1) Reflections on the Olympics

Have you noticed that the majority of UK medal winners were educated at fee-paying schools? It shouldn’t come as a surprise, 58 per cent of British medallists at the 2004 Olympics in Athens had attended non-state schools.
Leo Mckinstry at the Daily Mail noted this fact and fell back on an old technique: when in doubt blame the victims, http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1046615/Is-coincidence-Olympic-champions-privately-educated.html however, even for the Daily Hate this is an extraordinary set of arguments.
Let’s take a look at this Olympics malarkey. First, it strikes me that most of the world’s population hasn’t a chance of competing. Half the world — nearly three billion people — live on less than two dollars a day. No doubt the Daily Mail would point at the average African dirt farmer and say that he made his choice when he had those children.
It also strikes me that you increase your chances of winning when you opt for the more technically advanced and expensive events, as this will exclude another great chunk of humanity from competing against you. For example, I believe a good show jumping horse is worth around £250,000, add to this all the other costs, such as feeding the beast and you must safely see off the vast majority of the world’s population by choosing this sport. I guess this explains why the UK competitors have a better chance of winning in sports that require expensive equipment and specialist training in a professional environment.
However, that said, why within the UK, with lottery support monies to facilitate the elite, are there not more ex-state school Olympians? According to Leo Mckinstry there are a number of strands to this. First, that state schools don’t encourage high performing students. This is prejudice and nonsense; I know it is nonsense because I know the detail of my niece Kate’s experience. Kate is ranked 2nd for her age group at trampolining in the UK (Scottish independence would see her move to 1st; come on the SNP, I say). She attends a bog standard, middling, state comprehensive school where she has been greatly encouraged and supported by all the teaching staff and is freely given time off for training and competitions. Her successes are praised and publicised at every opportunity among the whole school community. Also, I know that this is the case for her peers, whose schools are equally proud of their pupils’ successes. Schools also recognise that tomorrows elite sports men and women require more than their school can provide and are pleased to work in partnership with others. Ignoring Leo’s usual misogyny, then there was the sneering point about health and safety; this is once again plain prejudice and ignorance: health and safety are very important; these young athletes are pushing themselves to the limit of their abilities. Without careful and precise training, tailored to their individual development, then serious and permanent injury can easily occur. Although Kate attends a middling state comprehensive school, with the possible exception of Kate herself, no-one would call her disadvantaged (no, not even with her choice of uncle). But what of the disadvantaged students; as a social group they especially value sporting success, so why if modern state comprehensives are a supportive and encouraging environment aren’t these students taking advantage of the opportunities?
As with most things in UK social policy, I think it comes down to small marginal differences and small marginal choices over a sequence of events and time that adds up to a big difference of outcome. For example, lets take an area of UK success, rowing.
First you need the idea – I could do that; then the question is how. Obviously, at one end of the scale if you go to a school with a rowing lake then this is a simple matter. But even if you live in a middle class area near some water then your family will probably know of someone who knows someone who messes around in boats. That link will get you started. However, what if you live on an estate in an inner city, all types of sailing are an alien activity, there is no link. If you were to ask around then you would be told that it is something that rich people do and you would probably suffer ridicule for asking. For most people this is where it would end, before it even begins.
The only way they might discover if they have the potential to be a talented rower would be if someone, or some organisation, reaches into their neighbourhood and offers them access. This is stage one, give lots of children the opportunity to try, then some will buy. However, stage one, is the easy bit!
Aiming for sporting excellence is a hard thing to do and its pursuit has to be maintained over many years: this requires a lot of support. My sister reckons to spend around £200 a month on club fees alone. There are transport costs, going to training 6 times a week, also competitions, which are nationwide and to maintain a national ranking must be attended. Its not just money; my brother in law and his whole family get to spend many a weekend in places such as Hull, locations they might otherwise not have chosen as a holiday destination.
Some families may not be able to provide this level of emotional support or the practical support or the financial support. Yet without it, without this backing, in all of its dimensions then the task becomes even harder to achieve; we all have our breaking points. For our potential rower, they may well have to travel alone out of their neighbourhood and mix with people who are different to them. Each of these are only marginal differences but in the long run they add up and at every stage in the process of development the disadvantaged fall away and this is long before the lottery money for potential medal winners kicks in. This is where schemes for mentoring may provide some of the support that is needed.
In short, the problem is not ideological; it is primarily practical, the problem is the variation in the level and type of support available to different groups of people as they try to do something very hard. Specifically, it is exactly what the author of this article said it was not “the urban working class are said to be excluded because they do not have the same access to facilities, coaching, and support”. That is exactly it: something that would be described to him in exquisite detail if he cared to visit any state comprehensive school and speak to the teachers, pupils and parents.
However contrast the ghastly Leo Mckinstry’s reflections on the Olympics with that of the apparently optimistic and enlightened Mayor of London, who in his enthusiasm, seemed to nearly disassociate himself from his party leader and all that chatter of a broken society http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/08/19/do1901.xml
In this article Boris still recognises that 58% of competitors went to private schools but argues for widening participation. We must talk to this man about how widening participation can be made real, especially with his role in the London Olympics and while there is a widespread interest in what are often seen as elite or upper class sports.

