Comments on: Review of Achievement In Island Education Presented To IWC Panel

By: mojo

mojo — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:23:08 +0000

The fact is that on the island the decision-makers have put financial concerns before educational concerns.

By: rb

rb — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:54:11 +0000

These were amongst the main reasons for setting up Middle Schools/tertiary system in the first place. I well remember these same arguments being aired in the Sixties and I remember the success with which the Middle Schools transcended these difficulties and saw off the problems. I’m sorry that decision-makers on the Island would appear to be either too young or too blinkered to share this memory.

(Report comment)

By: Chris Welsford

Chris Welsford — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 07:08:31 +0000

This is the quote:

John Cannon, a Head of Department in a large urban comprehensive school on the mainland says that year 7 behaviour has got so bad that perhaps a return to the Middle School system would be an option to be considered.

In the two-tier system children are required to transfer from primary school to secondary school at age 11. This is usually a massive culture change and has led many secondary schools to introduce “zoning” for year 7 children to try and address the problems that have led to a steady deterioration in classroom behaviour. However, John Cannon believes that the use of “zoning” may miss the point somewhat.

He says that whilst it is true that many youngsters do mimic their older peers and that zoning addresses this problem, the main reason for year 7 “hell” is puberty and the age of transfer arriving at the same time.

Mr Cannon goes on to say “the argument also forgets that secondary schools are much larger than primary schools and that the pool of difficult disaffected pupils coming together in one place “goes nuclear” with the sudden surge of rebelliousness multiplied many times over.”

The dip in year 7 performance at Key Stage 3 is often blamed on dull teaching and the transfer itself. Mr Cannon sees the more likely culprit to be hormones.

Another interesting point is that by zoning pupils in year 7 teachers are being forced to teach more than one subject (as they often have to in Middle Schools) which not something that most want to do. After all most became Secondary School teachers to specialise.

Mr Cannon suggests that: “perhaps somebody should carry out the ultimate experiment. Why not leave groups of 11 and 12 year olds in small primary schools and see if they stay sweet and pliable, being taught in one class room by one all purpose teacher? Sounds like an argument for bringing back middle schools to me…”

(Report comment)

By: Chris Welsford

Chris Welsford — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 07:07:28 +0000

Readers might find this extract from the TES (04/03/05, Seventh heaven without year 7 – Sounding Off) interesting. It’s a bit academic now (the decision having been made)but the argument in favour of two gentle transfers versus one harsh one, as well as smaller locally based secondary schools (ie middle schools)rather than vast centralised ones, is one supported by many parents including me:

(Report comment)

By: Steephill Jack

Steephill Jack — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:14:35 +0000

It is good to hear that the two sides are discussing the issues and trying to find a resolution.
Transition from one school to another is disruptive and is known to set school students back by a year each time it happens, so one transition is better than two.
This is known because the NFER (National Foundation for Educational Research) has shown this time and time again.
Two tiers are better than three but the big mistakes of the reorganisation plan are:
1) closing small, successful, primary schools in favour of travel to big schools away from home, because they are cheaper to run.
2) setting up huge academy-style secondary schools which again waste money and time to transport students. Why do it then ? Because these big schools are cheaper to run and someone else can be contracted to run them.
If they do well, then the Council will take the credit. If the don’t do so well then it’s nothing to do with the Council and they will find another provider.
Small and local is beautiful and has been shown to work.
Large and distant is alienating and time-consuming for the customers. But who cares ?
Economy rules. Quality fails.

(Report comment)