An interesting part of the Queen’s pre-speech speech(?) was a proposed bill to keep youngsters in education or training up until the age of 18 by making further education compulsory.
It’s an interesting one in as much as College has become just about compulsory for anybody who does half well at their GCSE’s, the entry criteria is pretty low, I mean I got in and thats proof enough really.
This is a government initiative to tackle the growing demographic of ‘Neets’, yes it is yet another annoying little acronym that represents the ‘Not in Education, employment or training’ bunch which so quaintly seem to hang around shops and population centres.
Over the past ten years this group has grown from 20% to 25% of 16-17 year olds and anyone has to admit that having one fourth of this age group doing absoloutely bugger all is a trifle worrying however I’m not sure the answer lies in simply upping the school leaving age.
I imagine that this argument has been repeated in the past, back in 1899 the government must have been concerned at the amount of 11 year olds who hung around on the streets learning about how to pick pockets by reading Dickens (spot the discrepency there if you can) Equally in 1944 the coalition government must have been concerned about all the 13 year olds running around the bombsites and collecting shrapnel, ‘what should we do?’ they asked and the answer was simple, ‘keep the little bastards in school until they are 14′
So it goes, the school leaving age has been 16 since 1964 but only in effect since 1972 and now yet again the nation wonders why on earth all these 16 and 17 year olds aren’t in college getting an education, or in a workshop learning a trade or at the very least working in a proper job.
Yes it’s a doozie of a question and I’d love to be able to provide an answer, I don’t know but I’m pretty sure that there is something unattractive in being forced into school and the fact that not everyone fits into the little round hole like the little round peg they are meant to be means that by the time it comes to making the choice between academia, vocation or employment a lot of people have really had enough and surprise, surprise they do diddly squat.
I think this has more to do with a breakup in what it means to be a society, what it means to function as a group of people, there is much too much influence on getting something for nothing and not enough on taking pride in your work, pride in what you can give to the world, pride in what you can achieve.
Its a sad fact but in educational establishments its actually a crime to be clever, in fact being called clever is a bit of an insult? it’s confused me greatly so maybe I’m not that clever but being termed a boffin or geek, nerd or braniac is actually meant as a derogotory term and consequentally the emphasis seems to rest on a downward shift plus people either do something in order to get vast amounts of money or they do shit all and hope that they will just accidentally come across a magic lamp which grants them cash based wishes whilst hating all those people who seem to be smart enough to go and earn it.
I’m in favour of education, I think it helps people to understand the world more and results in more rounded individuals who suffer less of a daily mail disorder but age restrictions on when you can leave school don’t seem to work, what will happen is that in 2017 when the first 18 year olds leave college and school the same percentage of disaffected people will drop out and become part of the Neet class, it just defers the problem, its not as though a 16 year old cannot get a job with the skills that they ought to possess when they leave secondary school.
This is difficult situation because whilst something clearly needs to be done I’m not sure if more of the same is going to work, citizens in this country at present receive 12 years of compulsory education and this is set to rise to 14 years. You have to wonder if whether in a couple of decades when there are 19 year olds and 20 years olds dossing about on the dole the government will raise the leaving age to 21, make university compulsory and have done with it.
But hang on…that might not be such a bad idea.
I’d say a massive rehaul of basic state education was necessary with much, much, much more emphasis on social values, of how to work together to acheive together. Going on and getting a pile of cash that Scrooge Mcduck could swim in doesn’t create a coherent society of go getters, it creates a society of divided, money driven zealots and because like I said not everyone fits the ideal it creates a disenfranchised and resentful underclass.
So what? thats the argument from those people who say they’ve made their bed and they can bloody well sleep their hangover off in it like the dole funded alcoholic morons they are; its not my problem.
Yet it is your problem and its my problem too, why, not because we’re liberal do gooders but because our streets, towns and communities have become plauged with this underclass and nowhere we go seems to be free of it it blights our streets and our country and it is creating a drain which will eventually pull us under, so sorry, but it is your problem unless you want to go somewhere else in the world, great idea but rest assured it won’t go away and if anything it will probably spread eventually it’ll find you or your children or their children and then the problem never addressed in the past just comes back at you twice as bad.
