GR Comment: ”Parents will have to organise themselves into an informal “parents board of governors”. If done properly with a constitution and everything required to form such a board they could be a powerful lobbying group that can make formal and possibly legal representations to the head, and more importantly hold them to account via ofsted, etc. I do not think this “divide and rule” strategy which is essentially what this plan entails, will be taken lying down by very many parents. I very much think that this is a mistake to remove parent representatives, and it will therefore become their duty to be vigilant and coordinated to ensure the children are receiving the best opportunities possible. It will not be as simple as removing them to remove a voice. I personally will make sure that I am a thorn in the side of any corporate bigwig who wants to f**k around with the education of children.”
Voting with their feet:
GR Comment: ”Thank you! I’m still thinking about it as our local secondary school which my son will go to in Sept will be converting. Not a safe pair of hands either: Bright Tribe are taking it in and they have a patchy record (to be polite).”
GR Comment: ”The government tries to paint a picture of the former Local Education Authority managed English education system as left wing teacher driven radicalism imposed and supported by local government. Nothing could be further from the truth. Most English schools remained staid institutions that had changed relatively little since the passing of the 1944 Education Act that established the principles of the post-war British education system. The character of local schools was influenced, but never controlled, by Local Education Authorities (LEAs). This was exactly the intention of the cross party coalition government’s 1944 Act. A uniform national framework of schools was created within which diversity on the basis of elected Local Authorities was encouraged, with freedom from government interference deliberately built into the system. This was in part a reaction to the then recent sinister history of state control of the school curriculum in Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.
It took the election of Margaret Thatcher in 1979 to begin the dismantling of this consensus of non-interference in schools by governments. She is on record as stating that her greatest regret was not getting rid of ‘left-wing’ LEAs much sooner. However belated, Kenneth Baker’s free market Education Reform Act eventually did the trick, with the new centralised powers further exploited by the 1997 Blair government. We now face an education system entirely managed and controlled from London by an ideologically obsessed government. Teachers have now largely become downgraded to educational operatives charged with ‘delivering initiatives’ at the whim of the personal prejudices of the latest government Minister and the sponsors/owners of the new Free Schools and Academies, be they powerful individuals, private companies, pseudo-charities or faith based religious organisations.
Make no mistake, this is a powerful global neo-liberal conspiracy that has direct parallels to the Stalin era of the Soviet Union.
But does it have parental and public support? Despite the lies and unrelenting Labour and Conservative government pro-Academy propaganda uncritically circulated by the media, I very much doubt it.
A parental revolt could be in the making.’‘
GR Comment: ”Parent Governors up and down the country, at the end of your last meeting, refuse to leave the premises. Head teachers etc who know this is wrong, collectively, refuse to recognise any governing body from which parents are excluded and don’t allow them access to your buildings.
Because, if you do that, they have a choice, back down or have respectable middle class parents dragged off school premises by police in front of TV cameras while the same cameras show other police trying to force entry for the local “representatives”. Or more likely local police making it clear to the government that they’ve got better things to do with their increasingly limited resources.”’