The title? A quote from the Simpsons when a marketing firm took over Sringfield Elementary because of a lack of funding (the picture however is from a similarly themed episode where the church becomes sponsored in order to raise funds). Of course this resulted in half an hour of family friendly hilarity with Funzo ruining Christmas. However, Free Schools now appear to be less of a cartoon creation and more a reality, with 281 applications to create a Free-School in the UK joining schools like Krishna-Avanti, Leicester as a wave of new Free Schools which seem set to revolutionize how kids learn.
A Free School is effectively independent from Government curriculum, and can be proposed by anyone: parents, teachers, charities, University's and even Football Teams - the only criteria that has to be met is that they must teach English, Maths and Science, and offer a broad and balanced curriculum (leaving a bit of room for maneuver). The only requirement is that there must be enough support from parents as to be able to fit 50% of the schools places.
It is bizarre to think that these new schools can offer a different kind of learning, that is so radically different to schools as we know it, which traditionally are based are Reading, Writing and Arithmetic. However, these schools and their ideas as how to teach are very much in the pipeline of the education revolution - Everton Football Club in Liverpool for example want to create a sporting and athletic atmosphere around their school, so as to encourage young, inner-city children to attend - the incentive of playing sport apparently is means of getting kids to school.
While we may sit and laugh at the extremes of having sponsored schools (Economic Monopolies brought to you by Wal*Mart/Leisure and Tourism in Association with EasyJet), this isn't much too far from what may happen, and what already is. An unnamed Free School has a connection with Apple, which as a result offers iPad's to it's students.
So what of these plans which have been on Tory pipelines since the days of Thatcher but have only recently come about under Gove, the Education Secretary. Well, as a principle i like the idea. Between the ages of 4 and 11, school can seem a little bit of a chore. Secondary school i feel is different, you're more independent which is a bit of an encouragement to attend (or on the flipside play truant). However, primary school can seem like a drag. Personally, i remember doing a lot of PE and having a lot of "Golden Time" in the later stages of my primary school life which makes me wonder how i got straight-5s in the KS2's. The point is, Primary School, while being the foundations of education, was not always what i wanted to do with my day. At home i had toys and a Playstation which i could play all day if i stayed at home, not just for an hour at lunch time as i might at school.
Free School's do offer incentives like these, its school revolutionized to a point where it's hardly a school at all - in Manchester a Free School is planned to be guarded by groups of the Army in order to promote ideals of respect and civility. But where do we stop? How are schools like these policed? Whats to stop Tesco's coming in and giving a lesson on the benefits of Land Banking? Nothing: Free Schools need not have qualified teachers giving the lessons.
I like the idea of modernising primary schools, things like mini white boards and computer rooms can really invigorate a child to participate in the classroom and can boost attention spans - however what we don't want is the Samsung School for mini electronics buyers. I'm all for a change but lets not have it run by Funzo and Phil from Marketing.
No comments:
Post a Comment