Before I start, I would like to make a few points. First, I am not attempting to write a scathing report on the UK Independence Party, nor am I even planning to demonstrate my opinion on any matter than education. Also, this is not an attempt to convince anyone to vote in a certain way, simply, it is my own reflections on the policies of the party, both positive and negative, and anyone is completely welcome to disagree with anything I say! I know that education is devolved to Scotland, so is unlikely to affect my education or my future career, but I do believe that my reflections are worth making.
I have copied some of the main points from UKIP’s manifesto from their website:
- Ease teachers’ workloads by cutting down on assessments, data collection and appraisals
- Scrap teachers’ performance-related pay
- End sex education for primary school children
- Bring back grammar schools and support a range of secondary schools including vocational, technical and specialist schools
- Waive tuition fees for science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine (STEMM) subjects at university
- Make First Aid training part of the national curriculum
“Ease teachers’ workloads by cutting down on assessments, data collection and appraisals”
I can see the point that they are trying to make, which is to reduce the bureaucracy and allow teachers to spend their time planning and teaching. However, I believe that assessments, data collection and appraisals can all be of value. For teachers, these things can be used to set targets and improve practice. I think that they key is in how individual schools and individual teachers use these things so that they are not aimless uses of time, but rather it is extremely meaningful. Assessments are not the be all and end all within education, but I can see that they can be beneficial if used correctly, so they should not be cut down. Ultimately, I can understand what this policy was attempting to do, but I cannot agree with it.
“Scrap teachers’ performance-related pay”
I am aware that we do not have performnce-related pay, but I think this point is worth consideration. Basically, it is saying teachers should not be paid based on their performance as teachers. A survey on the opinions of teachers in Wales about performance-related pay, it was found that “it would be problematic to isolate the performance of individual teachers and deleterious to collegiality and teamwork in schools” I agree with these points, I wonder how teacher would be assessed. Would it be based on attainment within their class? The problem with this is that children develop at different rates, so children who take longer to develop would bring a class average down. This could potentially result in a teachers trying to avoid having certain children in their class. I also wonder if teachers who are low on the pay scale would perhaps give up, and not put in as much effort. Of course, the counter-argument is that performance-related pay could be highly motivating to some teachers who would strive to be the best, but that begs the question: would they simply do it for the increased money, or would they do it because they loved it and they enhanced pay be a bonus? While I can understand this argument, I do not agree. I can see that performance-related pay could become a negative tool and therefore this policy is a sensible one.
“End sex education for primary school children”
This one speaks for itself, it means that many children will reach 12 years old with no understanding of sex education. I believe that it is essential that children know about sex and relationships, but also about their bodies. For me, the aim of sex education is to promote healthy habits in the future, not teaching children to do things that they are too young for.
“Bring back grammar schools and support a range of secondary schools including vocational, technical and specialist schools”
This is an interesting concept to consider. They are advocating the use of grammar schools, which are “the only state schools… that are allowed by law to select all their pupils on the grounds of high academic ability”. This means that children can be put on a completely different track based on whether they do well in the admissions test. To me, this is wrong as it limits the opportunities offered to children, and I think it could be detrimental to their confidence if they fail to gain entry. “The specialist schools programme is a UK government initiative that encourages secondary schools in England to specialise in certain areas of the curriculum in order to boost achievement.” I also have a problem with this, it is all very well to join a specialist school but I do not feel that it gives children enough opportunity to change their minds. They may want to be a dancer or performer when they are aged 11 or 12, and then decided they want something entirely different from their lives by the time they’re 16 By then it would be too late to change their minds.
“Waive tuition fees for science, technology, engineering, mathematics and medicine (STEMM) subjects at university”
This could seem like a positive move, but to me, I see strong bias in favour of people who are more academic who would be most likely to study a STEMM subject. This would mean any creative subject would require the payment of tuition fees, such as: Art, Music, English Literature or Performing Arts. These people on lower incomes may feel pushed to apply for STEMM subjects just because they would not have to pay for them and go on to struggle with the course content. This means that creative or arts subjects would only be accessible to those who could afford tuition fees, limiting the choices for those from lower income families
“Make First Aid training part of the national curriculum”
I do not see any problems with this policy. The number of people I know my own age who have no first aid skills is very high. St John’s Ambulance’s research says that two-thirds (59%) wouldn’t feel confident trying to save a life. This is a huge number of people with no skills in this area, and that does not account for the number of people with out-of-date skills. If every child had this as a mandatory part of their education it would allow them to build up a highly useful skill set which they will be able to use throughout their lives. Also, I believe that it may be something that children who struggle with academics may find they are good at and could be a means of building up confidence in some children. It goes without saying that any training would have to be age appropriate.
My final point comes as a result of a group activity. We had to get into groups and research a political party and I was in the UKIP group. Something that I became aware of was that some people did not even try to be impartial and talk about their party without also giving their opinion. While this was in a peer setting, as opposed to a teaching one, I have become aware that there will almost definitely come a point in our careers where we have to teach about the political parties. It will be essential at that time to be completely impartial. On 1PP1 last year, I taught a bit about politics around the time of the 2015 General Election. I had to be very careful, even not to agree with anything children said. This is something that I think will be very important to remember throughout our teaching careers.
http://www.ukip.org/ukip_manifesto_summary
http://www.tlrp.org/themes/seminar/gewirtz/papers/bibliography.pdf
http://www.ngsa.org.uk/faqs.php
http://www.serviceschools.co.uk/cms/specialist_schools_arts_drama_music_new/
