|
Media Coverage: LettersThe following are a selection of original versions of letters published in various newspapers and journals. Sections in italics were edited by the publication concerned and did not appear in print.
Education Guardian, 10 June 2008
"End obsessive testing", letter from General Secretary Philip Parkin
Early Years Educator, June 2008
Basic rights needed for accused teachers
Voice: the union for education professionals is backing calls by Scotland’s Children’s Commissioner for anonymity for teachers accused of abuse.
Children need protection, but those who work with them – both teachers and support staff – are entitled to protection as well. The lives and careers of innocent people have been ruined by false allegations of abuse, even after they have been acquitted of any offence. Being falsely accused and suspended can cause severe personal distress and long-term damage to the accused’s career.
Splashing someone’s name across the front page of a newspaper because they have been accused of something, but not charged, is trial by media. A small paragraph on an inside page weeks later reporting that the charges have been dropped is not acceptable – mud sticks.
An accusation of abuse should never be ignored, for fear that a child, pupil or student may be at risk, but neither should the accused be obliged to wear the mantle of guilt. It is time for teachers and support staff to be given some basic rights and safeguards. Among these should be the right to anonymity unless, and until, charged with a criminal offence. The necessary legislation to effect this should be introduced as soon as possible.
Philip Parkin, General Secretary, Voice
TES Scotland, 6 June 2008
Reduce class sizes now to achieve world-class education
Voice (Scotland) supports the aspirations of the Scottish Government to work towards smaller class sizes in Scottish schools.
We endorse the target of a maximum of 18 pupils in all P1 – P3 classes. We also urge that, once done, a further aim should be to extend this maximum year-on-year as these cohorts progress through primary school.
In secondaries, we would like to see maintained the commitment given by the previous administration to a maximum of 20 pupils in S1 and S2 English and Maths classes, and this extended to all years and all subjects (practical subjects already have this restriction).
Voice (Scotland) recognises that there will be implications for staffing resources and costs, and also for accommodation and school design. Over the last few years, there has been increased investment in training more teachers, a number of whom are finding difficulty in securing permanent jobs.
This resource, coupled with the trend towards falling pupil rolls, creates an opportunity, given the political will, to start reducing class sizes. This would assist in the raising of attainment by improving a teacher’s contact with individual pupils and would support the Scottish Government’s aim of achieving a world-class standard of education for Scotland’s children.
Maureen Laing, Senior Professional Officer (Scotland)
The Independent (Education), 03 April 2008
"Union unity": Letter from General Secretary Philip Parkin
Education Guardian, 26 February 2008 Kate Hilpern illustrates the near-impossibility of reconciling unlimited choice with fairness in the allocation of school places (Allocation, allocation, February 19). The various approaches suggested to secure greater fairness seem to be directed at securing better access to "good" schools for those living near "poor" schools. Emphasis on choice and diversity diverts attention from the real problem - what to do with pupils whose attitude and behaviour are so unacceptable they make it almost impossible for a school to become "good". Crack that problem and all schools will have a chance of improving.
John Till, Professional Association of Teachers
Daily Telegraph, 15 November 2007
(re "TV nannies exploit toddlers, says NSPCC", Daily Telegraph, 14 November 2007)
TES, 9 November 2007
A familiar story
Your cartoon of the Prime Minister’s speech has it spot on about "aspirational bombardment", "pledging" and "platitudes . . . for all" (Comment, 2 November). The speech made all the right noises and ticked all the right boxes. It was full of rhetoric that few could disagree with. Measures such as more funding for apprenticeships, raising standards and involving parents in their children’s learning are obviously welcome. However, the speech was high in aspiration but low in details. turning rhetoric into reality is going to be a different matter.
While most will share [Mr Brown’s] the Prime Minister’s aspirations, [he] Mr Brown needs to listen to the concerns of those [whop work] in education. I was disappointed that he didn’t signal a move away from the target-driven testing culture in our schools.
We don’t want to see schools closed down or taken over simply for not meeting a target on GCSE passes. [It’s the issues behind] The reasons for a school’s [low] performance issues – such as poverty and social deprivation in the surrounding area, or [pupils’] the special or behavioural needs of pupils – [that must be] need to be examined and addressed.
[But] Schools alone can’t meet the Prime Minister’s aspirations for our children. Families must participate fully so all children can fulfil their potential. I was surprised by [Mr Brown’s] his comment that there had so far been little effort to involve parents in the education of their children – this has been a high priority for most schools for decades!
I look forward to hearing [his] the PM’s proposals for encouraging [family involvement] families to become more involved in their children’s education without increasing the already high workload of teachers and other school staff.
While welcoming the high value placed on teachers by the Prime Minister, I was disappointed that he seemed to overlook the teaching assistants and other professionals in our schools.
Philip Parkin, General Secretary, Professional Association of Teachers (PAT)
Independent (Education), 13 September 2007
Are Teens Adults?
Christopher Price’s article ("Let’s offer chances to both ‘sheep’ and ‘goats’") and David Cameron’s proposed "National Citizen Service Programme" raise interesting issues about how society views those aged 16 to 18.