2) University widening participation: the usual story, one step back, one step forward

UCAS have decided that parents are to be overtly part of the university application process http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/aug/20/choosingadegree.clearing it strikes me this is a bad idea and will further disadvantage the disadvantaged. Disadvantaged students cannot draw on parental knowledge to significantly help them, as that knowledge isn’t there. Also, it won’t do any favours to those middle class kids who are being cajoled into doing what their parents want them to do. However, pushy parents are just the start in this process. I thought a report in the Times Higher of the 14th of August was interesting; it described how in the USA there has been a growth in the use of admissions consultants, with some 6% of applicants now using such services. Apparently, these consultants charge from around $100 to review a university application to $29,000 for fully supporting students and their parents when applying to top universities. Should the Brightside Trust get ahead of the game and offer this to disadvantaged students in the UK?
On the other hand, the happy widening participation news of the week is that Oxford University is to explicitly introduce social factors into its selection criteria, including postcode analysis of home address http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/aug/17/oxbridgeandelitism.highereducation?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

3) Things only got better

The vast majority of this year’s GCSE examination students have spent their entire schooling in an education system run by a Labour government. Using GCSE results as a guide, did things only get better? Overall, the GCSE results show a significant improvement in pupil performance during the last 11 years http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7574073.stm So, no one heading for The Hague, just yet, however, not all social groups seem to be benefiting to the same extent. There is a widening gap between pupils in the wealthiest 10% of neighbourhoods and the poorest 10%. In 2006, the proportion in the wealthiest districts achieving five good GSCEs was 28% higher than the poorest, while last year this had increased to 43%. It’s not just at GCSE level: it seems to be the same section of the population who are benefiting least from the education system at any point. For once I agree with the Baron Adonis, that the 20% of primary school pupils who transfer to secondary schools without basic literacy skills should be the most important of priorities http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/aug/21/primaryschools.earlyyearseducation But why then was the big government education initiative of the summer a macho directive that they will close or turn into academies any school that fails to get 30% of its pupils five good GCSEs including English and maths http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7444822.stm . Everyone in the education system knows what the effect of this decree will be: rather than actively invest time in the most needy of students, staff will sideline them and concentrate their efforts on those pupils who are functioning just below the 5 GCSEs target, in order to get them just above that target and thereby carry the school and themselves over the 30% safety line. At the same time, while not admitting it, the school management will also find ways to get those who are least likely to achieve the required level off the audit and out of the way. Marginalised, these barely literate youths will be on an educational conveyor belt to becoming the unwanted unemployables of the next generation. Unintended consequences no doubt, but life damaging for those concerned and a blot on the government’s record.

