Education

Subterms

    More stories

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in UK Politics

      Government urges schools to stay open as another London council moves classes online

      by

      Boris Johnson has sparked dissent in Tory ranks by issuing a demand for all schools to remain open until the official start of the Christmas break on Thursday.The order came as councils in London switched to remote learning as coronavirus cases soared in the capital, with Islington advising schools to shut and Greenwich saying headteachers should move to online classes from Monday evening. Tory MP for Wimbledon Stephen Hammond rejected the No 10 ruling, saying schools in his south London constituency should have closed last Friday and should consider two weeks of online learning after Christmas.Mr Hammond was among a group of London MP briefed by ministers and officials this morning on the situation in the capital, which he described as “stark”.“Frankly, the government should not be stopping schools closing,” Mr Hammond told BBC Radio 4’s World at One. “I have been of the view for at least a week now, looking at my local area, that schools should have been closed last Friday. With only three days left till the end of the term we should make that decision today.“It’s not just what’s happening in schools but it’s the congregation of  parents of primary schools and congregation of pupils outside afterwards. I also think that we should think very carefully about how quickly they should open after Christmas and potentially two weeks of online learning.”However, Downing Street said on Monday all schools are expected to stay open until the end of term.“We’ve consistently said that not being in school has a detrimental impact on children’s learning as well as their own personal development and mental health,” Boris Johnson’s official spokesman said. “Which is why we expect all schools and colleges to remain open until the end of term on Thursday, as schools have remained open throughout the pandemic.”Asked whether action will be taken against councils that close early, the UK prime minister’s spokesman said: “Our regional school commissioner teams are working closely with schools and local authorities across the country and will continue to work with them and support them to remain open.”The move to online teaching in some local areas comes amid concerns staff and children in school during the final week could be told to self-isolate over Christmas. Mass coronavirus testing is going ahead for secondary school students in areas of London, Essex and Kent amid rising coronavirus rates in the run-up to the holidays.On Sunday, Greenwich Council told all schools in its area in southeast London to close from Monday and switch to online learning following signs of “exponential growth” in Covid-19 cases. Islington Council is advising schools in the north London borough to shut early ahead of Christmas – except for children of key workers and vulnerable pupils – and not to reopen until later in January.“This is a very difficult decision – however the public health situation in Islington and London is so serious that we have to do everything we can to stop this deadly virus spreading in our community and across London,” Islington Council leader Richard Watts said.Meanwhile, nearly all the secondary schools in Basildon have moved to full remote education, Essex County Council said on Monday.Schools have been warned they could face legal action if they allow pupils to learn remotely in the run-up to Christmas.New powers introduced through the Coronavirus Act allow the government to issue “directions” to heads around education provision during the pandemic.  If they refuse to comply with directions to stay open, the UK education secretary could apply for a High Court injunction forcing them to do so.Additional reporting by Press Association More

    • 125 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Columbia students threaten to withhold tuition fees amid Covid protest

