Express Mortgages Express Loans Bingo Lose Weight Franchising Dating Music Downloads DVD Rental Shopping Book Shop Find Spare Parts Cut Your Bills Wine Shop Legal Store FlatShare

HAVE YOUR SAY

HAS LABOUR WRECKED OUR SCHOOLS?

Under fire: Jim Knight

Thursday March 20,2008

Comment Speech Bubble Have your say(25)

A LABOUR education minister claimed yesterday that class sizes of more than 70 pupils were “perfectly acceptable”.

Schools minister Jim Knight said that youngsters could be massed in a large room as long as their teacher was supported by several classroom assistants.

The revelations will be seen as further evidence of Labour’s failure on education given the 1997 election pledge to restrict class sizes to a maximum of 30 for younger pupils.

After his speech drew jeers at the Association of Teachers and Lecturers’ annual conference yesterday, the minister told reporters that more than 70 children could be taught together.

Mr Knight said he had seen a maths class of 70 pupils in Telford, Shropshire, in a room with three or four extra teaching assistants.

He added that it was “perfectly acceptable” and there had been “good learning going on”.

Is 70 children per class a ridiculous idea?

Does the trend towards larger class sizes concern you?

Have YOUR say!

HAS LABOUR WRECKED OUR SCHOOLS?

11.07.08, 2:41pm

I work in a primary school as a caretaker and what i have discovered is this; when i was at school we were taught, but todays children are being conditioned and brainwashed by political correctness . Labour are a flaming disgrace and are not fit to run a children's tea party never mind the country. The sooner we get rid of these evil beasts the better.

• Posted by: angrymal2008 • Report Comment

HAS LABOUR WRECKED OUR SCHOOLS?

30.03.08, 5:10pm

The New Labour Incompetence Party has not just wrecked our schools, they have wrecked the whole Goddam Country, its Culture, Morals and everything that it used to stand for.

• Posted by: EmperorMing • Report Comment

WHAT THEY DON'T TELL YOU

30.03.08, 4:09pm

this article points (unreferenced, once again) to the 'trend in larger class sizes', yet gives no figures or proof of this assterion.

well, after doing some very simple legwork, i found a document which charts the average class size from 1978-2005.

the average class size in a secondary school was:
21.7 pupils in 2005.
22 in 2000
21.5 in 1995
20.7 in 1990
21.4 in 1985
22.1 in 1978

furthermore it also shows that in 2005, .01% of classrooms had more than 36 students.

http://www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/TIM/m002008/ts-sec-cs.pdf

ok, so mr. banker, you will say, that was 2005. and that is true. and try as i might within the 5 minutes i allowed myself, i could not find a more current number.

but this much is clear:

there is no 'trend towards larger classes' as even if the classes got larger in the last two years, that does not make a 'trend'

secondly, barring some wholesale obliteration in teachers which i am not aware of, class sizes on average are still pretty small, and very large classes of over 36 are almost nil.

so what does that say about this 'story' then? is it making reasonable claims? or is it taking someone's comment totally out of context and using it to give readers a false impression of reality? one not backed up by any real sources or figures?

don't be duped.

• Posted by: crayfishbanker • Report Comment

THEY CERTAINLY HAVE RUINED EVERYTHING THEY TOUCH

29.03.08, 9:42pm

They are an "anti-midas', everything they touch turns to dust.

Teachers have to deal with up to 40 different languages in a class of 30, imagine dealing with a class of 70.

It is not enough to be a teacher, they must be parent, social worker, sexual health nurse, psychiatrists on top of their job. With standards dropping, the joy of teaching must be waning. Also, they have their hands tied and have to, in all cases worship the idol of multiculturalism against their wishes.

I applaud anyone going into teaching, I wouldn't do it.

• Posted by: K8Bee • Report Comment