Education in Britain
| Категория реферата: Топики по английскому языку
| Теги реферата: рефераты по предметам, закон реферат
| Добавил(а) на сайт: Snandulija.
Предыдущая страница реферата | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Следующая страница реферата
The need for educational change arises partly from a concern about academic standards. The sense that Britain is declining has been reinforced by statements from employers. According to them, Britain’s workforce is under-educated, under-trained and under-qualified! These criticisms of standards are pitched at different levels. First, there are worries about low standards of literacy and numeracy. Second, international comparisons give weight to misgivings about the performance of British schoolchildren in mathematics and science. And, therefore, the subsequent changes have tried to define standards much more precisely, and o have regular assessment of children’s performance against these standards.
II. Changing Political Control
a) After 1944
The key educational legislation, until recently, was the 1944
Education Act. That Act supported a partnership between central government
(Local Education Authorities or LEAs), teachers and the churches - with
central government playing a minimal role in the curriculum.
The 1944 Education Act required the Secretary of State to promote the education of the people of England and Wales and the progressive development of institutions devoted to that purpose and to secure the effective execution by local authorities, under his control and direction, of the national policy for providing a varied and comprehensive educational service in every area.
In the decades following the Act, «promotion» was perceived in very general terms - ensuring that there were resources adequate for all children to receive an education according to «age, ability and aptitude», providing the broad legal framework and regulations within which education should be provided (for example, the length of the school year or the division of education into primary and secondary phases), and initiating major reports on such important matters as language and mathematics teaching.
Within this framework, the LEA organized the schools. The LEA raised money through local taxation to provide education from primary right through to further and indeed higher education, and made sure that the schools and colleges were working efficiently. They employed and paid the teachers. And ultimately they had responsibility for the quality of teaching within those schools.
The Churches were key partners because historically they (particularly the Church of England) had provided a large proportion of elementary education and owned many of the schools.
The 1944 Act had to establish a new partnership between state, LEAs and the church schools. b)After 1980
However, the changing economic, social and cultural conditions outlined in the previous section caused the government to reexamine the nature and the composition of that partnership. The questions being asked during the 1980’s included the following:
Has central government the power to make the system respond to the changing context? Are the local authorities too local for administrating a national system and too distant for supporting local, especially parental, involvement in school? Have the parents been genuine partners in the system that affects the future welfare of their children? And what place, if any, in the partnership has been allocated to the employers, who believe they have a contribution to make to the preparation of young people for the future?
1) New governing bodies
Various Acts of Parliament since 1980 have made schools more
accountable.
Teachers, employers and parents have been given places on the governing
bodies. Governors have to publish information about the school that enables
parents to make informed choices when deciding to which school they should
send their child. Each LEA has to have a curriculum policy that must be
considered and implemented by each governing body. Schools also must have a
policy on sex education and must ensure that political indoctrination does
not take place. This accountability of schools and LEAs has to be
demonstrated through an annual report to be presented to a public meeting
of parents. The government gave parents the right to enrol their children -
given appropriate age and aptitude - at any state school of their choice, within the limits of capacity. Parents already sent their children to the
local school of their choice. The decision to publish schools' examination
results, however, gave parents a stark, but not necessarily well-informed, basis on which to choose the most appropriate school for their child.
Increasingly parents sought access to the most successful nearby school in
terms of examination results. Far
from being able to exercise their choice, large numbers of parents were now
frustrated in their choice. Overall, in 1996 20 per cent of parents failed
to obtain their first choice of school. In London the level was 40 per
cent, undermining the whole policy of 'parental choice' and encouraging
only the crudest view of educational standards. Schools found themselves
competing rather than cooperating and some schools, for example in deprived
urban areas, faced a downward spiral of declining enrolment followed by
reduced budgets. Thus the market offered winners and losers: an improved
system for the brighter or more fortunate pupils, but a worse one for the
'bottom' 40 per cent. Schools in deprived parts of cities acquired
reputations as 'sink' schools. As one education journalist wrote in 1997,
'There is a clear hierarchy of schools:
private, grammar, comprehensives with plenty of nice middle-class children, comprehensives with fewer nice middle-class children and so on.'
2) Central control
The government has looked for ways of exercising greater influence
over what is taught in schools. New legislation gave the government powers
to exercise detailed control over the organization and content of
education. The 1988 Education Act legislated a National Curriculum and a
system of National Assessment. In addition, significant changes were
enacted to make possible the central financing and thus control of schools
through creating a new kind of school outside LEA control (first, the
provision of City Technology Colleges 9CTC), and, second, the creation of
Grant Maintained Schools (GMS)). The government also significantly reduced
the power of local authorities by transferring the management of schools
from the LEA to the schools themselves (known as the local management of
schools or LMS).
At the same time, within this more centralized system, parents have been offered greater choice through the establishment of different kinds of schools (GMS and CTC), through the delegation of management to the governing bodies of the schools (LMS) and through the granting of parental rights to send their children to the school of their choice.
The various Parliamentary Acts (but especially the 1988 Act) gave
legal force to a massive change in the terms of the education partnership.
First, the Secretary of State now has powers over the details of the
curriculum and assessment. Second, a mechanism has been created whereby
there can be more participation by parents (and to a much smaller degree by
employers), in decisions that affect the quality of education. Third, the
LEAs have been required to transfer many decisions over finance, staffing, and admissions to the schools and colleges themselves. Fourth, the LEA
responsibility for the curriculum has been transferred to the Secretary of
State.
3) Employer involvement
The voice of the consumers will be heard more, and the consumer
includes the employer. Several initiatives encouraged employer
participation. First, and possibly the most important in the long run, has
been the encouragement of business representatives on governing bodies of
schools. Second, there has been a range of initiatives which have given
employers a greater say in the purposes which schools are expected to serve
and in the means of attaining them.
4) The role of assessment
The government decided to develop a reformed system of examinations which would specify the standards against which the performance of individual schools and of pupils might be measured.
The 1988 Education Act legislated for assessment of pupils at the ages of 7, 11, 14 and 16, using attainment targets which all children should normally be expected to reach at these different ages in different subjects - especially in the «foundation subjects» of English, mathematics and science. The assessments relied partly on moderated teacher-assessment, but more importantly on national, externally administrated tests.
As a result of these national assessments, exactly where each child was in relation to all other children in terms of attainment in each subject. And it would be possible to say how each school was succeeding in these measured attainments in relationship to every other school. These assessments, have subsequently, provided the basis of national comparisons and league tables of schools.
In the reform of National Curriculum in the early 1990’s, it was
decided that, because of public examinations at 16 , the national
assessment should finish at 14.
5) Inspection
For over one hundred years, there had been an independent inspection service. The inspectors were called Her Majesty’s Inspectors (HMI) to indicate that ultimately they were accountable to the Queen, not to the government from whom they ardently preserved their independence. Until about ten years ago, HMI numbered about 500. They inspected schools and they advised the government.
Senior HMIs were based at the Department of Education and Science
(now the department for Education and Employment) but the big majority were
scattered over the whole country so that they could advise locally but also
be a source of information to central government. Indeed, they were known
as «the ears and the eyes of the Minister».
Much of this has now changed as government has sought greater central
control. HMI has been cut back to about one third of its previous size. The
Chief Inspector is now a political appointment, not someone who has arisen
from the ranks of an independent inspectorate. A new office has been
created, the Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED), to which HMI now
belong and which is much more at the service of government policy.
Рекомендуем скачать другие рефераты по теме: способ изложения, шпаргалки по физике, оформление титульного листа реферата.
Категории:
Предыдущая страница реферата | 1 2 3 4 5 6 | Следующая страница реферата