4) The good news article

There has been an increase in the numbers of students going onto university compared to this time last year http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/aug/21/clearing.highereducation including an increase in the numbers of students from a disadvantaged background.

5) Summer in the city

Tower Hamlets Summer University, a description of what looks like a good project http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/aug/13/youngpeople.furthereducation

6) Education otherwise

Ever wondered about home education as an alternative to school? Well you should have. This is a generally friendly discussion of the subject and whether not going to school makes for disadvantage. http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/aug/19/schools.education

1) Standby for incoming

It is widely rumoured that the A level pass rate will exceed 97% this Thursday, which will represent the highest pass rate ever. So, it’s good to see some people getting their revenge in first, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/education/article4492122.ece I have tried to locate this research paper on the Institute of Directors (IOD) website but there is no trace, maybe it will appear in this coming week. I hope so, because if, as I suspect, this analysis is based on a small self-selecting sample of their members, then it will publicly reveal an appalling ignorance of basic numeracy while complaining about the low standards of numeracy among young people. If this study is indeed based on a small self selecting sample, then the numbers being thrown around have no generalised validity whatsoever, they merely describe numerically the cumulative feelings and prejudices of those members who could be arsed to reply to the survey and cannot in any way be taken to represent the views of the total membership. Indeed, by filling in the form, or agreeing to answer questions, these people have probably already identified themselves as being different; therefore a statistical analysis on the basis of these results is entirely spurious. I know this kind of misunderstanding and misuse of statistics is commonplace, however, if it proves to be true here, then we don’t so much have an objective assessment of young people today but a public demonstration of hubris by the IOD. And while I’m at it, since when have most members of the IOD been experts in anything but the narrow details of their chosen business. Finally, if anyone is in any doubt about the IOD standards you should know that they twice invited me to become a member.

2) A batch of interesting case studies

A case study of mentoring a troubled, chaotic teenager http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/aug/06/youngpeople.society

A case study of an AIMHIGHER visit to an Oxford college http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/aug/05/accesstouniversity.highereducation

A case study of cared for child who become a lawyer http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul/16/children.childprotection as Tracy said it’s a mixed message good and bad….

3) One step forward, one step back

The government is expanding the money available for summer schools and mentoring through the City challenge program http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/jul/28/bright.children meanwhile more universities are introducing their own recruitment tests http://education.guardian.co.uk/higher/news/story/0,,2291290,00.html which will adversely affect disadvantaged students. Win some, loose some.

4) SATs results

The latest SATs results show some worrying trends, http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/aug/06/sats.primaryschools I think the level 5 results are both interesting and worrying when broken down by gender with boys achieving significantly worse than girls http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000804/index.shtml I’d be interested to see the boys results when broken down by class and ethnicity, I fear there are very few white working class boys achieving level 5. These findings are matched by the numbers of children who move onto secondary school without a full toolkit of basic skills, functioning below level 4 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1041631/Entire-generation-pupils-failed-reading-writing-maths.html

5) Crime down, fear of crime up, why, why, why?

When asked about the level of crime, people conflate a number of things, but primarily they think about how safe they feel, not the statistical chance of their car being stolen http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/may/19/fear.of.crime . This really isn’t hard to understand, but it seems to permanently evade ministers, senior police officers and many journalists who are apparently determined to remain puzzled by the problem; like those depositors of plastic wrapped flower tributes at sites of national grieving who’s banal notes blubber ‘why, why, why’ http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/daniel_finkelstein/article4380637.ece
However, for those who still crave for a balance between perception of crime and crime statistics, I think I can see some good news coming your way. There are signs that recent rises in food and utility bills are already setting off a splurge of shop lifting. Have you noticed that Tesco are not only security tagging expensive cuts of meat; they have started tagging the chickens, well they have in Finsbury Park. When people start stealing battery farmed chickens you know that the financial pressure is on. As gas, electricity and food prices are now consuming the sum total of many low income families’ financial resources there will be nothing left for Christmas. My guess is that as the festive celebration looms, rises in retail theft will balloon; not just on inner city estates, it’s going to be a ‘knock off Christmas’. Consequently, statisticians, police officers and politicians will enter the New Year with the satisfaction that the numerical balance between the fear of crime and the actuality of crime statistics has begun to be restored.

