Would you send your AS kids to a secondary school that didn't teach the NC?

[Canopus]

I was discussing future educational strategies with the parents of a HE 11 YO with AS who are interested in setting up their own school. Their ideal model is that it will offer a curriculum based around real world life skills rather than traditional academic subjects although it will offer a handful of GCSEs and other qualifications. The only problem is that they think there is no market for such a school because the majority of parents feel that an AS school based around the NC puts kids on an equal footing with those who attended a mainstream school even though it may not be an ideal curriculum, but a heavily non-standard education is taking a big gamble. What do you think?

[LancsLad]

I think Canopus that this is a big gamble but not neccesarily a bad option in some circumstances.

 

I believe this is all about currency and percieved value. Many years ago I was an assistant head of sixth form and involved in a number of things at a national level such as the youth award scheme. One of the things I did do in that time was to set up three compact agreements with what were then new universities that were trying to become established. In effect what this basically meant was that if I recomended an individual for a course and not all courses were on offer I have to say at the establishments but there were a good cross section, they guaranteed a place. Each year the compact was reviewed and if the individuals were doing well on the courses then I could expand the numbers, if i was passing on individuals not up to the task then my numbers would be cut. In effect we negotiated the currency and I had the responsibility for maintaining its value in the market place.

 

I have to say this opened up opportunities for individuals where they would not have had them previously. The problem was that because of very good early success the universities offered up more places and as a result there was pressure to take them up from my own headteacher and we kind of devalued an initial good start. In simple terms we went from the kid who might have had a disaster at home due to a family break up at a critical point in the exam process into the territory of kids who were simply bad at formal exams which was of no use when at the end of the first year at university they had to sit formal exams and blew out. It was good for the school in respect to getting kids into HE but possibly not for the kids themselves.

 

I use this example though I realise it is not exactly the same. Moving away from the NC is good but where do you find the value in your currency in the open market, or even as in my case a small part of it. I can see that parents might be interested from their own perspective in providing an experience which is of value. I have to say however questions need to be asked is this about supporting skills which are the responsibility of parents to deliver or about providing alternative educational structures and contexts? For me questions need to be asked is education about providing life skills which support happy balanced personal lives in individuals, or is it about providing life skills to support an individual in making an active and 'productive' role in society? Whilst there is massive overlaps there are areas of distinction and background philosophy to a school is crucial in this.

 

The question we need to ask is, should the market place be parents, or should it be other educational establishments and employers? When we make a decision about what the market place is I think we might be closer to finding a solution. In many ways considering myself to have been a radical educationalist I do not have issues in theory with free schools, what really concerns me is that their market place is simply that of parents. The temptation is to attract parents into the start of the process and there might be little concern as to the value of the end product, as a result it will tend to align to parental values and as such free schools might become supporting mechanisms to parenting practices. In some ways I think this is a wholly justifiable approach for some children where a strong case can be proven that their life opportunities will be very limited if not non existent due to conditions which are not expected to significantly improve. My concern is, having been part of an AS group at university as a postgraduate how far do you stretch that concept without significantly disadvantaging individuals?

 

To take my thoughts a stage further in my teaching career i was also involved in setting up a partnership agreement with SAAB in Sweeden to have month long exchanges between our 15 year old engineering students and theirs. There were a number of things which struck me when visiting the training college in Sweeden. Firslty how impressive it was and the level of resources put into it along with the quality of teaching, there were things that greatly worried me which I raised however. I remeber asking one 15 yr old Sweedish student at the end of a materials technology lecture what they knew about steel? The answer shocked me as it was very little. I asked them what they knew about aluminium and its alloys and their level of knowledge was at undergraduate degree level. I raised this point with my equivalent in their system and they said thats pretty obvious there is very little steel in a modern fighter aircraft its all made out of aluminium alloys and carbon fibre. They were of course right, we both were I simply was looking at a larger picture.

