Harrow council, after looking for a legal category under which to prosecute a mother who effectively lied to get her child into the school she preferred, in the end accused her of fraud. There is a loophole in the (as usual badly drafted because rushed) legislation, which meant that Harrow had to withdraw the prosecution, but the government is rushing through an amendment to plug this.
The council said that it had to act in fairness to other families (whose children had also been consigned to second best?)
Why should we have this position, such that in the judgement of parents (and others) the life chances of some children are reduced by this rationing? Catchment areas are no solution - we get mothers lying about residence or wealthy parents buying houses which are expensive because of the school. A lottery is a gesture of despair, - the only equality is before the dice is rolled.
The only solution is for good schools to drive out bad ones, as in the Swedish model, and Danish, advocated by Michael Gove, with resources targeted at pupils who because of family dysfunctionality or failure at earlier schools are in need of remedial help. It will probably also need temporary removal for extra help of disruptive students.
Despite all the money pumped in over the past 8 years, we still protect schools which too many parents reject. Why should this be tolerated?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment