Because The Kids Just Aren’t Getting Dumb Enough Quickly Enough For Some…

Setting and streaming should be abolished in state schools amid fears weaker pupils are being left behind, ministers have been told.

Well, just fantastic…

All children should be taught in mixed-ability classes to boost standards and self-esteem among all students, according to a report.

You know, if you stopped a few people in the street and asked them what the problem with children was, I very much doubt ‘low self esteem’ would be high on the list.

Indeed, most of them have far too much (totally unwarranted) self esteem…

Researchers said that setting pupils was often done purely for the “benefit of teachers”.

You mean so they don’t have to teach three different ways in the same lesson? How surprising!

The study, by Teach First, which recruits top graduates as trainee teachers in tough inner-city schools, also called for a shake-up of admissions to stop the best comprehensives being filled with bright, middle-class children.

Because that would be terrible, wouldn’t it? Bright children in schools? Madness!
Don’t ask why. It just would…

It said schools should introduce a system of “fair banding” in which all children are given an entrance test and equal numbers of bright, average and poor-performing pupils are given places.

And presumably placed in the same classes. Otherwise, schools would simply band within themselves.

They do get something right though:

In a further conclusion, it called for the scrapping of league tables amid claims teachers are routinely forced to enter pupils for easier courses to boost their ranking.

Well, of course they do.

But the recommendations sparked anger among head teachers and educationalists who said it would be a recipe for “mediocrity” .

Mediocrity is what we’ve got now. What we’d get if we were insane enough to accept these recommendations is anyone’s guess…

Ralph Tabberer, the Government’s former director general of schools, said little time was spent protecting “scholarship, genuinely high quality study and its importance."

True enough. And if this bunch get their way, there will be even less time spent.

What did they base this study on, then?

In the latest study, Teach First collected views from 500 graduates who spent two years working in schools in deprived communities.

Ah. It’s a totally self-selecting sample, then. Only people who have already drunk the Teach First kool-aid are being consulted on this.

So, who are Teach First? Well, their website says they are:

…an independent charity launched in 2002…

And their mission statement says they are dedicated to:

… a powerful social change initiative aimed at tackling educational disadvantage in challenging schools around the UK…

So, where are they getting their money from?

Would you believe only half comes from other than governmental sources?

Approximately half of Teach First's annual budget is raised from private sources through one-off and sustainable grants from businesses, charitable foundations and individual giving.

The main culprits here are the Training and Development Agency and the Department for Children, Schools and Families.

Oddly, their website shows that their corporate supporters are precisely the sort of businesses you’d think would run a mile from socialist claptrap.

So, what gives?