 

I use this example to highlight if you move away from the NC and even create some alternative value in respect to either FE or employers how specific do you go, and if you get too specific are you restricting future opportunities. If an AS kid goes through the school doing an alternative curriculum for example tailored to develop skills in the retail sector with a guaranteed trial at Tesco's and they go on to be store manager is this a success. I think that all depends on their potential and level of expectations. If I go back to my own personal examples I would have to say that compact agreements led to many individuals simply setting their sights on a compact institution regardless of ability. In a similar way the kids at the SAAB training school had set their sights on working in the aeronautical industry for the rest of their lives and in both cases after a bit it didn't quite feel right. I make these points Canopus because i feel strongly that any alternative to the NC have to have universal 'values' even though it might not have recognised 'value' at present, and I think this should be the case in all educational set ups pre 18.

 

I think it would be possible to come up with a curriculum very distinctive from the current NC which held universal values as a central driving force. I believe with a lot of effort you could convert this currency firstly at a local level and then spread its value through testimonials and references of its end products the kids which pass throught it. Would this be easy no, would it be worth doing I think so but with one proviso. I think the biggest mistake would be in thinking the answer was in tailoring it dirreclty for AS. My gut reaction is which AS cliches would you use as a foundation starting points? What I am saying here is I think the answer is to design a better universal curriculum not to design a better curriculum for AS. As someone with a diagnosis of AS the last thing I would want is a curriculum tailored to myself, my strengths and weaknesses are so diverse I honestly do not think that would be possible and I would be one of many diverse individuals it would have to cater for.

 

Just a few thoughts to get things moving a good post.

[bed32]

I think we are looking to give our children the best chance of happiness in life. In the education of AS children it seems clear that they need both the academic teafching and more help than an NT child on life and social skills.

 

When I have been looking at schools I have never asked whether they follow the NC, but rather what they offer in the way of GCSE courses and other skills.

 

The schools I have liked best have offered a reasonable range of GCSE but at the same time have been flexible in how they are provided, and offered other options as well. I imagine, but I don't know, that they have not formally followed the NC and therefore have had more flexibility in what they teach.

 

So I would look for a school that did offer the opportunity to do a range of GCSE but was flexible in following the capabilities and interests of the pupils.

 

If you downplay the academic too much then you are in to the range of Autism/MLD schools which are a different proposition

[Sally44]

Whatever is being offered has to be 'measured' in some way. If it is by taking GCSE's then that is a recognised standard. If you move into unknown territory you need to be able to demonstrate the students 'competence' in some way.

 

I know there are other examinations other than GCSE's, but my understanding is that these are inferior qualifications [although I know that does not sound very PC]. So could different skills become GCSE's but the grade is taken from course work and maybe a 'discussion' rather than depending on regurgitating facts and figures?

 

One way that an end product could be achieved and the work measured and recognised for its worth, would be if there were close links with industry that could give the schools some task. The industry may even pay for that service, which would be provided by the pupils.

 

For example, if you had sixth form IT students, a firm could approach the school to design their product label, or website etc. That would gain income for the school, and also allow the students involved to use that work as part of their portfolio that went towards some kind of academic grade?

 

Whatever form it takes, it has to be useful. Otherwise it is like all those degree courses being offered that are totally useless in the real world.

 

I am in the process of setting up a small home based business, and I would definately seek help from a school that 'specialised' in some area and would be happy to pay for the service if it was competetive or a lower price than I could achieve in the market place. Every day I seem to come up with another problem that needs a solution and I think a well run school department, and the children could provide a better quality of service. But does that then become child labour?

Edited June 14, 2012 by Sally44

[Canopus]

For me questions need to be asked is education about providing life skills which support happy balanced personal lives in individuals, or is it about providing life skills to support an individual in making an active and 'productive' role in society? Whilst there is massive overlaps there are areas of distinction and background philosophy to a school is crucial in this.

 

Both. What an effective modern education isn't about is filling up brains with stuff that may or may not be useful on a just in case basis. Neither is it about teaching to the test with the primary objective of gaining pieces of paper. The NC does both very effectively.

