For the past week we have been interviewing boys for places at the School. As part of this process, I meet with their parents whilst two colleagues meet each boy. The key decision we have to make is whether the boy is suitable or not to join the School in September. Inevitably some talk of ‘pass’ and ‘fail’ but we do not see it in that way at all. What we are trying to do is to give our professional opinion as to whether boys will be able to thrive in our school and will be able to cope with the pace of work. Thus, in the end those who we say no to have not ‘failed’ – it is just that we cannot meet their needs in our environment.
Selection is very much a ‘taboo’ word in education. No political party is prepared to consider it for our national education system. Yet, British independent schools, which international surveys see as the best in the world, routinely select their pupils. Lord Adonis spoke of wanting state academies to take on the DNA of independent schools yet rejected any notion of selection for maintained schools.
Why is this? The government allows universities to recruit on the basis of talent and indeed recruits into the civil service in a similar way. Every workplace in the country interviews applicants to ensure that they are suitable for their organisation. Yet, maintained schools cannot select those pupils who will fit with their ethos or with the pace of work or indeed for any meaningful reason. The upshot – those parents who can afford to, move near to schools which match their aspirations or their own ethos. Those that cannot do so are left marooned by the system. Private day schools like our own have many boys receiving bursaries and so whilst we select on academic ability there remains a genuine social mix often unseen in maintained schools in leafy suburbs.
Society as a whole has no problem with selection. Indeed, the manager of my favourite football team Arsenal, Arsene Wenger, is lauded for his ability to spot talent and then to develop it. Our philosophy as a school is no different. Our entrance interviews are designed to spot talent and then we work hard to ensure that we develop it over the years. There is no suggestion that Premier League clubs must work with all who want to play football, they just select those they want. Like independent schools they do a great deal of outreach work to ensure that they link with the outside world and help spread their values and the benefits of their coaching. As a school we help in local primary schools with cricket coaching in a very similar way.
In football, with leagues though at all levels, everyone who wants to play football can be accommodated. The experience of the committed amateur with little skill is no less enjoyable, no less worthwhile. Indeed the quality of coaching at many junior football clubs is truly outstanding. Funding is rightly channelled into this important area. Yet would any coach be able to work daily with both the very best and the weakest – would either group prosper if this were the case? If the authorities then set targets to measure performance which meant that the key focus was on getting the weakest up to a certain standard, would the best still thrive?
Last week the Government announced that it is to close the national Gifted and Talented programme. There will always be a place for such children in the independent sector. I hope that the end of this funding does not mean that these children are neglected elsewhere. Yet with the continuing focus on gaining 5 A-C grades for all, it is inevitable that the focus will be on this rather than stretching the brightest in our schools. We intend to raise further funds so that we can take in even more who would reap the benefits of selection. Not all independent schools select – this is the point, our education system needs to cater for pupils of all abilities just as the structure for sport in our country does.
It seems that it is only in education where one size fits all. However, if football ever goes for a comprehensive approach with no selection on the grounds of ability please put me down for a place at the Arsenal academy!
Thursday, 4 February 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Kevin,
ReplyDeleteSome very interesting comments. In certain circumstances, I think there is a place for selection.
I've always thought that it's a pity that some parents (and I'm a parent too!)become wrapped up in the prestige of getting their children into a high achieving school, with some disregard for what best suits the child. I've seen friends of mine in tears because their children didn't get into an esteemed environment.
For my part, not all of my children made it into top notch establishments. Ultimately, this caused me great relief. It was clear that these places would have made said child feel quite dull, incapable and less able than her peers, simply because they would have been constantly behind the pace of the lessons. I would have felt huge pressure to organise and provide transport to extra lessons in order to enable the child to catch up, or keep up, and homework would have been fraught with tension.
So, perhaps making more of a point from the flip side of your post, I can see that there is a rationale in fulfilling the needs of students who can get through the work quickly, and for developing their talents in a place where they're not held back.
Kerry
I'm thoroughly against selection at school (and private schools in general) on a genetic level. By this I mean that my hackles are immediately raised and my instinct is to shout NO! I appreciate, of course, that a more logical and rational approach is required.
ReplyDeleteYour examples (football & university) are based on optional routes where a meritocracy is entirely appropriate. It seems entirely reasonable that at 16 we say that Johnny, who can barely kick a football, is not going to have a career in the game. Equally to say that Jasmine, who cannot multiply two numbers, is not suited to a Maths degree. It is another thing entirely to say that poor Jack cannot have access to a good education because at age 11 he didn't manage a Level 5 in his SATs.
I know that this isn't what you're saying now, but I find it difficult to see how it could pan out any other way. I work in a very successful school in a 'leafy suburb' and we have a very broad mix of students - both in terms of ability and affluence. We don't turn anyone away because they won't make the grade, try to find courses that will suit all abilities, without dumbing down and don't force parents to pay or rely on the charity of others.
If we selected by ability our results as a school would improve, and the lower ability would be shipped off to sink schools to wallow in the mire, with few positive role models, low staff morale and little opportunity to progress.
I'm lucky in that where I live (in a below averagely prosperous area) we have 2 decent schools to choose from (living out of zone for my school). If I lived somewhere with poor schools and couldn't afford to move (I can't) I would do everything in my power to get him into better school elsewhere and I would play on any opportunity to do so. Objectively though, I still find it hard to agree with selection...
This is a tough one. My two eldest children went through a local 'bog-standard' comprehensive and my youngest, because finances changed, attends a very fine independent school near the centre of Nottingham (with a great headmaster!). The two older ones struggled at school through a culture that knocked anyone down who tried too hard, a culture that was not entirely restricted to the pupils. My daughter was bullied for being 'square' and my son found his way through by being laid back to the point of horizontal. My daughter was a strong enough person to power through, though she has no fond memories of school. We had to work extremely hard to bring my son to the realisation that commitment to his studies was important.
ReplyDeleteMy point is that selection has to happen at some point, whether it is the conscious selection at age 11 of choosing a school in line with ones own ethos and aspirations, whether that be maintained or independent, or selection on ability within a school. All schools select at some point.
I'm not sure the football analogy holds water, unless your point is that selection is at some level all about league tables?
Kevin,
ReplyDeleteI'm really not sure the comparison of Nottingham High School and the Arsenal academy is a helpful one. Schools exist to serve their pupils - clubs exist for their fans and their owners.
I understand what you're saying about developing the right sort of talent in the right sort of environment, but while a selection policy benefits those at the top of the pyramid, it's a model that would lead to stagnation and neglect at its base.