So here it is, as I’ve stated education needs to be reformed and actually I’m all in favour of plenty of it, sure we’re not all going to be microbiologists and nuclear physicians but there is no harm in having a good grasp of knowledge, langauge and maths and if there is a serious emphasis on co-operation as opposed to ruthless competition then we can get generations emerging from education who work together, who utilise their skills and knowledge to better our society and to make this species work, not sit in the dog and duck drinking away the dole cheque and not hide away in a gated community with the gadgets and goods that a good salary can buy.
Age limits won’t help us its the direction in which we aim the young and the way we treat them whilst they are still impressionable which truly affects the outcome.
I love age limits, except when it’s 14-18 night and I can’t get in
November 6, 2007 by scottcarless
Posted in Education, Government, Labour, Political, Social, Society, UK politics | Tagged Compulsory Education, Queens Speech, Utopia | 5 Comments
5 Responses
Leave a Reply
-
Archives
- April 2009 (3)
- March 2009 (2)
- January 2009 (2)
- December 2008 (2)
- November 2008 (6)
- September 2008 (6)
- August 2008 (8)
- July 2008 (9)
- June 2008 (8)
- May 2008 (1)
- April 2008 (8)
- March 2008 (10)
- February 2008 (17)
- January 2008 (15)
- December 2007 (12)
- November 2007 (22)
- October 2007 (28)
- September 2007 (10)
- August 2007 (16)
- July 2007 (32)
- June 2007 (40)
- May 2007 (34)
- April 2007 (39)
- March 2007 (30)
- February 2007 (27)
- December 2006 (1)
-
Categories
- A few places to go (1)
- admin (2)
- Advertising (2)
- Alcohol (1)
- Alternative Treatment (1)
- Anarchism (7)
- Animal Rights (1)
- Anti-War (9)
- Apathy (3)
- Art (4)
- Atrocity (1)
- Battlestar Galactica (1)
- Belief (3)
- Bipolar (1)
- Bipolar Disorder (3)
- Blair (1)
- British Rail (1)
- Canada (1)
- Capital Punishment (3)
- Capitalism (4)
- Capitilism (7)
- Censorship (1)
- China (5)
- Civil Liberties (13)
- Class Conflict (1)
- Climate Change (1)
- College (4)
- Comedy (6)
- Conservatives (2)
- Corporeal Punishment (2)
- Corrections (2)
- Crime and Punishment (6)
- Culture (5)
- CWU (10)
- Dear Disappointment (12)
- Death (2)
- democracy (23)
- Discussion (3)
- Disillusion (8)
- Disillusionment (2)
- Economy (11)
- Education (5)
- Election 2008 (3)
- Employment (1)
- Enviroment (1)
- Events (8)
- Existentialism (1)
- Fiction (9)
- Fox Hunting (1)
- Free Market (9)
- Freedom (5)
- Freedom of Information (1)
- Freedom of Speech (2)
- Frustration (7)
- Government (16)
- Greece (1)
- Gun Control (3)
- History (3)
- Human Rights (7)
- Idiocy (12)
- Industry (6)
- Insomnia (1)
- IRA (1)
- Iran (8)
- Iraq (7)
- Israel (2)
- Justice (4)
- Labour (15)
- Lebanon (1)
- Liberal Democrats (2)
- Libertarianism (4)
- Life (15)
- Literature (1)
- Loserscapes (1)
- Major (1)
- Marxism (6)
- Materialism (3)
- Meaningless Rambling (58)
- Media (2)
- Middle East (2)
- Minarchism (1)
- Minimum Wage (2)
- Misery (2)
- Missile Defence (2)
- mistake (2)
- Music (21)
- My Head (11)
- My Heart (3)
- New World Order (2)
- NHS (1)
- Non-Violence (5)
- Northern Ireland (1)
- Nuclear Disarmament (2)
- Nuclear Weapons (7)
- NUS (1)
- Patriotism (3)
- Peforming Arts (3)
- Personal (14)
- Philosophy (7)
- PNAC (2)
- Police (3)
- Political (99)
- Pop Culture (2)
- Postal Strike (8)
- Postcomm (2)
- Privatisation (5)
- Property (1)
- Property Market (2)
- Proportional Representation (1)
- Public Services (9)
- rant (34)
- Rare coming of the senses (3)
- Recession (1)
- Religion (6)
- Renationalisation (1)
- Republicanism (1)
- Robert Fisk (1)
- Royal Mail (18)
- Sabbatical (3)
- Science (4)
- Scripting (1)
- Self Hatred (1)
- Service Industry (1)
- Social (41)
- Socialism (12)
- Society (28)
- Speculation (10)
- Terrorism (6)
- Thatcher (1)
- The School (9)
- Theatre (2)
- Timekilling (1)
- Trent and Eric (1)
- UK politics (40)
- Uncategorized (16)
- Unionism (14)
- US Politics (11)
- Utopia (3)
- Utter Lunacy (6)
- Violence (20)
- War (16)
- World (14)
-
Pages
http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/s/1022757_cool_cash_card_confusion