 

The question we need to ask is, should the market place be parents, or should it be other educational establishments and employers? When we make a decision about what the market place is I think we might be closer to finding a solution. In many ways considering myself to have been a radical educationalist I do not have issues in theory with free schools, what really concerns me is that their market place is simply that of parents. The temptation is to attract parents into the start of the process and there might be little concern as to the value of the end product, as a result it will tend to align to parental values and as such free schools might become supporting mechanisms to parenting practices.

 

I'm of the opinion that free schools will be run according to the whims of parents, in a similar way that primary schools were run according to the whims of the head teachers and governors prior to the NC, without any regard to what the real world wants from school leavers. I'm also of the opinion that governments both in Britain and abroad are patently incapable of drawing up quality curricula beyond KS2.

 

What I am saying here is I think the answer is to design a better universal curriculum not to design a better curriculum for AS.

 

I have thought about that one but kids with AS have special requirements that are rarely applicable to NT kids. For a start, most NT kids are capable of learning certain social skills and etiquette as they go along but most kids with AS can only learn them if they are taught about them. Such lessons in social skills will be almost essential for kids with AS if they are to function successfully in life as an adult but are unnecessary for most NT kids.

 

Factoring out the social skills specific to AS then what is left is something that approaches a better universal curriculum. Suggestions and ideas that have been submitted include:

 

1. To offer English language and maths GCSE / IGCSE.

 

2. Some computer qualifications but not necessarily the ICT GCSE.

 

3. A selection of other GCSEs or IGCSEs depending on the interests and abilities of the kids. Most of these will be optional subjects and may include those not offered by state schools.

 

4. A course about cars including legal matters, the highway code, and basic maintenance.

 

5. The job market. Methods of how to successfully find employment. CV writing and interview skills. The secrets of tapping into the hidden job market.

 

6. The legal system and prominent laws. How to fire a lawsuit against someone and what to do when someone fires a lawsuit against you.

 

7. The workings of the government and civil service departments. What they are responsible for. How the election system works.

 

8. Property. How to buy a house. Various legal aspects associated with buying and renting.

 

9. Film and video production.

 

10. Medical matters including alternative medicine.

 

11. Business.

 

12. DIY and building work.

 

 

Whatever is being offered has to be 'measured' in some way. If it is by taking GCSE's then that is a recognised standard. If you move into unknown territory you need to be able to demonstrate the students 'competence' in some way.

 

Measured by who exactly? The government measures the performance of state school and kids by the number of A*-C grade GCSEs. If school decides on alternative qualifications then it will score badly by Ofsted as a result of it being non-standard rather than it being poor. An extreme example of this is if kids moved directly into A Levels and every one of them got at least 3 A grades at 16 but nobody got any GCSEs then the school would score zero by Ofsted despite every man on the street knowing that the kids are amongst the highest academic ability. GCSEs are a very narrow measurement as they give virtually no indication of life skills, social ability, or whether one was respected at school or bullied badly.

 

Employers use different yardsticks to the government and look beyond GCSE grades.

 

I know there are other examinations other than GCSE's, but my understanding is that these are inferior qualifications [although I know that does not sound very PC]. So could different skills become GCSE's but the grade is taken from course work and maybe a 'discussion' rather than depending on regurgitating facts and figures?

 

There is a whole raft of qualifications out there and many of them are high quality and respected by employers and further education. Some kids with AS would achieve more under a coursework based system but others are very good at exams.

 

One way that an end product could be achieved and the work measured and recognised for its worth, would be if there were close links with industry that could give the schools some task. The industry may even pay for that service, which would be provided by the pupils.

 

The plan is that there will be considerable input from industry into the curriculum of the school.

 

Every day I seem to come up with another problem that needs a solution and I think a well run school department, and the children could provide a better quality of service. But does that then become child labour?

 

There are an increasing number of young teenagers who run their own businesses.