The Government is considering lowering the voting age to 16 yet proposes extending compulsory education or training to 18. The Conservatives propose a sort of junior National Service, albeit on a voluntary and non-military basis, at 16. The ages at which people can drive, get married or buy alcohol remain a range of dates between 16 and 18.
There is not a strong case for introducing compulsory participation in education or training to 18. The priority should be providing high quality provision for all when they are ready to learn. In the spirit of lifelong learning, the exciting opportunities in education and training should be the carrot and not the stick to encourage participation. We see far too many young people switched off from learning at an early age as a result of rigidly prescribed programmes of study and an overbearing testing regime. We should increase the number of young people in education or training, but without conscription.
We need to decide if 16 to 18 year olds are adults or children. At the moment we seem to want these child-adult hybrids to be participating, voting citizens who must stay on at school or be found useful things to do. We could soon have married, voting parents being disciplined for not attending school. Is it any wonder many young people don’t know how they should behave?
Philip Parkin, General Secretary, Professional Association of Teachers (PAT)
"Teachers need criticism not abuse": The Times, 7 August 2007
So, does Aron D’Souza think that teachers should "build on" "criticism" such as "you are dead" and a photograph of themselves without a head? ("Marks for teacher", Letters, The Times, 3 August 2007). How about insulting and unfounded accusations posted after a teacher had to discipline a pupil for misbehaviour? What about the teacher’s right of reply to defend their reputation? Would a decapitated image of Mr D’Souza accompanied by a death threat be acceptable "comment" on his teaching skills and his delivery? Does he feel that bullying, of teachers or of other students, is an acceptable form of "honest feedback"?
Responsible feedback from adult higher education students – or from school pupils in an appropriate forum – is one thing. Malicious persecution is another. "Democratic discourse" should be encouraged but it should not include threats or intimidation or be one-sided. Freedom of discussion is a two-way process that is tempered by responsibility. In a democratic society we are allowed to criticise but it is not considered acceptable to incite others to murder, or to intimidate with racist, sexist or homophobic remarks, or to ruin reputations with baseless accusations. Bullies are often cowards and those who hide behind anonymity in such circumstances do not have the courage to stand by their remarks.
Perhaps cyber bullying is not a problem in Australia and Mr D’Souza does not really appreciate its effects on its victims. PAT is not trying to censor free discussion but to protect teachers and pupils from fear and intimidation. It is Mr D’Souza who is setting a "terrible example" to young people by trying to justify such behaviour.
Philip Parkin, General Secretary, Professional Association of Teachers (PAT)
Teachers demand ban on sites used by cyber-bullies, The Times, 1 August 2007
Sunday Herald, 5 August 2007
Cyber-bullying
At our Conference in Harrogate earlier this week, this Association discussed and subsequently carried a motion demanding the closure of sites which appear to encourage this unfortunate use of modern technology to bully others by intimidation and embarrassment.
The original motion was submitted by our Scottish Executive Committee and was proposed on its behalf by Kirsti Paterson and seconded by Catriona Tate.
In her speech, as delivered, Kirsti admitted that we were unlikely to see such sites closed. However, since previous pressure on the site providers for them to better regulate their sites would appear to have achieved only a minimal, token response, we felt the time had come to apply further pressure by calling for the ultimate sanction. By coincidence, the ’Panorama’ programme the night before our debate did very much the same.
After the last meeting of the ’Discipline Stakeholders’ Group’ shortly before this year’s elections, the then Minister for Education, Hugh Henry, wrote to every one of Scotland’s 32 local authorities encouraging them to ensure that every school under their jurisdiction had an effective policy concerning the use of mobile phones on school premises and promising the full support of his department to all schools seeking to implement such a policy. This policy would sit alongside the policy that every school should already have about the responsible and appropriate use of the school’s computers.
However, effective controls within schools are only one part of the problem. It is the irresponsible use of the technology away from the school site which needs regulating and where we feel that the site providers should respond to their social responsibility obligations.
Cries that it would be too difficult to monitor materials being displayed and/or would be too costly to implement (this from a multi million dollar industry) just don’t wash.
Catriona drew attention to the 2005 research done by NCH which showed that 25% of pupils in our schools had experienced some form of cyber-bullying. We feel that we owe it as much to these youngsters in our care as we do to our members to highlight the problem and to seek to get a balance with regard to the use of technology.
Jim O’Neill,Professional Officer (Scotland), Professional Association of Teachers.
TES, 30 March 2007
Has the testing regime has its day?
Schools should be about educating children, not teaching them to pass tests in an inflexible, mechanical process and shoe-horning them into sitting tests at times that suit the Government’s agenda not the interests of children (TES, 23 March 2007). Tests have a place in education but our pupils are currently over-tested.
I welcome the proposals from Ken Boston for greater use of teacher assessment, as this would allow teachers to exercise their professional skills for the benefit of pupils’ education. We need to move education away from rigid teaching to tests in order to allow more accurate measures of individual pupils’ performance and development.