      by

      Almost 1,800 students at Columbia University in New York are threatening to withhold tuition fees next year, in the latest signal to US academia of widespread preparedness to act on demands to reduce costs and address social justice issues relating to labor, investments and surrounding communities.In a letter to trustees and administrators of Columbia, Barnard College and Teachers College, the students said: “The university is acutely failing its students and the local community.”They accused the university of “inaction” since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic in March, when students began demonstrating against what they say are exorbitant tuition rates “which constitute a significant source of financial hardship during this economic depression”.The letter referred to national protests over structural racism, accusing the university of failing to act on demands to address “its own role in upholding racist policing practices, damaging local communities and inadequately supporting Black students”.Emmaline Bennett, chair of the Columbia-Barnard Young Democratic Socialists of America and a master’s student at Teachers College, told the Guardian the university and other colleges had made no effort to reduce tuition fees as they moved to remote learning models necessitated by pandemic conditions.“We think it says a lot about the profit motive of higher education, even as the economy is in crisis and millions of people are facing unemployment,” Bennett said. “This is especially true of Columbia, which is one of the most expensive universities in the US.”Demands outlined in the letter include reducing the cost of attendance by at least 10%, increasing financial aid by the same percentage and replacing fees with grants.Such reforms, the letter said, should not come at the expense of instructor or worker pay, but rather at the expense of bloated administrative salaries, expansion projects and other expenses that do not directly benefit students and workers.The university, the letter said, must invest in community safety solutions that prioritise the safety of Black students, and “commit to complete transparency about the University’s investments and respect the democratic votes of the student body regarding investment and divestment decisions – including divestment from companies involved in human rights violations and divesting fully from fossil fuels.“These issues are united by a shared root cause: a flagrant disregard for initiatives democratically supported within the community. Your administration’s unilateral decision-making process has perpetuated the existence of these injustices in our community despite possessing ample resources to confront them with structural solutions.“Should the university continue to remain silent in the face of the pressing demands detailed below, we and a thousand of fellow students are prepared to withhold tuition payments for the Spring semester and not to donate to the university at any point in the future.”A Columbia spokesperson said: “Throughout this difficult year, Columbia has remained focused on preserving the health and safety of our community, fulfilling our commitment to anti-racism, providing the education sought by our students and continuing the scientific and other research needed to overcome society’s serious challenges.”The university has frozen undergraduate tuition fees and allowed greater flexibility in coursework over three terms. It has also, it said, adopted Covid-related provisions including an off-campus living allowance of $4,000 per semester, to help with living and technology expenses related to remote learning.Columbia is not alone in facing elevated student demands. In late August, for example, students at the University of Chicago staged a week-long picket of the provost’s house as part of a campaign to disband the university police department, Chicago’s largest private force.The issue of student debt remains challenging. In a nod to progressives, President-elect Joe Biden last month affirmed his support for a US House measure which would erase up to $10,000 in private, non-federal loan debt for distressed individuals.Biden highlighted “people … having to make choices between paying their student loan and paying the rent” and said such debt relief “should be done immediately”.Some Democrats say relief should go further. In September, Senate minority leader Chuck Schumer and Massachusetts senator Elizabeth Warren co-authored a resolution which called for the next president to cancel up to $50,000 of outstanding federal loans per borrower.At Columbia, students say their demands for Covid-related fee reductions are only a starting point.“In the long-term, we need to reform the educational system entirely,” said Bennett. “We need to make all universities and colleges free, and to cancel all student debt to prevent enduring educational and economic inequalities.” More

    • 163 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Minnijean Brown-Trickey: the teenager who needed an armed guard to go to school

      by

      When Minnijean Brown-Trickey looks back at old pictures of 4 September 1957, she remembers the day her courage kicked in. “I look at the photos of the nine of us, standing there, in contrast to those crazy people,” she says. “And what I say is that they threw away their dignity and it landed on us.”Brown-Trickey, now 79, was one of the Little Rock Nine, the first group of African American children to go to the city’s Central high school in September 1957 – and in doing so, desegregate it. On the teenagers’ first day at the Arkansas school, white residents were so furious they amassed in a 1,000-strong mob at the gates. In preparation, eight of the teenagers had been instructed by Daisy Bates, the leader of the Arkansas National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), to meet at her house, so they could travel to the school in a group. But one of the nine, Elizabeth Eckford, had no telephone and so was not told of the safety plan. Instead she was forced to run the gauntlet of the mob’s hatred alone. The pictures of the young girl encountering the baying crowd is the enduring image of that day for many. But to Brown-Trickey, despite its power, it cannot completely capture all nine children’s fear. “Still photos cannot show how we are shaking in our boots, sandwiched between the Arkansas National Guard and a mob of crazy white people,” she says.As they tried to walk into school, the children were subject to verbal abuse, spat on and denied admission. Three black journalists watching were also attacked. One, L Alex Wilson, was hit on the head with a brick, developed a nervous condition and died three years later aged only 51.It took a further three weeks for the students to actually step inside the building, thanks to fierce resistance from the Arkansas governor Orval Faubus, who used the mob as a pretext for barring the nine, putting the state’s National Guard in their way. Brown-Trickey recalls how he warned of “blood in the streets” should the children be allowed to go to school. More

    • 88 Shares129 Views

      in World Politics

      India’s New Education Policy: Not Paying Attention

      by

      It was instructive that probably the most consequential event in the life of the Indian Republic merited nothing more than three pro-forma single-sentence references to “epidemics and pandemics” in the recently-adopted National Education Policy 2020. The policy must have been discussed and agreed by the Union Cabinet wearing masks, a clear and present reminder of how much has changed. Yet the document approved acknowledges COVID-19 only to exhort higher education institutions to undertake epidemiological research and advocate greater use of technology in delivery mechanisms.

