In typical, rational and thoughtful Willetts style, he consulted the evidence and concluded: “We must break free from the belief that academic selection is any longer the way to transform the life chances of bright poor kids. This is a widespread belief but we just have to recognise that there is overwhelming evidence that such academic selection entrenches advantage, it does not spread it.”

For his pains, and despite Cameron’s support at the time, he was ‘demoted’ to shadow DIUS and then kept well away from schools policy!

Enid Worsley, Educational consultant in the learning and skills sector

Just finished the book…a very engaging and passionate contribution to the current debates on schooling. I shall certainly be recommending it to my Education Studies students at Bath Spa University – some of those future teachers who should be ‘well read’ in educational, psychological and sociological issues.

Is there a further strand to add to your vision for the future of state education…the ‘all through school’. isn’t it time we questioned the very existence of a divide and discontinuity at 11 for most of our children?

I’d be interested in your thoughts
Alan

I heard the discussion during “Woman’s Hour” on Tuesday morning regarding the creeping selection implicit in current government policy. I applaud Melissa Benn’s aim to highlight this issue and challenge the appalling arguments posited, on this occasion, by Ann McElvoy. I felt that Ms McElvoy did illustrate a real problem in education when she categorised Ms Benn’s specific points as “left wing” ramblings and actually classified Comprehensive Schooling as “a left wing system”. Ms McElvoy’s reduction of a discussion on education policy to cheap political point scoring has characterised media debates for as long as I can remember.

I also found Ms McElvoy’s difficulty with “equality” curious. Teachers I have worked with would recognise that a system based upon equality of opportunity has achievement and aspiration as contingent components not alternative approaches and her implication, that comprehensive schools “squeeze out” achievement and aspiration, is both offensive and ill-informed.

My anger and frustration with Ms McElvoy derives from her casual and cynical generalisations designed to denigrate any provision not within her political purview. Together with a failure to engage, and I suspect understand, the nature of the fallacies currently infecting student assessment, league tables and Ofsted.

What is so sad is that constant review and discussion should be an improving process, essential to keep teachers and schools on their toes. Instead what we have is the development of agents of government control, and decreasingly democratic control to boot. Alongside this is a wave of propagandist nonsense about grammar schools, Tory academies, freedoms of various sorts (that manage to restrict the freedoms of others) and this particular issue of school admissions that goes to the heart of manipulating and controlling education for political outcomes.

Yours sincerely

Paul Butler (Assistant Headteacher, whole career in various comprehensive schools)

PS The final straw was Ms McElvoy’s use of the phrase: “More diversity of supply”, sorry it just made me cringe.

‘When an adult took standardized tests forced on kids’

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/when-an-adult-took-standardized-tests-forced-on-kids/2011/12/05/gIQApTDuUO_blog.html