My own educational background is not so different from many others. I attended a tiny private school from an early age and then I was obliged to attend the local state primary school for one year as my parents moved house. It was at that primary school that I became aware of the streaming process that marked out a child's future for life. In the intuitive and irrational way that children have, I became aware that the "D" set were not only abandoned by themselves (and presumably their families) but that they were also allocated significantly inferior resources. At 11+ stage the "sorting hat" - not of Harry Potter, but of the system, would set each and every one of the boys I was with on a largely inescapable path.
I then went to a superb school and onwards to Oxford - all on scholarships, but even without those, with the support of the state. I quite simply could not have afforded to do this without the best education I could get being offered to me by my country as an investment in my future and in anticipation of the millions of pounds I have paid in taxes over the years.
Later in my life I earned the right to call myself a farmer ( a conceit really - I owned the land whilst others did the work ) and learned important lessons about, among other things, preserving seed corn and nurturing a growing crop.
Perhaps the segue into my analogy is fairly obvious - but our children, our youth and even our adult population who wish to learn are our seed corn. Words were cheap to Blair, but how I wish he had meant those three - "Education, Education, Education" - as his priorities. To borrow from a political philosophy I despise much less that Blairism, I can see no greater aspiration for an educational system than "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs". The crop must be nurtured to the best of our abilities.
Education is, perforce, a pyramidal structure - with a broad base of nursery and primary education narrowing to a smaller University sector. Throughout this pyramid, inequalities of resources come in all forms. Wealthier parents can not be expected to eschew the opportunity to give their offspring more, but only if this does not mean detracting from the less fortunate, Cultural imperatives play their part - many asian and oriental parents support their children (and why, in this context, is the perjorative term "pushy" used so much? - I admire it) more, it seems, than the great majority of WASP parents. I have known some abysmally dim kids from wealthy families or the ethnic groups mentioned above, just as I have known some to be razor-sharp from the local sink estate. As with any crop, the first growth stages are the most important and all should be fertilised with the manure of knowledge (I do hope you don't think I kept a straight face as I typed that phrase!).
Private eduction benefits greatly from the state - not only via charitable status for tax. Most teachers were trained at the expense of the state and the framework from which private education hangs is in essence that of the national system. Even the inspection and regulation system is that of the nation. It works, so let us not dismantle it, rather let us use it or emulate it in the manner of the traditional Grammar School. At the very least let the state reclaim some of its investment in terms of much higher scholarship or free place levels.
Then the pyramid narrows - and narrows sharply. University education can range from the aethereally academic to the brutally practical, but it must be the tip of the pyramid, rather than a mere extension of presence in a system than real education. Three years of hard work at least (many degrees in Germany can take up to 6 years) are the slope a student faces and his reward is to be at least potentially a more valued and valuable member of society. The corn grows and society reaps it in turns of contribution and even taxes.
I regard the concepts of Tuition Fees and Student Loans as being so ill-conceived as to be positively dangerous. Today's students are the leaders of tomorrow. It is insane to think they might have bought that position rather than earned it.
Education to the highest level deserved and properly used should be totally free to all.
Dum Spiro Spero
I've not understood much of the coverage of this debate on BBC News Channel today... But one strange point seems to be being repeatedly made by news-casters: "it should be free for all since in the past it was free for me." I don't understand that... it's almost as though they think that education is completely uncoupled from a nation's ability to pay for it.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is obviously true that education is a costly process, it is neither a luxury nor an item of discretionary expenditure. In my opinion it is of equal if not slightly (note that I do say slightly) greater importance than even the NHS. Mens sanis in corpore sano?
ReplyDelete