      360˚ Context: The State of the Indian Republic

      READ MORE

      That is a pity. COVID-19 has brought lessons in its wake that we will ignore at our peril. In a societal sense, the pandemic has laid bare the fragile and counterproductive assumptions that underpin the way we have organized ourselves. Education, as the primary mechanism that drives long-term change in a society, must respond in a way that protects and strengthens children today and the nation tomorrow.

      What We Value

      Three important mechanisms of social organization that have been taken for granted in education during recent decades are institutionalization, urbanization and globalization. If COVID-19 is not a one-off event — and there is no reason to assume that it is given how exploitative our engagement with our environment continues to be — each one of them must be reassessed for worth, especially for how they affect the future of our children.

      Institutionalization has promoted the idea that the only learning worth our children’s time and our money is the one that is provided in schools, colleges and universities. Across most of the world, this has made learning information-centric and uncritical. It has packed children into rows and columns in classrooms and made them unfamiliar with their surroundings. It has taken them away from the productive use of their hands and bodies, and valorized “brain work,” creating an artificial crisis of periodic unemployment even before the unimaginable destruction of employment caused by COVID-19.

      Embed from Getty Images

      It has snapped children’s’ connections with their land, their environment, their culture and their communities, replacing them with words in ink on paper or typeface on a computer screen. In India, a mindless pedagogy has further ensured that institutionalization fails even in its own objectives as student achievement in “learning metrics,” mainly focused on literacy, numeracy and data, has kept falling.

      With pre-school centers closed, COVID-19 has brought attention squarely to the role of parents in the holistic development of their young children. (We started Sajag, a program for coaching caregivers in nurturing care in April 2020. It now reaches over 1.5 million families and is set to expand further. Many others have started similar programs.) By forcing the closure of schools and colleges, COVID-19 presents us with the opportunity to explore what exactly is being lost when schools close. It also creates the possibility that we will discover how much there is to learn in communities, on land, in relationships and in discovery and invention, outside the school. It has the promise of suggesting a radical overhaul of what we value in education.

      Organized for Economic Efficiency

      Urbanization has caused us to believe that ghettoization of people in cities is inevitable as we “develop.” With economic and social policies in most countries oriented toward this shibboleth, we have seen unhygienic conditions grow exponentially in cities, even as rural communities have been devastated by the loss of populations. Mental health challenges in urban communities have become alarming, accentuated simply by the inhuman stresses that accompany urban living. For our young, it has meant few physical spaces for wholesome growth and play, little opportunity for meaningful community engagement, and a social landscape tragically barren of nurturing experiences.

      By attacking densely-packed urban communities disproportionately, COVID-19 has laid bare the fallacy of organizing ourselves solely for economic efficiency. It asks us to reconsider how physical communities should be laid out, how large they should be, how they should harmonize into the surrounding landscape and how their cultural, economic and political sinews should function. We have also been fed the inevitability of globalization, almost as a primal force. It is true that it promises economic efficiency, but we have, in the process, lost much.

      Diversity is the essence of risk reduction and long-term survival and thriving, whether at the level of an organization, a community, a nation or, indeed, evolution of life itself. In a few short decades, blinded by the promise of economic efficiency, we have traded diversity away for massive inequality and loss of local skills, trades, crafts, self-reliance, agency and autonomy. Our textbooks, the only source of information promoted by our policies, have consistently failed to ignite an examination of the underlying assumptions and the all too visible outcomes among our children.

      COVID-19 has alerted us to the downsides of these Faustian bargains. Its dramatic spread is certainly a result of our way of life, with air travel being the primary vector. The heart-breaking spectacle of tens of millions of migrant workers walking hundreds of kilometers and sleeping on asphalt roads in India’s scorching summer heat is another. They discovered that they had no means of support, no community, no fallback when their employment ceased. COVID-19 has also awakened us rudely to the reality that having the world’s fastest GDP growth rate is no protection against ending up with the world’s steepest fall in GDP and widespread misery.