Funnily enough, on the same day I read this post, I read that too. Yes, it’s amusing in an “Oh god, the MORONS!” sense, but on a more serious note it’s a fair representation of the problem the education system currently has. It can put out people who have no concept of a negative number. In fact, it does. You know as well as I do that the school system is full of a bunch of people that the teachers are just keen to get rid of at the far end, because after the first eight years or so it becomes pretty clear they’re not going to be taught anything.
Funnily enough, on education reform I don’t agree. I know, I’m sure you’re shocked. Well, on reform I agree, on the nature of it I don’t.
You see, you attribute the existence of a disenfranchised (who took away their vote, BTW), resentful underclass on the fact that a load of people who’ve won by the rules of the game exist. I don’t. I blame it on the fact that quite simply our education system as it stands is putting out a load of people who are not remotely equipped for this world as it currently stands. I remember from school a lot of stuff about the value of “sharing” and how god-damned wonderful we all were, and how everyone had to get along. Did it work? Not noticeably. Incidentally, if it is to mutual advantage, many people will co-operate of their own accord, without any instruction.
Of course, I have a biased perspective, by the rules of the academic game as it stands I’ve placed quite well. But you think that we need to teach people co-operation, I think we actually need to teach them the basic tools of survival.
Things like maths. Not necessarily the good stuff, like algebra, geometry, trigonometry, complex numbers, calculus etc, though all that is important and should be taught if possible. I mean the basics, addition, subtraction, division, multiplication, percentages, fractions, decimals. Simple stuff, but I’ve seen a couple of surveys indicating far too many people can’t do that. But if you can’t do any of that you’re not remotely equipped for dealing with money, even on a short term basis.
English. If you can’t read and write you’re practically an employment no-hoper, and fucking hell some of the writing I see on the internet from people our age makes me cringe.
With those two basic skills, amazingly enough somebody might actually be half-way useful in the world, but the education system is turning out people who can’t do it. But why stop there, I’ll add in a couple of other useful things.
The scientific method. Knowledge of ’science’ (Inverted commas because school science lessons are crap) is good, yes, and it’s the best way of illustrating how it should be done, but the method is all important. A good grounding in the “how” of science is like having a bullshit detector installed.
History, because as the man said, if you don’t understand history you might as well live with your head in a sack.
That’s pretty much the foundations of all education there.
From then on, you can work out what people are good at, and let them pick their direction accordingly. The thing is, all that I detailed can pretty much be taught by the age of ten (rough guess). If someone doesn’t learn it then they just go through the rest of school learning nothing. And then you get a NEET at the end of it. The problem isn’t lack of time in education, it’s lack of actually making use of it.
So people have to learn those basics that allow them to function in (A): Education, & (B): The wonderful world of work. I’d actually be in favour of keeping people back a year if they hadn’t made the grade up to the age of about ten, and it was believed that given time/application they could. Failure can be a powerful motivator, as long as you get another chance.
One thing I am fairly sure of, compulsory education to the age of 18 is not necessary.
Thanks Jon, and thanks for the link…I think, I’m not sure if thats amusing or deeply, deeply upsetting.
Probably both.
Anyway I don’t think there is really a point at which we disagree here, most certainly increasing the compulsory education age won’t help matters if the basic education people receive sucks.
