Warning: This post was published more than 11 years ago.
I keep old posts on the site because sometimes it's interesting to read old content. Not everything that is old is bad. Also, I think people might be interested to track how my views have changed over time: for example, how my strident teenage views have mellowed and matured!
But given the age of this post, please bear in mind:
- My views might have changed in the 11 years since I wrote this post.
- This post might use language in ways which I would now consider inappropriate or offensive.
- Factual information might be outdated.
- Links might be broken; embedded material might not appear properly.
Many thanks for your understanding.
The Times, amongst others, has run with the story today that the government is to give failing schools just one year to improve, or else close them. I don’t really understand how this is supposed to work… After all, with the very real threat of closure hanging over a school, it will be unable to attract better staff and more able pupils, who would presumably want a more secure future. So surely by threatening the school, the situation only gets worse… Besides which, the worst schools are generally the over-subscribed inner-city comprehensives – so this will only further cut school places, of which the government says we don’t have enough. It seems counterintuitive to say the least!
It’s one of those strange Labour ideas, like fining NHS hospitals which don’t come up to scratch, so that the hospital then has even less money with which to hire more staff and generally improve things, and hence has to cut even more corners, and things get worse. I don’t understand that logical in that either…
Maybe I’m just slow…