6) Happy land

Michael Gove, the Conservative Party spokesperson for education has delivered an interesting and well researched speech about educational disadvantage, it’s worth reading. Is this the future policy direction for the UK? http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2008/aug/08/schools.conservatives

7) It's research, it must be true

The BBC reported a new LSE study that showed 1 in 5 of the UKs 16/17 year olds are not in education employment or training (NEET), which is double the official figure. The research also featured on the BBC television news as a mid range item. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7515042.stm When I saw this, I thought the finding was both interesting and what I had feared. I also mused how relatively obscure pieces of local research can be rapidly circulated by international news agencies, for example, I found it repeated the following day on a news site aimed at the Indian community in Thailand http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/uncategorized/teen-troubles-target-britain_10073708.html Just one detail of a problem with the story: there is no such research report. I discovered this when I went to the LSE website and tried to view the details of the research, (I’ve been around long enough to know that you are unwise to take press releases on trust, always ask to see the data and methodology); when I couldn’t find any trace or reference to this research on the LSE website I started making inquiries. Long story short: it turns out that at a public meeting one of the LSE’s researchers had suggested that it may be the case that there are more young people not in employment, education or training than government figures suggest and this got a little twist by a listening journalist into ‘a study at the LSE has shown’ and there you go, the hare is running. Shame that not one of the people who ran the story bothered to check, or am I just being old fashioned, never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

8) Happiness needs to be constructed

I have decided that from now on that I will include a piece of genuinely good news with every blog update. Well, that’s my intension; furthermore it will be an item of education policy or at least of some sort of positive social practice. Whatever the struggle, I promise there will be no resort to Youtube video links of sneezing pandas.
Good news item of the week
Since 2004, care leavers have gone from 1 per cent of the student population to 6 per cent and that’s before the Brightside Trust’s projects have fully kicked in. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/higher/in-the-loop-why-a-rising-number-of-careleavers-are-going-to-university-880934.html On a more abstract level, I think this is also a classic example of a successful social policy intervention. It shows how life changing contributions to people’s lives, can be achieved, even where initial prospects don’t look good.

9) Not poor enough

Nearly half a million British children growing up in poverty are not entitled to a free school meal. The parents of 410,000 youngsters do not qualify because they are not receiving benefits but they are on such low incomes they are officially classed as living in poverty. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/2008/07/29/exclusive-hard-up-kids-denied-free-school-meals-115875-20675397/

1) A bit of good news (after a gloomy start)

A consistent strand to British culture is the dislike of children and the fear of adolescents. I think it is part of a deep pessimism of the soul that Polly Toynbee discussed on her recent visit to Daily Mail island http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/aug/20/mydailyhell While much of the reporting in the Daily Mail is simply laughable, Polly reminds us that it has a chilling appeal to it ‘"The ideal Daily Mail story," a former Mail journalist told me, "should leave you hating someone or something"’ These journalists seem to speak directly to the barely controlled unconscious of middle England, which longs to find the cause of its frustration and failure. Unfortunately, they will never look in the mirror – the cause of their misery must be someone else and once found they must be severely punished. One of the easiest of targets, and always one of the first, is ‘young people today’. However, despite their volcanic unconscious and limited intellectual toolbox, there is more to the consciousness of middle England than this; there is also a benign conscious, which includes a receptiveness to humour, and through it, occasional self-parody. In the end, with their obvious frustration, they are more Rigsby than ripper and like Rigsby will make common cause with the youngsters when it is clearly a matter of natural justice. Which is why I think this initiative is timely http://www.talentedyoungpeople.com/youthmanifesto “The Youth Manifesto has been set up by the Talented Young People organisation to address the current situation regarding young people in this country and as a way to combat the current problems.” Yes, lets have a few celebrations of success but lets not be too worthy guys, lets go for the humour and the fun, and as a miserable old git may I advise that when dealing with your detractors always go for the low blow, middle England would expect nothing less.

