything about section 5 because we don't use that system.
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Section 5 strikes me as simply superfluous, it doesn't appear to have any point to it.

    Section 4 I don't like particularly as I'm not overly convinced of the proposed methodology - why once a year? Why 100 marks? The funding aspect also seems like it should have been treated with more care and presented with considerably more detail so as not to seem, as it does now IMO, as though it was an afterthought that was welded on.
    • TSR Community Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I'm sure most of this was very similar when it was before the house previously I don' t see anything much different from then and enough to remove all the concerns I raised on the section on this bill the last time we debated these sections.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Let's go:

    (Original post by UKIP)
    1. For the Purposes of this Bill

    (a) MFL’s should be chosen by the students and can include Classics, Classical Greek etc etc.
    Classics is a broad name for virtually all studies in Greece and Rome some entailing and some not entailing languages. I'm assuming you mean that it entails Language based courses?



    (Original post by UKIP)
    (a) OFSTED may no longer fine schools for excluding pupils.
    I'm hesitant about how easily this could be abused to raise exam results. I realise it's a somewhat poor view of the characters of headmasters but still the issue has to be raised, if there's no disincentive to expel pupils then how can we be sure people are being expelled entirely fairly. Perhaps if some clear and binding guidelines were laid down regarding the exclusions (and if people are in violation the victim is subject to compensation) I could support this, until then nay.

    (Original post by UKIP)
    (b) In the case of a student becoming violent - reasonable force is allowed to be used on said student.
    As decided by whom? Will this be a criminal or internal matter for the school?

    (Original post by UKIP)
    (c) In KS2/3, schools may issue detentions to students for up to and including 40 minutes without notifying parents.

    (i) For detentions above 40 minutes - schools must give 48 hours notice of such and occurance, and allow the parents to rearrange the detention for suitable reasons.
    I'm not going to make a major issue over this.

    (Original post by UKIP)
    3. Core Subjects

    (a) All schools that teach the Key Stage 2 and/or 3 curriculum must teach the following subjects as Core Subjects to all of their pupils with the aim of the pupil receiving a GCSE (or the equivalent) from at least 5 at A*-C:
    * English/Welsh/Gaelic
    * Maths
    * ICT
    * Science
    * MFLs
    * Physical Education BTEC
    I fail to see why an actual qualification in PE is necessary. Much less to a BTEC standard, why on earth would you make a Sixth form education a compulsory part of education? Surely if you were going to do this (which so long as they're being encouraged to be active, I fail to see why the qualification itself is necessary) it should at least be a PE GCSE or equivalent rather than BTEC.

    (Original post by UKIP)
    (b) All schools that teach at Key Stage 2 and/or 3 level must teach the following subjects as KS2 Core and KS3 Option Subjects:
    * Geography
    * History
    * Religious Studies
    * Music
    * Games
    * Design and Technology
    I'm okay with that.

    (Original post by UKIP)
    4. School League Tables

    (a) School League tables in their current form are to be scrapped and replaced with ones based on Marks given by Ofsted.
    (i) The present school inspections are to be reverted to the previous framework, but will still remain.
    (b) Every year Ofsted must inspect each school for a period of at least 3 days once every year. During this period Ofsted are to mark each school on a number of areas, each area will have 100 marks.
    (i) The areas are as follows:
    * Teaching Ability
    * Standards of Attainment
    * Standards of Facility
    * Pupils Behaviour and the Schools control of that
    * The Schools ability to contact parents and guardians about their son/daughters progress.
    (c) The Department for Education is to give funding based on how each school does in the marks.
    (i) The DfE are to fund each school on a decreasing scale from the bottom schools up - meaning that the schools that do poorly get extra funding to try and make them better.
    Seems like an excessive pressure on the school to me. Ofsted just don't need to inspect a school every single year.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    No to religious studies being compulsory.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by UKIP)

    (a) MFL’s should be chosen by the students and can include Classics, Classical Greek etc etc.
    I don't think this is right, I thought the purpose of getting students to learn languages was so they could use them in practise? Not everyone, only a small minority, will use Classical languages in their lifetime, so perhaps an actual modern language, french, spanish etc. would be more suitable.


    (Original post by UKIP)
    2. Behaviour

    (a) OFSTED may no longer fine schools for excluding pupils.
    (b) In the case of a student becoming violent - reasonable force is allowed to be used on said student.
    (c) In KS2/3, schools may issue detentions to students for up to and including 40 minutes without notifying parents.
    (i) For detentions above 40 minutes - schools must give 48 hours notice of such and occurance, and allow the parents to rearrange the detention for suitable reasons.
    Define reasonable force? The same amount of force the police can use? What? Be more specific here. I'm fine with the detention thing, except, I think 40 minutes is a little excessive, if I wasn't home 40 minutes after school had officially finished, my parents would be worrying.

