From notes made from a previous blog…..2007.
I heard a little of ‘Any Questions’ on Radio 4 last night and I must admit that I usually does feel right wing when I find myself agreeing with Ken Clarke - it’s not like finding out that you’ve just agreed with Benito Mussolini but it can be a little unnerving. He pointed out something that everyone tends to forget about in education debates and I will speculate why.
If you’re not up to date with what’s been happening in potential education bill, which looks like it’s going through, we are about to adapt the education system in order to offer greater choice to parents who need something interesting and exciting on their doorsteps when it comes to off-loading their kids on the minimal choice they have at present in terms of the local schools. This has led to the concept of the specialist school. First, it was the army, then it was sport as route out of poverty, then it was the grammar school. then it was music industry. There are obviously some routes out of the poverty trap for a chosen few or more. Governments throughout recent history have sought to find ways of making being working class less acceptable and being middle class the desirable way to live. What’s more they’ve defined middle class so broadly at present anyone in a menial job with little to no autonomy in their work could one day could one day be defined as being in the middle class bracket through having improved their quality of life by only a couple of significant measures.
When are governments going to stop lying to us about social mobility- in the US everyone is supposed to be able to become president if they are born there, which strikes me as one of the most totally abusive lies of all time, next to the lies of the importance of individualism in current debates on conservativism. In the UK if kids pass their exams they should be able to make their way up the employment ladder……no, if everyone else in the country is trying to do it too it becomes a lot more difficult. Social mobility is not for everyone and shouldn’t be seen as one of the goal of our time - what should be is to be acceptable working class in the sense that you’re not manipulated by market forces to a ridiculous extent and you don’t wish to manipulate anyone else. What happens when the class jump is not made - a sense of dejection and failure that could leave someone drinking for the rest of their lives . But hey, that’s great for the alcohol related industries in the UK and they do so well under Mr. Blair.
Having heard another snippet on Radio 4, an interview with a mother who had emigrated to France from an African country ( I believe she was black-African) I couldn‘t help but feel that we need to indicate a few things about social mobility internationally. She lived in what would be called a ‘sink estate’ in the UK on the edge of Paris, she was unhappy about the standards of the education her French born children were experiencing problems in their progress and they as they were being channelled into vocational courses. The mother was disappointed because she wanted her kids to make the class jump and presumably jump from social class five (unskilled manual) to social class I (highly skilled professional) - it‘s already difficult enough to make a jump from social class II (higher management). If she wants to dedicate herself to that it may be possible though this could, in effect, cause significant culture shock to the kids. It’s how difficult the social class jumps are that need consideration and the education system alone is not adequate - I’m a living example of such. What is possible is to be educated to a high standard and to organise your own life in a way that improves the quality of what you understand about the world - I guess I’ve become a Dharma Bum at heart. Another irony is that parents may wish their kids to become socially mobile without having the least understanding of the statistics that are presented to them when reports of increased social mobility are reported on the news nor of the social history of the country and the cultural context that this occurs in - there’s a simple presumption that good education will lead to social mobility - politicians are just so cruel. A carefully worded phrase from a politician that is technically accurate may mislead millions of people in poverty and there is little to no chance of this changing unless we consider acting on this collectively.
There is a phrase in the UK that means to be acceptable working class, and it tends to be heard less and less now, that someone is the ’salt of the earth’. As long as salt of the earth does not mean that it is an individual who is exploited working class who is manipulated by capitalism to a degree that they have rights that they can’t action it means primarily that they are a reasonable neighbour and will seek to uphold the law when it is not directly to their benefit - which puts them above the police in some respects - then it is a good tradition to look to continue - does Britain need more multi-culturally linked phrases to redefine the emerging largely ethnic working class in London as a crime free group? Please don’t let Dick Van Dyke degrade Cockney or British culture any further - we don’t deserve the harassment that a musical can deliver. Though it does seem to be the means of delivering harassment in the UK without being accused of nuisance behaviour - are you listening Rt. Hon. Charlie Clarke? Will he challenge our longest standing means of recourse? If you are American and you have issues with British foreign policy including our colonial past, please direct them straight at the organisations that delivered them not the British public in such abusive musical forms.
And what are the parents of the informed working classes doing while this debate goes on? Probably using the voluntary sector to ensure that their kids are personable and capable of dealing with long and relatively complex tasks. This is part of the rationale for the Duke of Edinburgh Awards Scheme and the Cubs, Scouts, Brownies and Guides so if parents wish to absorb themselves in this type of debate I can only wonder why it’s worth their while to do so - it strikes me as being labour intensive for the quality of the results that it could yield. It’s more likely to be the combined interest in having a good school being near to home, with that increasing the value of the property the parents own, with the need for their children’s needs, is Mr Blair attempting a dangerous, misleading double whamey that could leave his education policies in tatters - I don’t know. Ruth Kelly does make me feel like she’s the prefect around teachers when I see her with the Cabinet - she even dresses like prefects used to when I was at senior school! Is she just doing it to do my head in?
The debate is not really about kids, or schools for that matter, it’s about property and adding another feature to your dated semi - and, if possible misleading people into thinking that everyone can be socially mobile in order to make more cash for the alcohol industries. Tony Blair is doing estate agents and publicans an enormous favour. This is why as a bill it will probably require the support of Tories to push it through - it’s tarting up the local comp in order to stick a few quid on the house - carpet bagging mark II, me thinks.
There’s probably a better time investment in improving the conduct of many of the pupils in the area, if they can’t respond to basic instructions then they may need to attend some form of behaviour modification course - or the parents be selected for this improvement, after all it would be improvement I think if anyone who was a parent, or thinking of becoming a parent, would undertake a short course in behaviour management techniques - if behaviourism remains unpopular it will be at the expense of the country as a whole. Most of these matters could be dealt with during Junior school education and then everyone could have at least a slightly better Senior School near them - it’s the quality of the intake that matters in the sense that they are willing to operate within the ‘project’ that education offers: to focus on the matters within the syllabus during lessons and to relate those to issues outside the syllabus when appropriate. This as more important as being personable which everyone really wants more than a child who has passed exams. Without being personable you ain’t going nowhere. And Ken’s point that I agreed with- everyone seems to forget the importance of trying to get the best out of the ability of the young people who show signs of being able and willing to achieve - the potential of young people should never be less than central to the debate.
