The only person who is educated is the person who has learned how to learn, the person who has learned how to adapt and change, the person who has realised that no knowledge is secure, that only the process of seeking knowledge gives a basis for security. Changingness, a reliance on process rather than on static knowledge, is the only thing that makes any sense as a goal for education in the modern world.
The Coalition Government’s ‘Free Schools’ are highly controversial and many left-leaning academics and educationalists have argued that they have been a move in the wrong direction (Anti Academies Alliance 2011, Benn 2012, Ball 2013). In this climate, it seems risky to even question whether they might provide some exciting opportunities for educationalists.
Nonetheless, I have been drawn to Free Schools for two main reasons, both of which I would be interested to debate with others:
First, when Free Schools were originally launched as part of the Academies Act 2010, Michael Gove was clear that there was no single blueprint, no formula, and that they would be open to a range of models. To be fair, this seems to have played out to some extent. We now have Free Schools run by the co-operative movement, youth workers and Everton Football Club. This level of diversity offers some interesting alternatives as part of, rather than separate from, the state education system. Since I do not believe that one system could ever to be designed to fit all young people, genuine alternatives seem important
Second, Alternative Provision Free Schools (AP Free Schools) are of particular interest to me because, when underpinned by the values of youth and community work, and staffed by youth workers working alongside teachers, as some of the new providers are, there could be real improvements in the educational offer for students who have been failed by the system. For those of us who work directly with children and young people who are written off as ‘disengaged’ or ‘challenging’, this issue is critical. Through the Free Schools policy, young people who have been excluded from school will, at last, get the same funding as those remaining in mainstream provision
I accept that Free Schools are now part of an increasingly fragmented and fractured education system; one in which parents with social and cultural capital can exploit to their own advantage. It is tempting, therefore, to cast all Free Schools aside and argue that there is not, in any circumstance, a justification for them. However, I believe that Free Schools came in different guises, and as such, it is overly simplistic to dismiss them all.
One thing I am sure about is that Free Schools will be hotly debated during this General Election campaign. What do you think? Please share your comments.
I have published peer-reviewed papers and chapters which you might be interested to read:
Hope, Max A. (2015) Alternative Provision Free Schools: educational fireworks or sparks of optimism for excluded young people (forthcoming book chapter).
Hope, Max A. (2012) Localism, Decentralisation and Free Schools – is there a green light for a radical alternative within England’s state education system? International Studies in Educational Administration.Volume 40, Issue 1. Pages 89-102.
Hope, Max A. (2012) Youth Work and State Education. Should Youth Workers apply to set up a Free School?Youth and Policy. Number 109. Pages 60-70.
The General Election in the UK is now less than 100 days away.
I am bracing myself for the onslaught of education policies. Free Schools are bound to get a huge amount of attention. Ofsted will get hauled over the coals. The words ‘standards, ‘quality’, ‘competition’, ‘choice’ and ‘teaching unions’ will be over-used. And yet, are the general public really able to tell the difference between one party and another. Are the policies all starting to blend together? Do politicians argue over the issues that are of interest to most voters or just to a small group of educationalists? If you are a parent who cares about the education of your child, will you know who to vote for?
Here are three ideas that I would like to see the politicians discussing during the election campaign:
Why, when there is a warehouse-full of evidence that ability grouping in schools is hugely damaging, academically and socially, does it continue? Why do politicians of all political parties feel so confident that they should make ability grouping mandatory? What evidence do they have and why are they not publishing this?
Why do none of the political parties advocate for the closing of private schools, or at the very least, the removal of charitable status from all of them? Most politicians argue for the importance of social mobility and the entitlement of all children to a high quality education, and yet they are content to support a private education system that means some parents can always choose to opt out.
Why are all the parties obsessed with grades and academic achievement in traditional subjects rather than considering the development of the whole child? Would it be possible for a politician to argue for the importance of developing self-esteem, confidence, happiness and a pleasure in learning? Could we consider that creativity and play is as important as academic grades?
I will be watching with interest. If any of the parties, large or small, engage with any of these issues, I might even consider voting for them.
Dave has aspirations. He wants to be a hit man.
The Warren’s weekly parliament meeting starts with a question: if you could do anything with your life, what would you do? One person wants a big house, another a good job, another to be happy with themselves. Dave says just six words; “I want to be a hit man.” He gets a laugh, but he is not joking – this much is clear from his face.
I corner him later, asking whether he is serious.
‘I am serious. I really want to be a hit man. They make loads of money. They get respect. People are scared of them.’
‘They also kill people, Dave’
‘I want to kill someone. I want to have my own gun. I wouldn’t mind killing people.’
‘What about getting caught and going to jail?’
‘I’m not scared of jail. Everyone I know has been to jail. You just have to do your time and get out again …………’
Read the rest of the story in Learning the Lessons: how young people taught us everything we needed to know – here.
Liberating education consists in acts of cognition, not transferrals of information … through dialogue the teacher-of-the-students and the students-of-the-teacher cease to exist and a new term emerges: teacher-student with students-teachers … they become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow … here, no one teaches another, nor is anyone self-taught.
Happy Democracy Day!
On Tuesday, the BBC held its Democracy Day to celebrate the 750th anniversary of the first parliament of elected representatives at Westminster. There were many interesting programmes on radio and TV all day (some of which can still be heard on BBC iPlayer). For those of us committed to democracy, it was a fascinating mix of news, commentary and insight into the parliamentary process.
In a school in Columbia, I heard that they have a Participation Day where the children get to be actively involved in their learning, where they participate, where their voices are aired.
On March 8th every year, we have International Women’s Day, a fabulous opportunity to raise issues, to campaign, to celebrate, to be visible, to have our voices heard.
All of these events beg the question – is one day enough? Why can’t every day be a Democracy Day, a Participation Day, or a Women’s Day? By confining them to one day of the year, are we suggesting that the other 364 days can be justified for being non-democractic, non-participatory and male-centred?
Here’s to making every day a Democracy Day.
Why write a blog? What direction will I take? Who am I writing for? These are the questions that any new blog-writer might ask themselves. I am no different.
Working as a university academic gives me many opportunities to share my ideas. I regularly teach undergraduates and postgraduates. I speak at conferences. I write articles for publication in peer-reviewed journals. Yet, academics have a reputation for living in an ivory tower, for not being in the ‘real world’. Although I feel very grounded in the ‘real world’, I do accept that I use mechanisms that tend to reach a limited audience. Much as I love working with students (all of whom, of course, are real people who live in the real world too), there are many more people who I would love to talk to, to connect with, to hear from.
One of my colleagues is really interested in social media, and speaking to her has challenged me to think about blogging and tweeting. It is all very new to me, but it could be an exciting new adventure. A new direction.
This blog is an attempt to reach out to new people. If you are reading this, I am interested to know more – who are you, and how did you stumble across this blog?