Priti 4 Witham

I’m back on the subject of education but not that ‘pointless’ debate, which I’ll leave you to judge whether it should or should not have taken place… The Times today  reports that the Conservative education policy review is expected to recommend that schools have ‘fewer, but tougher’ exams, as we are an ‘over examined and over tested nation’. I couldn’t agree more, as school children in England are the most tested in the world. However, testing is only one area of educational reform the Conservative party desperately needs to address. Pupil behaviour is a major problem in our schools, yes it is the result of many ’societal’ factors, but it still needs to be addressed.

Yesterday the Education Secretary Alan Johnson said protecting teachers from web bullies (an ever-growing area), is a top priority. Easier said than done, as our teachers who are under ever increasing pressure to meet targets don’t have the powers to tackle the wide range of behavioural problems that turn up in our schools every day. Let’s hope that the Party’s education policy review gets to the point and gives teachers and schools the powers they need to address the range of behavioural problems that seem to have become the norm in our schools.

I am confused this morning. Perhaps it’s a reflection on my bog standard comprehensive school  background. Not a very fashionable thing to declare in this day and age where the type of school you went to still seems to count for a great deal in life (more so in the political world)– as opposed to where you are heading in life or what you have achieved.

So I was interested by the Today programme’s headline that ‘the Conservatives are to abandon their support for grammar schools’.

Judging by the tone of the headline, I had then expected a follow up statement along the lines of. ‘the Conservatives have pledged to abolish all remaining grammar schools and replace them with the academy system’.

Fortunately the latter is not the case, however, I am surprised by the notion that academic selection is deemed to be unfair to poorer families and therefore limits social mobility. After all there are thousands of young people from disadvantaged backgrounds who have not only faired well and even flourished as a result of the grammar school system, but also experienced a range of opportunities that may well have not been available to them via the comprehensive route.

Rather than be critical of a system which has been a ladder of opportunity to many and which has produced some of our leading political figures, I would have liked to have heard more this morning about how the Party will reform state education so that it gives all children irrespective of their social background the opportunity and self confidence to excel in life. There is also a gap in the educational debate about how the state system can look to support the most academically gifted young people to be challenged and stretched more. These areas in my view are where we as a Party could really add value to the educational debate, as opposed to ta lking down a system which has provided genuine social mobility for many previous generations…..