    (Original post by UKIP)
    3. Core Subjects

    (a) All schools that teach the Key Stage 2 and/or 3 curriculum must teach the following subjects as Core Subjects to all of their pupils with the aim of the pupil receiving a GCSE (or the equivalent) from at least 5 at A*-C:
    * English/Welsh/Gaelic
    * Maths
    * ICT
    * Science
    * MFLs
    * Physical Education BTEC
    No to physical education, at least make it to a GCSE standard, or to no formal qualification and just have lessons where excise is undertaken. I wouldn't want a C in PE because I wasn't very good at sport but still academically clever on my CV.


    (Original post by UKIP)
    (b) All schools that teach at Key Stage 2 and/or 3 level must teach the following subjects as KS2 Core and KS3 Option Subjects:
    * Geography
    * History
    * Religious Studies
    * Music
    * Games
    * Design and Technology
    What is 'games'? I agree with everything else, is the GCSE year still 2 years long? Will be there an opportunity to change your options? I certainly didn't know what I wanted to do or indeed what I was good at the age of 11 to then get a
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Idea-wise, I like the behaviour bit (s2) a lot. I detest making BTEC PE compulsory, as I do combining KS3 and KS4 to make one single key stage. There's a significant difference between the two and when this bill states that so many subjects must be taken onto KS3 and thus GCSE I think it takes away the potential to study other subjects in their place. If you're going to impose mandatory subjects then only do so at current KS3 (Y7-9) and don't make it cut into students options. I also disagree with the school funding mechanism. Whilst I acknowledge the necessity of funding for lower-performing schools I don't believe that the better schools should be penalised and I believe they deserve recognition and extra funding in some form by way of recognition of their achievments. I'd rather see a system of means tested funding according to schools and their individual circumstances rather than generally giving all poorly performing schools money. Sometimes a school doesn't under perform because of their facilities but for a number of other factors and therefore money will be wasted. On a smaller note offering Classics and Classical Greek is a total contradiction to Modern Foreign Languages and therefore I'd request that that be changed. Furthermore, the learning of archaic languages gives people very different skills to that of learning MFLs and therefore the purpose of MFLs is lost. It's not that universities like you because you can speak French, Spanish etc. they like you because of the learning that was required during the process.

    Even if these amendments were made, however, I couldn't agree to this bill as it's too generalised. I don't doubt the effort of TSR UKIP in drafting this bill, however, the reforms proposed require much more expansion that isn't included. I would recommend that UKIP look at the areas most important to them and try and create a smaller, yet better written bill and try and implement their reforms that way. I for one would vote Aye to a bill that expands on what is outlined in s2.
    • Community Assistant
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cambo211)
    I don't agree with making a formal qualification in PE compulsory.

    And i don't think in year 7 you really know what options you want to pick.
    I agree with your second point, but perhaps a limited selection of choices in year 8 wouldn't be a bad idea. We did it for art, music, DT and MFLs in my school and it seemed to work.

    Making PE compulsory could be a way to tackle childhood obesity so I just don't agree with your first point.


    (Original post by DayneD89)
    I disagree with PE being compolsory as well. The bit I'm most confused about is not having to give parents notice for detentions under 40 min. I would see this as fine if these detentions were done during the day, but if a student is being told to stay behind after school for an extra 30 min the parents do need to be informed otherwise their plans may have to be changed. MFLs aren't clearly defined and 4ci is a massive disincentive. I'm sure that it was well intentioned, but as it is in this bill would be terrible. Making this come into power so fast is also quite dangerous. Just my quick thoughts on it.
    4ci I have mentioned to the author of this Bill, so I am not going to argue this point any further as we are in agreement. This is the same with the swift nature of it's implementation which should probably be phased in over several years. Your point about detention notice is certainly interesting, but if we rang parents or home contacts during the day to inform them of detentions, then I believe that there isn't a problem. We will obviously need to alter the Bill to that effect though.


    (Original post by The Next Left)
    You've said that schools that teach KS2 should make some subjects compulsory. I disagree with this, I certainly didn't know what subjects to pick at this age. It is also woefully vague - will subjects be compulsory from the start of KS3?

    Is the aim of this bill to give children more freedom over what they learn from a younger age?

    Overall not a terrible idea - something I could back, but the bill is vague and I just need a better explanation of what would happen.
    Some subjects are already compulsory at KS2 e.g English and I just don't see the problem with ensuring that pupils have a balanced curriculum at KS2 rather than one focussing primarily on SATs. I believe that freedom over education is the aim.