      Globalizing Impulse

      The globalizing impulse has led to entire education systems being unmoored from authentic experience and unresponsive to local needs. As a result, it has fostered and valorized the creation of an alienating and alienated elite. The reaction to that is a distressing level of anti-intellectualism throughout the world. That, of course, creates the fodder for the assembly line that is perhaps the holy grail of the globalizing philosophy in the first place, but it also creates a dangerous level of instability and irrationality in society that can eventually only tear everything apart.

      To the extent that we continue to regard globalization as self-evidently good, we create the potential for damaging our children, inhibiting their learning and creating a world that is less fit for them. Time has come to drop the fiction that local wisdom is somehow inferior and to engage in a meaningful dialogue that hasn’t foreclosed on the alternatives.

      To disregard such fundamental questions in an education policy adopted in the middle of the pandemic makes little sense. These should be the subject of widespread dialogue, including in our schools and colleges, before and after the adoption of the policy. The sensibilities that arise from such deliberations must inform our liberal education as well as the conduct of professions such as engineering, town planning, medicine, economics, sociology and, indeed, education. An education policy that doesn’t even consider the questions relevant to how our education system should be structured has surely not paid attention.

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More

    • 125 Shares129 Views

      in UK Politics

      University students to go home for Christmas as soon as lockdown ends

      by

      University students in England are being told to go home to spend Christmas with their families as soon as the lockdown ends next month.Face-to-face learning should end by 9 December, new guidance says, allowing young people to travel at a time when the risk of Covid-19 transmission is lowest – after the four weeks of restrictions.A week-long “student travel window” from 3 December will see universities set staggered departure dates, to ease the pressure on public transport.The guidance follows the furore over suggestions that students might be trapped in their halls of residence over the festive period, to prevent them spreading the virus across the country.Gavin Williamson, the education secretary – facing rising criticism over the “disgusting” conditions students faced, as they were ordered to stay in their rooms – stepped back from such a move.Now the guidance also seeks to solve the problem facing students who test positive before they are due to leave, forcing them to self-isolate for 10 days.Moving all learning online by 9 December will provide enough time for students to complete that isolation period and still return home for Christmas, ministers say.They have promised to “work closely with universities to establish mass testing” ahead of departures, with priority given to universities in hotspot areas.“We are delivering on our commitment to get students back to their loved ones as safely as possible for the holidays,” said Michelle Donelan, the universities minister.“We have worked really hard to find a way to do this for students, while limiting the risk of transmission.“Now it is vital they follow these measures to protect their families and communities, and for universities to make sure students have all the wellbeing support they need, especially those who stay on campus over the break.”Speaking ahead of the announcement, the University and College Union warned of “huge hurdles” to be overcome if mass testing is to be carried out.“Some of our concerns include whether all universities will be able to take part, how the tests will be administered, who will cover the costs, what the plan is for students who commute to campus daily from their family home, and how students who aren’t able to be tested will travel home safely,” said Jo Grady, its general secretary.Ms Donelan stressed that English students at universities in Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland should follow the guidance in those nations, before returning home.If they had not gone through a four-week lockdown, they should restrict their contacts with others for at least 14 days, either before or after returning home to England.Dr Jenny Harries, the deputy chief medical officer, said: “The mass movement of students across the country at the end of term presents a really significant challenge within the Covid-19 response. The measures announced today will help minimise that risk.”  More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      TV tonight: the moment of truth for Trump and Biden

