1) Second chance

The government has announced that more than one and a half million young people in England are to become eligible for £7,000 each to spend on improving their qualifications. The offer is open to 18-to-25-year-olds who want to boost their education to GCSE or A-level standard http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7448213.stm

2) Snail’s pace

Another batch of statistics and a report finding that widening participation into higher education is only making slow progress http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article4069357.ece

3) Off-site units and PRUs

The government has produced a white paper, ‘Back on Track: A strategy for modernising alternative provision for young people’ http://www.dfes.gov.uk/publications/backontrack it is discussed here http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2281099,00.html I feel that it is very wrong to assess the effectiveness of pupil referral units (PRUs) by the number of GCSE passes and it suggests to me that the people driving this policy review have little idea about the reality of such places. For example, it has always been the stated aspiration of off-site units to re-integrate into mainstream: it simply doesn’t happen in practice. Why? Because frankly everyone, student and mainstream school, are thoroughly sick of each other by the time the move to the PRU is undertaken. Its not surprising that few students get 5 GCSEs A to C, the kind of young people I came across were more like the characters in this article describing a unit that combines boxing with study http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2285860,00.html From my experience it should be seen as a success if students leave the PRU functionally literate and numerate with a sufficient repertoire of ‘soft skills’ that they are employable. Forget 5 GCSEs, once employed they can get an equivalent trade qualification that will serve them better.

4) Conservative Assessment

In an article by Oliver Letwin, interestingly placed in The Guardian, he argues that ‘Our aim is to be as radical in social reform as Margaret Thatcher was in economic reform.’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/jun/03/conservatives.labour spelling out that project, the Conservative Party has produced a discussion paper, ‘welfare to work’ and their spokesperson Chris Grayling has outlined in a speech what he calls the ‘next steps in welfare’ http://www.cps.org.uk/latestlectures A common mistake and a common theme that I think I see in both Labour and Conservative analyses is that the out-of-employment population are seen as languishing away in their homes, sullen but ready to be swept up by programs of training or employment. From what I’ve seen over the years in Finsbury Park and from working as a social worker this is not the case. The lifestyle is not so much one of being gloomily stuck, it is more that of hanging out with friends, having a laugh, ducking and diving, being a gangster or at least a shoplifter or small time dealer. They are in a state of permanent adolescence, a careless nihilism. If you do pester them about their plans they will tell you that one day they will go to college and become a plumber or a beautician and earn more cash than you. Living in a haze of drink and drugs, time passes quickly enough and there is always one more money making scheme to be tried. Some exist for years thinking they just need a break and then they will become a celebrity.

In short, they have aspirations but little plausible idea as to how or when they will achieve them, however the offer of doing something hard, like picking vegetables at the minimum wage is not on their agenda. Shifting them will be a much more difficult project than government or opposition seem to realise.

5) Poverty statistics going the wrong way

This report makes for gloomy reading as it shows child poverty rates seem to be on the rise again, as reported in The Independent http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/failure-on-child-poverty-targets-is-moral-disgrace-842780.html and at The Guardian http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jun/07/socialexclusion.taxandspending and http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jun/11/socialexclusion.children1 but I thought the charts at the end of this last article were interesting, in particular, the way they show a fall in the percentage of national income going to the middle and fourth cohorts of the population as well as to the poorest. I think this explains, at least in part, why in the UK the middle classes are feeling unloved, insecure and not particularly sympathetic to the poor. Yes, there has been consistent economic growth over the past ten years from which they have benefited in real terms, but it would also seem that the middle classes are right in feeling that their share of these gains has been minimal and that it stands to be wiped out by the present burst of commodity price inflation. I feel that another thread in the current middle class consciousness is paralleled in another article which focuses on a single parent who is quoted as saying ‘it feels like I am not giving my children what I had’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jun/11/socialexclusion.children2?gusrc=rss&feed=society . I think many middle class married couples could be found expressing the same sentiment albeit using different criterion. In turn, I think this is linked to the mood of public pessimism, which seems to be impervious to genuine improvements, such as the falling levels of crime. On the upside, I guess the Labour Party could save money and catch the popular mood by recycling the 1997 ‘things can only get better’ campaign song for the next election campaign.

6) Tomorrow belongs to OFSTED

“Strong leadership, self-knowledge and a strong school identity are key to a successful journey out of special measures, according to Ofsted's new report, 'Sustaining Improvement: the journey from special measures'.” http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/070221

I had hoped that the 20^th century had disabused people of the general folly of wishing for strong leaders. However, when it comes to headteachers there is form here. We have seen many decades of reinforcing the powers of headteachers and in particular of asserting their autonomy from local education authorities. In my opinion, what this has shown is that headteachers are only a marginal factor in school improvement and only in some circumstances. Where is the OFSTED study of those schools who appointed ‘superheads’ at salaries of over 100k and then got worse. I think that OFSTED have confused a description of some superficial outcomes with causal factors. It is the fashion for headteachers to present as strong leaders when ‘their’ school is improving; while the finding that ‘self-knowledge and a strong school identity are key’ is banal even in consultant-speak. The only good thing about this report is that it shows that whatever the problems schools face, OFSTED is not the answer.

7) ULN, a new acronym for you

I don’t know if people had noticed, and I’m afraid I hadn’t, but the government has willed the means for assigning every person undertaking education and training in the UK state system a unique number, which they will then carry through their academic life. An Oracle database has been constructed to keep the data associated with each Unique Learner Number (ULN) and it goes online in September. I don’t know who will have access to the database but it potentially opens up the possibility of much easier and more detailed research into widening participation and educational choices. If it is available to employers it should also make educational career counterfeiting a more difficult project.