Without a doubt Maths and English, both written and spoken, are vital subjects which make anyone’s life a whole lot easier and again you point out the basics as opposed to the more complex, I’d agree its no good having somebody who can calculate the area of a triangle if they can’t add up, or multiply.
Maybe I didn’t really make myself very clear in the post but educational reform was a bit of a catch all phrase for putting forth a much more productive agenda in schools alongside a co-operative framework.
As you’ve outlined Maths, English, Science and Scientific Method, History I’d also add to that Geography because a good Geography course can broaden the horizons no end.
I think it should be an absolute minimum that children should be able to leave school with a good, rounded grasp of these subjects, they help no end.
As for keeping people down a year for failing to make the grade, well we both know the Ace Rimmer/Rimmer story and whilst it might not be a factual biography it still makes a lot of sense, failure can be its own inspiration.
So for once I don’t think there is much argument here, we’re agreed on several points.
1.Raising the school leaving age won’t help
2.Education as it stands does not equip people adequetly for the world
3.Basic Subjects need to be prioritised and improved
4.People who can’t figure out a cash scratchcard because of negative numbers really need to go back to school.
(By the way the disenfranchised underclass had their votes taken away because they are so thick they can’t comprehend the ballot paper, much less find the polling station.)
Good point on the geography, plus on lack of comprehension of ballot paper. My word, I think we … agree.
However, while we’re on the subject of education, I’ll go off on a tangent….
At the other end of the scale, a while back I read an excellent piece by Boris Johnson on grade inflation, entitled: “As I fell off the side of the mountain, I finally understood the problem of grade inflation.” He was relating a tale of how certain ski resorts were “dumbing down” the black runs, supposedly the hardest and most dangerous routes. And this was fine while you were there, and you could go home and boast to your skiing friends that you’d been doing the black runs (you can tell he moves in slightly different circles to us, can’t you). But then you went to another resort, where the black runs were still hard, and you fell off the side of the mountain, and experienced much pain to body and ego.
You can make the qualification easier, and everyone’s happy because they’ve all got A’s, and 2.1s, but then the outside world comes along and demands that people actually know their subjects, and they don’t know enough.
Lower education is, as we’ve said, the process of getting as many people as possible up to the minimum standards necessary to be functional members of society. Higher up the scale you need to start identifying the best in every field and taking them as far as possible, because society will need them, and need them to be good. Of course, everyone else should be developed to their full potential too, but if someone has more then the education system should make sure they can exploit it.
Good old Boris a perfect example of what grade inflation can do and it stands up to close examination that if its easy to get an A+ distinction that does not mean the student will understand their subject.
Again I’m going to agree that a basic education should concentrate on giving all students a good set of skills which will see them do better in whatever they choose to do, further education is where people can really start finding their subject and higher education is where they specialise in their chosen subject.
I think the Labour government with its fanatical desire to get everybody through university regardless of ability is well intentioned enough but as we’ve just discussed its totally meaningless if you have people emerging from 17 years of education and still not be able to write, count or know what the capital of Indonesia is.
I think importantly what you’ve written here
“Of course, everyone else should be developed to their full potential ”
Highlights that potential differs from person to person and not everybody is going to be a bona fida genius, everyone can do well I’m sure of it but its no good forcing somebody into FE or HE if they just aren’t going to benefit from it.
Its interesting you should mention grade inflation because recently we were told that the exam questions for Politics would be restructured the year after next because people were not getting high enough grades, basically this will result in questions that instead of asking for the usual essay style 30 mark question which requires the balancing of two sides of a subject ie whats good about paticipatory democracy and what is bad about it, the question would merely ask for a bullet point format description of a biased side of the argument so the question would instead read ‘list the limitations of paticipatory democracy’
As far as I can see what this means is that you can still get 30 marks but for writing less, now I understand the argument that it could ask for either side and so you’d still revise the good and the bad but what you no longer have to do is bounce the ideas of one another and present a cogent argument.
So people might be getting a lot more A’s but somewhere along the line they are going to get caught out because they were not adequetly prepared by their A levels.
Anyway probably not much I can add other than wow…we agree!
very interesting, but I don’t agree with you
Idetrorce