      by

      US election night 11pm, BBC One; ITV; Sky NewsThe road to the 2020 US election has felt even more dramatic than anticipated, taking in everything from the “October surprise” of Trump being admitted to hospital to the unfurling consequences of the pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement. Tonight, the votes are counted and there won’t be any shortage of options in terms of assessing the news from the battleground states. Andrew Neil on the BBC? Tom Bradby on ITV? Or Ed Conway on Sky? Get ready for a nail-biter. Ammar KaliaAung San Suu Kyi: The Fall of an Icon 9pm, BBC TwoFrom Nobel peace prize winner to facing accusations of genocide, Aung San Suu Kyi has had an unpredictable fall from grace. This documentary charts her history from imprisonment to election victory before analysing her widely criticised response to violence against Rohingya Muslims. AKChannel Hopping With Jon Richardson 9pm, Comedy CentralRichardson enters the Clive James territory of pointing at telly and laughing, with a collection of wacky clips from around the world. His guests this week are Ivo Graham, whose TV obsessions are Britain’s Got Talent and Blind Date, and Judi Love on US cult classic Finding Bigfoot. Jack SealeBlack Monday 9pm, Sky ComedyThe periodically amusing Wall Street comedy starring Don Cheadle and Regina Hall returns. As season two begins, everyone is dealing with the cold, hard reality of what a stock market crash really entails. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t deals to make and opportunities to pursue if you know where to look. Phil HarrisonEducating Greater Manchester 9.15pm, Channel 4This series returns to Harrop Fold secondary in Salford. Headteacher Mr Povey’s career is under threat, while a new year 8 pupil arrives from Calcutta and tries to fit in with the students. We also catch up with Vincent, who promises he has reformed his mischievous ways. AKAlton Towers: A Rollercoaster Year 10.15pm, Channel 4This has been the year of the furlough documentary, revealing how UK attractions – from stately homes to zoos – have coped during lockdown. This latest addition doubles as a comeback special, shadowing staff at the venerable theme park as they prepare for reopening in a tight 12-day window. Graeme VirtueFilm choice More

    • 188 Shares199 Views

      in UK Politics

      Coronavirus: Students in Scotland told ‘realistic possibility’ they may not be allowed home for Christmas

      by

      University students in Scotland may have to stay in their halls of residence over Christmas, the Holyrood government has said.John Swinney, Scotland’s education secretary, said there was a “realistic possibility” that students would be prevented from returning home in December “if we have a situation where the virus has not been controlled”.Speaking on the BBC Good Morning Scotland radio programme, the deputy first minister said the return of students at Christmas “without a doubt” depends on the coronavirus infection rate being reduced.Asked if that meant students could be forced to remain in halls of residence, he said: “We want to avoid that at all possible cost because we want students to return home.”But I have to be realistic that, if we have a situation where the virus has not been controlled, then we will have to look at other scenarios and other plans.”Mr Swinney added: “There is a lot of thinking and work going on within the Scottish government, with Universities Scotland, the institutions, with the National Union of Students, and also with the governments in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to try to make sure this can be undertaken as safely as possible.”But there obviously is a risk that if the virus is not contained, then we may not be able to support the return of students to their homes.”We want to avoid that but it is a realistic possibility.” More

    • 113 Shares189 Views

      in World Politics

      India’s New Education Policy Is Full of Hodge-Podge Nonsense

      by

      The union cabinet of the government of India recently announced its 2020 National Education Policy (NEP). This is the first education policy developed by a non-Congress party government since independence. Coming 34 years after the last formulation of a fully-fledged education policy, Indians anticipated a significant pivot in the education system to leverage the country’s demographic dividend. India’s current political leadership claimed it wanted to make the country a “vishwa guru,” the Sanskrit word for a world teacher, and would dramatically reform its education. Therefore, great expectations from the NEP seemed natural.

      360° Context: The State of the Indian Republic

      READ MORE

      Prima facie, the NEP might make many Indians happy because it has something in it for everyone. However, a careful read reveals that the NEP does little to change the direction of our education. It largely promises cosmetic changes. In essence, the NEP is a collection of myriad aspirational expressions, not a coherent policy framework.

      The ideologues of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) may find the references to ancient wisdom of India heartening. It might lead to young Indians learning that Banabhatta outlined 64 forms of art or Sushruta pioneered glorious surgical techniques. However, it does little to prepare the young to shape the future.

      Given my advocacy of long-term policymaking, I should have reasons to thank those who drafted the NEP. They have taken a 20-year view and set goals for 2040. Just as we plan over a 20-year timespan, not a five-year one, for our children, so should our national plans. Yet a bad 20-year plan is worse than its bad five-year counterpart, and that is my problem with the NEP.

