Education Matters of Concern We believe the party's policy on education has been prepared by people who know what they are talking about, and is well thought out. We are very conscious that no area of policy has been so continuously in the spotlight, or had so much detailed legislation as education over the past 19 years. In consequence we are reluctant to recommend major change. Instead we have suggestions concerning the organisation and practices of schools which could be implemented with little fuss. In addition we want to make 4 comments around various education interfaces and society . Organization and Practice We have 5 suggestions If we wish to strengthen local democracy, the Greenwich judgement (which disregards LEA boundaries in setting catchments) must be reversed . OFSTED's role should change from measure-ment to "review and advise"and its officialspeak reports written in real English so parents can understand them. Chris Woodhead should be replaced by someone in whom the profession has confidence . Schools should have the power to decide pupil numbers. Under the 1980 Education Act, the Conservatives directed that schools should take pupils up to a "standard number". This was to prevent LEAs spreading pupils around to avoid the difficult political problem of closing schools. It is this legislation, plus unpredictable decisions of appeals panels, which leads to large class sizes in popular schools, rather than lack of resources. Since LMS, money has followed the pupil. Schools now have an incentive to take as many pupils as they reasonably can and there is no need for government to "second guess" them. Unhappily, primary schools can now find themselves with, for example, 75 in a year group. They cannot afford 3 teachers with classes of 25, and are appalled at having 2 classes of 37 and 38. The responsibilities of governors needs to be clarified. Governors volunteer, yet their duties and liabilities (eg with respect to H+S) are onerous. There must be an independent unit monitoring standards over time. It may have been amusing to watch Conservative ministers wondering whether to praise "their" education policy for improving pass rates, or, on the other hand, condemning teachers for making exams easier, but it is absolutely crucial to know which way we are going. We have a particular concern with respect to university entrance. There are suggestions that the pressure to increase student numbers (often finance driven) has (a) forced universities to accept lower academic standards on entrance and (b) by accepting a "norm referencing" system for degrees, is lowering their value. There is always a temptation to think "standards aren't as high as they used to be", but if these fears are substantiated, our achievements in higher education are delusion. Home and School Good schools and teachers make a difference, but academic achievement relates most strongly to socio-economic criteria. The proportion of pupils entitled to free school lunches (those with parents on income support) is often used to adjust schools' performance. This accepts that schools can not compensate for the disadvantages of being raised in a low income family. Presumably this is due either a genetic disadvantage, or that such families generally provide less supportive educational environments. We know of course of the cycle of deprivation where a poor home in one generation leads to a poor home in the next.If we wish to improve educational standards across the board, we need to invest resources lifting up these failing homes. Yet policy in respect of the home and, by extension, parenting appears to be a no-go area for politicians. At the same time the incredible range of skills (manager, carer, teacher, and so on) needed to be a successful parent lie unrecognised. We shy away. We address the problem indirectly, putting extra resources into inner city schools for example, rather than into parenting directly. Thus schools can find themselves teaching one value system to their pupils while their parents teach another. There is a respect for education at school, yet an ignorance of its value in the 80% of the child's other waking hours. There is another side too. Skilled parenting leads to a lot more fun and a lot less stress. Most parents would benefit from advice given in the right way.The party is already committed to teaching parenting in the curriculum. We have 4 other suggestions . The party should publicly acknowledge that parenting imposes great responsibilities not only to the child but society. A successful parent needs a wide spectrum of skills, there are substantial advantages in providing formal or informal education and training . Any "education" will have to be informal, eg through health visitors, Mother and Toddler groups, schemes such as the Parents as Teachers" scheme in Bucks, PTAs, and so on. LEAs would support this "education" by funding learning materials, advisers, room rental and so on. In consequence of 1-3, many parents may want to do some "catching up" of their own education, or even try "second time around" courses. Any opportunity "to help parents help their children" should be seized. Outcomes One of the traps into which education can fall is that it concentrates on things which can be measured, not the things that are important. It is too easy to fill a child up with knowledge and judge the success of both child and school by how much the memory can pour out in an hour long exam. If we look at what employers and society want, we see something different. It is of much more value, for example, that a young person is curious than steeped in Shakespeare; that he or she is reliable, honest, thoughtful, cheerful, tolerant, willing to earn, able to work with others, resourceful, and so on. A school producing 16 year olds who obtain 4 or 5 GCSEs and think "Thank God, education's over" has failed. We believe schools need to work out ways to develop attitude and character, and to concentrate on developing learning skills (research, as well as reading and arithmetic; computer literacy; judgement as well as just writing; and working in teams) as well as introducing a basic understanding of the world, its past, present, and potential future. Keeping up to Date We have to appreciate that the rate of technological change is accelerating. Computers are now gateways to the internet and vast areas of knowledge, and are clever and cheap enough to assist the learning process. It is crucial that children from infants age have access to computers, and their teachers given the training necessary to appreciate computers' potential. This will require substantial investment. Second there is increasing risk that teachers' and lecturers' knowledge will become out of date in technical areas. Many lecturers of course carry out consultancy, or leading edge research, but there is a good case for making it easy for others to work one or two days a week in industry, and for science teachers to spend time in industry and research labs as well. There is no point on earth teaching students obsolete knowledge. An Educated Country One of the indicators which should depress us most about past education is the percentage of the population that is content to get their "news" from papers like the SUN. We return to an earlier point. Education should be about teaching children how to learn - to make them curious about the wonderful world in which they live and desirous of learning more. We at least need a study to establish whether the young generation are better informed than their parents, and, if not, to ask searching questions why. Our vision is of a society of "good citizens" taking responsibility for themselves and for one another. We are worried about the demands for rights without obligations, and the view that if something goes wrong, some one else must be to blame. "Blame" and "dependency" are twins, and both are inconsistent with the party's commitment to "empower" the people, for empowerment means taking responsibility. With only 30% of the electorate feeling a responsibility to elect the best possible representatives, education has a long way to go. Contents