    (Original post by simontinsley)
    I've seen this in various guises before. I don't like any of it.

    The first bit is hugely problematic, what does it mean? MFLs should be chosen by the students - from ALL MFLs? The Bill doesn't even say what MFL stands for, by the way. So schools must be equipped to teach any modern foreign language? Laughable.
    I think that you are stretching the idea a little too far, but I know what you mean and we shall aim to define MFLs more clearly.

    The bit on detentions, allow schools to handle the discipline part themselves. It's not for government diktat to decide.
    I believe that government and schools working together like this will help, not hinder discipline.


    On making subjects compulsory, I don't particularly like that they are, but if so it should only be the bare minimum that is compulsory. That is making children literate and numerate. Anything over and above that shouldn't be coming from whitehall. Naturally schools may make subjects compulsory, but that allows for variation and with other measures aimed at opening up school choice, allows children to have an education system more tailored to them.
    See somewhere above . However, in all seriousness, I think that this will ensure a more balanced curriculum than an examination weighted one in Year 6, for example.

    The funding is so backwards and creates a real problem here. You fund the worst school more, why? So let us imagine a school wants some extra funding for a project, coming up to the next inspection it aims to get as low marks as possible so as to gain that extra funding. No, I'd much rather see funding follow the pupil to whichever school they choose, that gives incentives for schools to do better and attract pupils, rather than do worse to get extra funding.
    I have mentioned this and agree with you on this part.


    (Original post by robinson999)
    ok maybe i got confused

    education needs massive changes and i don't feel these are it
    What changes do you think are necessary then? I am not meaning to sound aggressive, but I think you need to expand further on this point rather than just make a sweeping, unjustified statement.


    (Original post by xXedixXx)
    In one sense it looks like the Bill is trying to make education more of a choice for students and more liberal but then at the same time it forces them to do other things... authoritarian.

    Very confused as to what the message is from UKIP
    I think you perhaps should see in more as liberal for the students, but trying to forge good, strong relations between government and schools which will help them to improve certain aspects of their school.


    (Original post by Smack)
    Section 1 is fair enough, although I don't think that classical Greek is a modern foreign language, and it could be interpreted to mean that such a language must be taught by schools.
    I see your point on this, just a point outside of this debate though - a lot of classical Greek is similar to modern Greek and a lot of modern Greek speakers (or koine Greek speakers) can read classical Greek.

    Section 2 I like most of, but if the detention is after school then I think that the parents should always be informed, as it can mess up transport arrangements etc.
    Agreed and this point will be tackled in a second reading.

    I like section 3, but what is "games"?
    I am assuming that it means outdoor P.E., but you would have to ask AfcWimbledon2 about that one to be completely sure.

    I know nothing about section 4 since we don't have league tables here, nor do I know anything about section 5 because we don't use that system.
    Are you talking about on TSR? If so, then would you be able to re-direct me to which Bill has stopped them please? If not, then I am slightly confused about what you mean.


    (Original post by paddy__power)
    Section 5 strikes me as simply superfluous, it doesn't appear to have any point to it.
    I think that is something you will have to address to AfcWimbledon2. I am tempted to agree with you on this point somewhat.

    Section 4 I don't like particularly as I'm not overly convinced of the proposed methodology - why once a year? Why 100 marks? The funding aspect also seems like it should have been treated with more care and presented with considerably more detail so as not to seem, as it does now IMO, as though it was an afterthought that was welded on.
    100 marks perhaps due to percentages? The funding aspect, I have already stated, I disagree with. I think the yearly inspection ensures that the standard of education is consistently maintained at a high standard. I think that an inspection every 5 years is not sufficient enough to ensure than high educational standards are maintained.


    (Original post by RK)
    I'm sure most of this was very similar when it was before the house previously I don' t see anything much different from then and enough to remove all the concerns I raised on the section on this bill the last time we debated these sections.
    Any particular concerns you wish to raise with these parts of the Bill that you strongly feel weren't addressed. I hope that some of the concerns mentioned here are some that you hold and that my answers quell some of these concerns.




    (Original post by big-bang-theory)
    Let's go:
    Classics is a broad name for virtually all studies in Greece and Rome some entailing and some not entailing languages. I'm assuming you mean that it entails Language based courses?
    Your point is correct and we shall strengthen the description.