      What Are the Changes Proposed?

      Let me pick on a key aspect of the plan. The NEP proposes the three-language formula. This means that, all over the country, students will learn three languages. These are Hindi, English and the regional language of the respective state. The government believes that it is abolishing language barriers in the country. Instead, this has triggered off a storm in non-Hindi speaking states. In Tamil Nadu, there has been long-standing opposition to Hindi as compulsory learning or administration. The three-language formula has been around since 1968 but failed to take off because parts of India resent the domination and imposition of Hindi.

      There is another tiny little matter. Demand for learning in English has taken off around the country, including and especially in Hindi-speaking areas. Thanks to the legacy of colonization, the advent of globalization and a host of other factors, English has emerged as the language of success in India. The people do not care for the three-language formula one jot. Yet the BJP’s NEP is flogging a dead horse.

      Embed from Getty Images

      Many have lauded the NEP for promoting multidisciplinary education. This has long been discussed. At far too young an age, Indians are cast into rigid silos of arts, science and commerce. As a result, they lose love for learning and end up at lower-productivity levels than their counterparts in Europe or East Asia. The NEP allows students to change disciplines more easily along the same lines as in the US. However, this flexibility will only benefit the country if quality education is offered in different disciplines. For instance, English and history are taught terribly in a rote-based manner in most schools. Shifting from science or commerce to study either subject might enable a student to pass more easily but would achieve little else.

      The NEP offers greater flexibility in earning degrees either over a period of time or across subjects. Offering multiple entry and exit points in higher education is a good idea. It may help people find their true interests and give them second or third chances in life. However, the key logical next step is to unlink degrees from jobs, where academic degrees are immaterial. A new form of recruiting that is based on demonstrated merit and knowledge of the work itself is the way forward for the country. The NEP has missed that opportunity to curb India’s fixation with degrees and promote a culture of focus on work.

      Supporters claim that the NEP is focusing on work by combining vocational education with school and college education. In due course of time, vocational education will be on par with other degree programs. A carpenter, a plumber or an electrician will command the same respect as someone with a master’s degree in literature, history or sociology. This argument is disingenuous. Increasing “respect” for vocational programs involves changes in social perceptions. It requires much deeper and drastic changes than those envisaged by the NEP.

      Bad Thinking and Poor Drafting

      In fact, the NEP is full of seemingly good ideas that have simply not been thought through. It has passing references to fostering creativity and instituting a 360-degree view in student report cards. It also throws in digital education, adult learning and lok-vidya (folk education) about local heritage and culture. Yet the NEP fails to tell anyone how these ideas will come into practice.

      The drafters of the NEP forget that soundbites are not policy. Nor are tweaks. Turning a 5+3+2+2 system into a 10+2 or 5+3+3 one does not change the way students are taught or the way they learn. Similarly, giving a certificate after year one, a diploma after year two and a bachelor’s after year three does not change syllabi, pedagogy and learning. Yes, a student can drop out after a year with a certificate, but would that be worth the paper it was written on?

      To change education, India must improve the quality and commitment of its teachers. Training them in institutions with new names or giving students multiple exits or entries in a four-year bachelor of education program offers flexibility in getting a degree but does not improve the quality of their instruction.

      In comparison with earlier education policies, the National Education Policy is a poorly-drafted document. It is a testament to how India has regressed under the BJP. The demonetization policy was instituted by a hasty, poorly-drafted document. It seems that the government does not have the intellectual policymaking firepower of its predecessors.

      One sentence in paragraph 4.13 on page 14 of the NEP captures drafting woes common to recent government documents when it proclaims: “In particular, students who wish to change one or more of the three languages they are studying may do so in Grade 6 or 7, as long as they are able to demonstrate basic proficiency in three languages (including one language of India at the literature level) by the end of secondary school.”

      Does this mean that students can change the languages they are learning as long as they can travel into the future, i.e., Grade 12, and prove they are proficient in the new languages they choose? Or does it mean that students must be prepared to prove proficiency in the languages they choose in Grade 12? Sadly, the NEP is full of such unadulterated absolute nonsense.

      The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy. More