The Privileged Elite

[Whistlin' Dixie]

Socialist dictionary's definition of the privileged:

anyone who earns more than you

'Earn'....That's a good one!

 

[Tree13]

Having worked as a teacher for a number of years mate, I can assure you that Vygotskian methods have been heavily moved away from and in all honesty were never implemented in the manner he wanted them to be (but for a couple that were successful introduced during the middle of the last decade). Most Heads, OFSTED inspectors and governors have no idea who Vygotsky really is and the system we have is increasingly moving further away from the principles he wanted. I remember one Chief Ofsted inspector (and "Superhead") giving me a glazed over look when I told him I tried to emulate Vygotskian principles. Try and bring up Piaget, Bruner or Dewey and you are flogging a dead horse, they'd rather listen to Etons Head teacher for inspiration.

The class sizes argument is very important. You can't argue private schools have lower class sizes and it is a critical factor in improving outcomes. They are far better funded, generally private schools have anywhere from 3 to (in a significant number of cases 6) times the funding per pupil to state schools. That has continued to decline under this government.

Better funding and reducing class sizes would "close the gap" but that debate is avoided. We are taught to adopt their teaching methods (often from people without QTS) or uniform (often prohibitively priced for already cash strapped parents). It is an important question really, if you don't fund education you will see negative results in the end. Having said that, when results are equivalent the opportunities for students differ greatly which does need to be acknowledged and tackled.

Vygotsky, Piaget, Bruner and Dewey are all mandatory reading on teacher training courses in England and Wales, and have been for over ten years. My wife is a teacher, has been for seven years; a good 25% of my friends are teachers, ranging in age from 20 to 60, and they all remember having all these luminaries of pedagogy drummed into them. I retrained last year and have firsthand knowledge of the course content - It's all Vygotsky and Bruner, to the almost total exclusion of anything else. (We did get two hours on behavioural management theory from Paul Dix - utterly brilliant stuff!) If it's not being implemented in a school, it's not because the head isn't aware. More likely it's because the type of progress Vygotsky's work can lead to isn't the type that fits into OFSTED's bizarre boxes!

The class size / funding issue is the crux of it though, fully agree with you there. And you are right to point out that evening if the class sizes were reduced and funding increased, state school alumni would still not get some of the opportunities enjoyed by their private counterparts.

 

[Whistlin' Dixie]

I've no doubt that the old school tie plays a part in certain professions. Lets take law as an example of a well paid profession. Ok, so most High Court judges fit that old school tie image, but there are approximately 118,000 practicing lawyers in the UK so I find it hard to believe that the kid from Roughwood Comp couldn't have become one of their number if they wanted to.

Just out of interest, when was the last time you seen a toff shovelling sh1te* , Bruce?


*All half of the imbeciles are barely fit for...Oh I meant on a building site - NOT those that have thrashed their stable staff to within an inch of their miserable serfdom existences for stealing an apple meant for 'Whoopsie's regimental nightgown' (Or whatever ridiculous names they give their animals) so badly they've been hospitalised, leaving lord toff of twattshire to do the 'mucking out' themselves - don't count.

Nor does @Baines' left foot

 

[Catfish Blues]

it's akin to a peacock's tail in that it communicates your smart

*you're

 

[Tree13]

I've no doubt that the old school tie plays a part in certain professions. Lets take law as an example of a well paid profession. Ok, so most High Court judges fit that old school tie image, but there are approximately 118,000 practicing lawyers in the UK so I find it hard to believe that the kid from Roughwood Comp couldn't have become one of their number if they wanted to.

I managed it, having attended a bog standard state comprehensive. I'm still in touch with a couple of classmates who, like me, qualified as solicitors, and one lad who became a Barrister. Other kids in my year managed to get into Oxford and Cambridge. But when I went to school there were only 20 kids per class. This year I went back to the same school during my teacher training - 35 kids per class now.

 

[Black Belt Jones]

Take for example, all evidence shows that pupils from comprehensives do better than those from grammar school, who do better than those from independent schools when at university. Yet evidence also shows for Oxbridge and Redbrick institutions that the reverse trend is true when it comes to letting in pupils with equivalent grades. If you had 3 lads, one from Harrow, one from Tonbridge Wells Grammar School and one from a Salford Comp with the same grades it shows the lad from Salford Grammar would excel the most, yet he is the one who's likely to miss out.

.

Is that last part really true? Oxbridge and the Russell group are massively under the microscope for widening access and I suspect that they would take the arm off the scruffy Manc to get him in (his grades are formally the same, but obviously correspond to far higher academic performance than the other two in reality, and as you say - he is the one likely to do best). In fact I know they would take him for many subjects, but possibly this is something that differs across degrees?

For something like medicine, massively over-subscribed and you're turning away very bright kids, then yeah I can see the Manc in his anorak at an interview has a harder road.

 

[catcherintherye]

Is that last part really true? Oxbridge and the Russell group are massively under the microscope for widening access and I suspect that they would take the arm off the scruffy Manc to get him in (his grades are formally the same, but obviously correspond to far higher academic performance than the other two in reality, and as you say - he is the one likely to do best). In fact I know they would take him for many subjects, but possibly this is something that differs across degrees?

For something like medicine, massively over-subscribed and you're turning away very bright kids, then yeah I can see the Manc in his anorak at an interview has a harder road.

Recent research showed it was the case mate. It is a surprise as it seems to defy logic to have such a policy and more importantly with the influence of the Independent and to a point Grammar school lobby telling everyone that they let poor kids in with worse grades over their alumni continually through their extensive coverage they get within the media you could be forgiven for assuming the reverse was true.