2) Where are they now?

“One in 10 state school pupils will drop out of education before university despite having once been among the brightest in their class...” More Sutton Trust research http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/tenth-of-brightest-pupils-opt-out-of-higher-education-846241.html the problem seems to be keeping disadvantaged students actively engaged in the education process, especially up to and beyond GCSEs. This is going to become even more problematic when the education leaving age is raised to 18. Possibly shedding some light on this problem, an article from the Guardian, which is effectively a detailed case study of a disadvantaged student who made it,
http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools/story/0,,2290865,00.html the analysis seems tough on parents but this is a recurring theme.

3) Absence makes the heart ….

As you may have noticed, the same old social issues and problems come round every few years; they get chewed over and when they no longer seem to be worth the jaw ache are spat out and left on the carpet in favour of something else. Then one day, for some reason, they are taken up again and once more become the touchstone issue of the day, a harbinger, a proof that we are all going to hell. So, I thought I’d get ahead of the pack and lock my nashers onto the temporarily deserted bone of school truancy. Even in terms of the official figures there are a lot of pupils not going to school http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7385275.stm however; I don’t think that these students should be seen as a discreet subset of the school population who have cut themselves off from their peers, rather they should be seen as a subset of a larger group: the disengaged. By the age of 15, many of these little lovelies can be found floating around school, some having registered, some not. Did you know that one of the recurring problems with students who have been excluded from school is keeping them away from the premises? When we discuss students who leave school without 5 GCSEs http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7348088.stm , I think we should be thinking of a group of children who have been in the process of gradually disengaging since they were 12 or 13. They slowly become unglued from the school routine and their reaction can then take the form of absence, disruption or even sometimes bursts of enthusiasm. People have tried many ways to re-engage these types of pupils. At the moment, peer mentoring seems quite fashionable, however this wouldn’t be my first choice, I think that having a significant sympathetic adult is what is needed. Anyone fancy starting an e-mentoring/mentoring scheme for occasional truanting/mildly disengaged 13 year olds? Your reward: when truancy next becomes the subject of national alarm you will be running the best stall on the market.

4) Firm but fair

“She gives away lots of - other people's - money to charities, but they have to meet tough business targets and prove they can rise to the challenge.” http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul/09/voluntarysector proving efficiency and effectiveness when seeking monies is only going to get harder in the new philanthropic capitalism.

5) Knifes are us

There has been much panic and alarm about teenage knife carrying and murders but I wonder if this is a single or even a new phenomena. I was surprised to find the Sun newspaper contributing something worthwhile to the debate
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/justice/article1418367.ece I think it important to note that it was the cutting, the slashing, that was the purpose for these gangsters, not murder. The cultural and social context of knife use is important and not just in London, for decades Glasgow has had a much higher level of knife crime than the rest of the UK but as I understand it, once again the aim is to slash, hurt, humiliate but not kill. Silly boys carrying knives does not automatically lead to murder.

Are we even dealing with a single phenomenon? Details of these murders are hard to find but in at least one instance, murder followed a perceived slight in a bar where the attacker then went home, armed themselves with a knife and returned to kill the victim. This would seem very different to the theme of government and popular commentary where it is assumed that these fatal stabbings are the result of ‘situations get out of hand’ where young men carrying knifes find themselves using the knives, spontaneously and unplanned, resulting in an unintended death. The gangster slasher, the revenge stabbing, the panic wounding are all very different and I worry that they are being grouped together as a simple single phenomenon. If there are these differences then solutions might have to be both specific and different, depending on the detail of what is really happening.