    I'm hesitant about how easily this could be abused to raise exam results. I realise it's a somewhat poor view of the characters of headmasters but still the issue has to be raised, if there's no disincentive to expel pupils then how can we be sure people are being expelled entirely fairly. Perhaps if some clear and binding guidelines were laid down regarding the exclusions (and if people are in violation the victim is subject to compensation) I could support this, until then nay.
    The problem is that headteachers don't expel children who misbehave due to these fines. I think that removing the fines means that headteachers won't only keep those children who misbehave due to the fine. Also, bear in mind, that 4bi shows that schools still have to show they are ensuring high levels of behaviour so I can't see this being abused.

    As decided by whom? Will this be a criminal or internal matter for the school?
    This will be decided by the teacher in each situation. However, I agree that we need to define the circumstances a little more.

    I fail to see why an actual qualification in PE is necessary. Much less to a BTEC standard, why on earth would you make a Sixth form education a compulsory part of education? Surely if you were going to do this (which so long as they're being encouraged to be active, I fail to see why the qualification itself is necessary) it should at least be a PE GCSE or equivalent rather than BTEC.
    This point is explained earlier, but I believe that sixth form education should be compulsory if we can perhaps also offer A levels geared more towards life skills and this is something I will discuss with AfcWimbledon.

    Seems like an excessive pressure on the school to me. Ofsted just don't need to inspect a school every single year.
    Point covered earlier.



    (Original post by Margaret Thatcher)
    No to religious studies being compulsory.
    Care to expand further? I believe that the compulsory teaching of RS will give pupils the tools both for respecting religion and to come to their own conclusions about whether they want to be religious or not.



    (Original post by Peachz)
    I don't think this is right, I thought the purpose of getting students to learn languages was so they could use them in practise? Not everyone, only a small minority, will use Classical languages in their lifetime, so perhaps an actual modern language, french, spanish etc. would be more suitable.
    I think that classical languages do help in the study of other languages both by showing the evolution of words and developing the logic behind language. It can help so I don't agree with your point.


    Define reasonable force? The same amount of force the police can use? What? Be more specific here. I'm fine with the detention thing, except, I think 40 minutes is a little excessive, if I wasn't home 40 minutes after school had officially finished, my parents would be worrying.
    First point dealt with earlier. 40 minutes is not excessive. It is a fair punishment for a pupil's poor behaviour, but I do agree with your point about giving parents notice regardless of Key Stage.


    No to physical education, at least make it to a GCSE standard, or to no formal qualification and just have lessons where excise is undertaken. I wouldn't want a C in PE because I wasn't very good at sport but still academically clever on my CV.
    However, I don't perceive that as a major problem. I believe that companies would judge you on other factors besides a C in GCSE PE.


    What is 'games'? I agree with everything else, is the GCSE year still 2 years long? Will be there an opportunity to change your options? I certainly didn't know what I wanted to do or indeed what I was good at the age of 11 to then get a
    Games point answered earlier. I am not sure about GCSEs so you will need to ask AfcWimbledon2 along with the changing options question.



    (Original post by chiggy321)
    Idea-wise, I like the behaviour bit (s2) a lot. I detest making BTEC PE compulsory, as I do combining KS3 and KS4 to make one single key stage. There's a significant difference between the two and when this bill states that so many subjects must be taken onto KS3 and thus GCSE I think it takes away the potential to study other subjects in their place. If you're going to impose mandatory subjects then only do so at current KS3 (Y7-9) and don't make it cut into students options. I also disagree with the school funding mechanism. Whilst I acknowledge the necessity of funding for lower-performing schools I don't believe that the better schools should be penalised and I believe they deserve recognition and extra funding in some form by way of recognition of their achievments. I'd rather see a system of means tested funding according to schools and their individual circumstances rather than generally giving all poorly performing schools money. Sometimes a school doesn't under perform because of their facilities but for a number of other factors and therefore money will be wasted. On a smaller note offering Classics and Classical Greek is a total contradiction to Modern Foreign Languages and therefore I'd request that that be changed. Furthermore, the learning of archaic languages gives people very different skills to that of learning MFLs and therefore the purpose of MFLs is lost. It's not that universities like you because you can speak French, Spanish etc. they like you because of the learning that was required during the process.
    I think I've answered most of this earlier, if not, feel free to quote me back with specific questions

    Even if these amendments were made, however, I couldn't agree to this bill as it's too generalised. I don't doubt the effort of TSR UKIP in drafting this bill, however, the reforms proposed require much more expansion that isn't included. I would recommend that UKIP look at the areas most important to them and try and create a smaller, yet better written bill and try and implement their reforms that way. I for one would vote Aye to a bill that expands on what is outlined in s2.
    That is an idea we may look into after a second draft.




    (Original post by Afcwimbledon2)
    QFA
    There are some questions you might need to answer for me here.




    I await all your responses.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: December 30, 2010
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Will you be richer or poorer than your parents?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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