No Child Left Behind...in Scotland???

Here's the link:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/stricter-inspection-regime-leads-to-more-sacked-heads-1917442.html

The article in the Scottish Independent discusses how the heads, or principals, of Scottish schools are being dismissed for their schools' poor educational status. Similar to the American "No Child Left Behind" and the dismissing of entire school staffs in Rhode Island, the theory works on the premise parents can decide who may or may not lead a school. And, further, it implicates staff on the school's academic results, be they fair or terrible. While the writer of this blog is no fan of institutional schooling as it currently exists, I must defend teachers who attempt to do their job.

In all the arguments one hears about education and, unfortunately, everyone has an opinion, including me, no one quite takes the position that children watch too much television, are left to their own devices for too long, or are involved with too many activities. Ultimately, a child does poorly in school because the parent has failed in some degree. Of course, there are exceptions but when there are more students with needs and behavioural problems than there are regular students, it is not the school's fault. It is the school's fault if a child cannot read and is allowed to pass into a higher grade; it is the parents' fault if they request the passage despite their child's skill level. People have discussed how a child's self-esteem is affected by school failure; I would argue a child's ego is much more affected by the frustration of not having the skills requisite a specific grade.

There's also a paradox examined in the writings of Ivan Ilych; once an institution becomes too big, it begins to function for itself rather than for its original mandate. Thus, larger schools demand more types of education, specialized education; in a sense, students become more than just students but types of students: gifted, behavioural, learning disabled and so forth. Their labels justify the need for more schooling and a further increase in the size of the institution. The reality that a child cannot read becomes irrelevant because a child will be promoted to the next grade regardless of skill level; an educational assistant will be assigned to assist with learning disabilities or behavioural issues that really only arise because the child cannot read. In a sense, the more access to educational facilities, the less actual education occurs.

Dismissing the staffs of schools will not affect the outcomes; maybe, for awhile, schools will improve but the reality illustrates more schooling is not the solution. The argument could be made that the supervisors, the educational consultants and the assessors are examples of increased institutionalized education; they function, most of them think they have important jobs to do, to keep the institution in existence. After all, without their participation, school administrations could not exist and schools could not function. And, teachers could not do their jobs.