Random selection of pupils would be better than the current system but could still lead to teaching to tests in order to ensure that pupils were prepared in case they were selected. We would need assurance that data from random tests would not be used in compiling school league tables or drive intervention by Ofsted.
As personalised learning becomes the focus of attention, it is time for the Government and the QCA to have the courage to bring this testing regime to an end.
Philip Parkin, General Secretary
"Key Stage tests: mechanical and inflexible?": The Times, 27 March 2007 (refers to Times, 21 March 2007).
The Independent: Education, 22 March 2007
Wrong kind of pupils
Sir Cyril Taylor’s article on the new admissions code for schools (8 March) shows a welcome concern for fairness in the allocation of places. In suggesting ways in which this might be achieved, however, he fails to address the most important question of all.
Anybody familiar with admissions procedures knows that what is uppermost in the minds of parents when ’expressing a preference’ is their concern about the kind of children who will be attending the schools. It is the character of the intake which tends to determine parental and local perceptions of ’good’ and ’poor’ schools. This is what helps to sustain independent schools and to explain the escape culture which is such a marked feature of attitudes to public services. Applied to the public education service, it means seeking places in schools which have the fewest undesirable pupils.
And it is these undesirable pupils who are the problem for Sir Cyril Taylor - and for Mr Blair and Mr Cameron. In a public service which provides for all, they have to go somewhere. Wherever that is becomes the place to be avoided, despite all that some committed and heroic heads and staff manage to achieve.
This is why it is incredibly naïve and misleading to suggest that long term the problem will be resolved when there are no more failing schools. There are schools which perform well by Sir Cyril Taylor’s criteria, but which are not schools of first choice for many parents. Their reason is usually that such schools have too many of the wrong kind of pupils.
These attitudes are not and will not be changed by giving schools a notional specialism nor by calling them academies and colleges. In fact such gestures divert attention and effort from the real problem. There has been enormous progress in the last sixty years in creating greater opportunities. The challenge in Britain, and, I suspect, in other developed countries, too, is what to do with those children and parents who are not interested in taking advantage of those opportunities, who cannot or will not accept the standards and expectations of schools, teachers and the majority of parents and whose presence blights the reputation of the schools they attend.
It will be when this becomes the priority that the local school may come to be perceived as a ’good’ school and increasingly complex admissions procedures may become redundant.
John Till, Regional Officer (North and Mid Wales), Professional Association of Teachers
Daily Telegraph, 22 February 2007
"The generation of ‘damaged’ girls" (20 February) highlights concerns felt by many in education.
In 2003, Jim O’Neill, our Chairman at the time, attracted media attention for raising this issue in his conference speech, making the point that children are beings not objects. He argued that young people were "coerced into growing up too fast and far too soon" and warned of "pressures to succeed, to conform, to be in fashion, to be ‘cool’, and to have everything immediately".
He was rightly concerned that a Somerset junior school had to ban pupils from wearing thongs. There is indeed an erosion of childhood innocence when we have to warn primary pupils about drugs and alcohol and offer them sex education.
In my 2006 conference speech I highlighted media reports of ‘Inappropriate Sexual Behaviour Teams’ being sent into primary schools in Birmingham because of concerns that young children were behaving towards each other in an increasingly sexualised manner.
Although there were fewer pressures on children when I grew up in the ‘50s and ‘60s, we should avoid harking back to an age that is only golden with the passage of time. The Government’s Every Child Matters policy on children and their welfare makes it clear we should be promoting healthy lifestyles, encouraging children to be healthy, stay safe, enjoy and achieve, and make a positive contribution to society.
Children need space to be children. Society needs to give them that space, and guide them as they mature, rather than put them under pressure to be adults too soon.
Philip Parkin, General Secretary, Professional Association of Teachers, Derby
Letter to Nursery World, February 2007: recruitment agencies and disclosure of references
The Times, 13 January 2007
The Professional Association of Teachers – which represents teachers, further education lecturers and education support staff – welcomes proposals to raise the school leaving age (Times, 12 January 2007) as a forward-thinking and historic move.
The economy is changing, with more highly skilled jobs and fewer unskilled ones. The Government’s proposals are the next logical step in a coherent strategy that embraces the Every Child Matters and Extended Schools initiatives. Today’s news involves the Education Secretary at the DfES. I hope that all parts of the UK will work together on this.
The consultation process needs to address a number of key issues.
[However] there must be an appropriate curriculum, encompassing both academic and vocational qualifications and with parity between them.
Training, funding and resources must be provided for education professionals – teachers, further education lecturers and education support staff – in working with all the extra students, many of whom will have different needs and requirements to those in education at the moment.
There must be support and motivation for young people to stay on in education or training. It should not be seen by the less motivated as some sort of conscription. There needs to be carrot rather than stick to avoid the image of a new compulsory and onerous National Service.
Philip Parkin, General Secretary, Professional Association of Teachers (PAT), Derby
Letters 1998-2006 (Word) |
