On January 29th the regional league tables based on students achieving 5 or more good GCSEs were produced http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-31023724.
As expected affluent southern regions dominate the top of the table, with the northern cities predominantly performing below average. Within the North West two of the three highest performing regions are within the grammar school system. Although it can't be argued that grammar schools have excellent results (many achieving 99% five A*-C inc English and maths), it leads me to question whether or not on a national scale, these high performing schools are compensating for those non selective schools.
The North West also houses two of the worst three performing regions, sadly neither surprising but both unique. Blackpool a town regularly labelled as having one of the highest poverty rates in the country and Knowsley, another area with a high rate of poverty, crime and racism. In 2005 Knowsley was the first authority to be awarded outstanding for the provision of 14-18 year olds, it lead the way opening seven learning centres through the building schools for the future fund in 2009 and recognised for its innovation by giving vulnerable students iPads in the same year. Yet despite all this, one of their learning centres closed after four years and the students in the borough are not leaving high school with the same opportunities as their peers who are less than 10 miles away in the Wirral.
This gap needs to be closed but how? Do Knowsley need to face the facts that innovation is not working and look to going back to the Tripartite System which most regions got rid of in the 1970 providing academic / vocational qualifications depending on ability? Or is this gap being widened by these league tables which lead both students and teachers to feel like failures when five good GCSEs are not achieved? Do these boroughs need to look to transferring their innovation from school and focus on students home life? Or finally do teachers who work in these underperforming schools need a financial reward to stay at the school for a certain number of years?
As expected affluent southern regions dominate the top of the table, with the northern cities predominantly performing below average. Within the North West two of the three highest performing regions are within the grammar school system. Although it can't be argued that grammar schools have excellent results (many achieving 99% five A*-C inc English and maths), it leads me to question whether or not on a national scale, these high performing schools are compensating for those non selective schools.
The North West also houses two of the worst three performing regions, sadly neither surprising but both unique. Blackpool a town regularly labelled as having one of the highest poverty rates in the country and Knowsley, another area with a high rate of poverty, crime and racism. In 2005 Knowsley was the first authority to be awarded outstanding for the provision of 14-18 year olds, it lead the way opening seven learning centres through the building schools for the future fund in 2009 and recognised for its innovation by giving vulnerable students iPads in the same year. Yet despite all this, one of their learning centres closed after four years and the students in the borough are not leaving high school with the same opportunities as their peers who are less than 10 miles away in the Wirral.
This gap needs to be closed but how? Do Knowsley need to face the facts that innovation is not working and look to going back to the Tripartite System which most regions got rid of in the 1970 providing academic / vocational qualifications depending on ability? Or is this gap being widened by these league tables which lead both students and teachers to feel like failures when five good GCSEs are not achieved? Do these boroughs need to look to transferring their innovation from school and focus on students home life? Or finally do teachers who work in these underperforming schools need a financial reward to stay at the school for a certain number of years?