Tuesday, September 06, 2005

Partners in class

Why does Ruth Kelly, the Education Secretary, think parents should be treated as partners in education rather than as consumers? Is it unreasonable to expect the state to provide a good standard of general education by itself?

People don't go to Tescos and help fill the shelves before buying their food!

3 comments:

lascivious said...

Tescos does not sell faulty goods that you are forced to purchase, even if you have purchased similar goods from another supermarket resulting in the Tesco goods never being used.

The government has to justify taxing everyone for a dismal comprehensive education (oh wait, the comprehensive schools are now labelled as "specialist schools"), and if it means bringing in "partners" to do it, they will. After all, we can't have people choosing which school they go to, can we?

wonkotsane said...

It's important for parents to be involved in the education of their children - my kids probably learn as much at home as they do at school. However, we pay for our children's education and this is what the state should provide. It's not like you have a choice really - you either educate them yourself or send them to school.

Snafu said...

Wonko, I totally agree with you. The problem is that when some parents do get involved in, ie become school governors, they are accused of being too middle class and unrepresentative!!