It also correlates to reality though. The best performing school in the country for A levels was a state school and yet they only had 4 students make it to Oxbridge from the entire cohort. Most of the top public schools generally enjoy 15 or so. Some even have "guaranteed places" whereby they are allowed to have a set number irrespective of results (the number is probably set higher than the said state school that out performed them).

It is surprising and the research came as a bit of a shock but it's what it showed. Thats not counting the countless number of state school people who chose not to apply to Oxbridge as they are put off by it.

 

[catcherintherye]

Vygotsky, Piaget, Bruner and Dewey are all mandatory reading on teacher training courses in England and Wales, and have been for over ten years. My wife is a teacher, has been for seven years; a good 25% of my friends are teachers, ranging in age from 20 to 60, and they all remember having all these luminaries of pedagogy drummed into them. I retrained last year and have firsthand knowledge of the course content - It's all Vygotsky and Bruner, to the almost total exclusion of anything else. (We did get two hours on behavioural management theory from Paul Dix - utterly brilliant stuff!) If it's not being implemented in a school, it's not because the head isn't aware. More likely it's because the type of progress Vygotsky's work can lead to isn't the type that fits into OFSTED's bizarre boxes!

The class size / funding issue is the crux of it though, fully agree with you there. And you are right to point out that evening if the class sizes were reduced and funding increased, state school alumni would still not get some of the opportunities enjoyed by their private counterparts.

Fair play to you for qualifying mate. I suppose it must vary institution to institution as where I studied we did 1 week of all the theorists above across an entire year!

I agree entirely on class sizes and ultimately it's about funding really isn't it?

 

[monty]

Just out of interest, when was the last time you seen a toff shovelling sh1te* , Bruce?


*All half of the imbeciles are barely fit for...Oh I meant on a building site - NOT those that have thrashed their stable staff to within an inch of their miserable serfdom existences for stealing an apple meant for 'Whoopsie's regimental nightgown' (Or whatever ridiculous names they give their animals) so badly they've been hospitalised, leaving lord toff of twattshire to do the 'mucking out' themselves - don't count.

Nor does @Baines' left foot

Boris Johnson eating...............................just a suggestion like

 

[Woolly Blue]

Is that last part really true? Oxbridge and the Russell group are massively under the microscope for widening access and I suspect that they would take the arm off the scruffy Manc to get him in

This is true, our daughter went to Oxford and, while she's not a he, or a scruff she's not far off being a Manc.
She did have pretty good grades, but I suspect 20, or even 15 years ago, she wouldn't have got a place with the same grades.

 

[Woolverhampton_Blue]

Who knocks it out of them though? That's what I don't really get.

All the other kids in the school. Either physical bullying, or socio-emotional bullying. The more covert socio-emotional bullying is widely reported by children to be more damaging, more widespread, less noticed by staff and less acted upon.

There's no kudos to being the brainy kid in the average state school - the other kids ridicule you for it. Accolades from the school for being the brainy kid just make it worse. Much of it sadly is fuelled by ignorant parents who see school as nothing more than daycare, because they place little value upon education themselves.

From my personal experience and observation, spot on. The 'knocking out' starts in earnest around the end of primary school/ start of secondary school, at which point children are really beginning to feel pressure to fit in with their peers. If your parents don't value education then you're more at risk of losing out.

In my humble opinion, societies glamorisation of complete idiots in mass media, and a pervasive attitude amongst the working classes that cultural things like (for example) classical music or the theatre 'aren't for the likes of us' (leading to narrowed opportunities), only exasperate the situation.

 

[Tree13]

From my personal experience and observation, spot on. The 'knocking out' starts in earnest around the end of primary school/ start of secondary school, at which point children are really beginning to feel pressure to fit in with their peers. If your parents don't value education then you're more at risk of losing out.

In my humble opinion, societies glamorisation of complete idiots in mass media, and a pervasive attitude amongst the working classes that cultural things like (for example) classical music or the theatre 'aren't for the likes of us' (leading to narrowed opportunities), only exasperate the situation.

You've got two very good points there.

(and it's "exacerbate")

 

[Woolverhampton_Blue]

You've got two very good points there.

(and it's "exacerbate")

Thank you

(and thanks!)

 

[scratchnsurf]

Vygotsky, Piaget, Bruner and Dewey are all mandatory reading on teacher training courses in England and Wales, and have been for over ten years. My wife is a teacher, has been for seven years; a good 25% of my friends are teachers, ranging in age from 20 to 60, and they all remember having all these luminaries of pedagogy drummed into them. I retrained last year and have firsthand knowledge of the course content - It's all Vygotsky and Bruner, to the almost total exclusion of anything else. (We did get two hours on behavioural management theory from Paul Dix - utterly brilliant stuff!) If it's not being implemented in a school, it's not because the head isn't aware. More likely it's because the type of progress Vygotsky's work can lead to isn't the type that fits into OFSTED's bizarre boxes!

The class size / funding issue is the crux of it though, fully agree with you there. And you are right to point out that evening if the class sizes were reduced and funding increased, state school alumni would still not get some of the opportunities enjoyed by their private counterparts.

You may well be expected to learn about the giants of pedagogy if you undertake a B ed but if your qualifying via a PGCe it'll be little more than a nod in their direction. School direct students wont even do that. With the onset of ' Evidence only' routes into qualifying as a teacher, with Head Teachers deciding if standards are met this pattern will continue.

 

[Tree13]

You may well be expected to learn about the giants of pedagogy if you undertake a B ed but if your qualifying via a PGCe it'll be little more than a nod in their direction. School direct students wont even do that. With the onset of ' Evidence only' routes into qualifying as a teacher, with Head Teachers deciding if standards are met this pattern will continue.

I've just done the PGCE mate. We never went a day without at least two lecturers making specific reference to the Zone of Proximal Development.