Product Description

The education system of the UK is failing many children - particularly the inner-city children who need education most. This book challenges low expectations, poor teaching, complacency and the unthinking commitment to progressive, child-centred teaching methods. Chris Woodhead's controversial book exposes the bureaucracy, waste and incompetence in so many local education authorities. It demonstrates how the university academics who train our teachers are in fact responsible for much of the "ideological nonsense" which has forced so many parents to dig deep into their pockets to escape state education. In a nutshell, the book confronts the vested forces of the education system and stands up on behalf of parents across the country who know that their children should be getting a better deal. The book should strike a chord with anyone who believes that education is valuable in itself, rather than existing solely for its contribution to our social and economic good.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #242582 in Books
• Published on: 2002-03-14
• Original language: English
• Binding: Hardcover
• 222 pages

Amazon.co.uk Review
In his time Class War author Chris Woodhead has been a radical 70s schoolmaster, a Local Education Authority bigwig, a Schools Inspector for both Tory and Labour administrations, and a writer on educational matters for the Daily Telegraph. Now he's put that unique experience to polemical use: this is his hugely well-informed and highly opinionated dissertation on the state of the UK's education system.

Those with some knowledge of Woodhead's history and outlook (and why he was sacked by Tony Blair) will not be surprised by his traditionalist take. Woodhead finds Britain's embattled schools swamped by trendiness, undermined by bureaucracy, weakened by indiscipline and prone to mismanagement. But that predictability does not make Woodhead's arguments any the less germane and incisive. Each well-aimed kick--at Ofsted, the LEAs, even the University system--should bring a tear to the eye of the average teacher, pupil, parent--and voter. Woodhead's deconstruction of the National Curriculum, as it has been watered down to suit "progressive professional opinion", is particularly sharp. Here's the author in full flow concerning the dodgy sociologese, the post-modern weasel words, used by so many contemporary educationalists to disguise the sloppiness of their theorising:

We now have "thinking skills" in the National Curriculum. We have "enterprise education". We have "education for sustainable development". And, as an inevitable consequence, we have less and less time for the teaching of subjects the National Curriculum was first introduced to protect.

Amid all this scathing criticism, Woodhead does take time to praise certain hard-working schools, teachers, governors, and so on. He also tries to end on a positive note, by sketching a traditionalist "Way Forward", if that isn't an oxymoron. On the whole though, it's the litany of unnecessary failure that remains in the mind. This is a salutary read for the literate and pre-literate alike. --Sean Thomas

Review
There are very few teachers in the United Kingdom for whom the mention of Chris Woodhead's name does not cause a shudder of distaste. For both Tory and Labour governments, he took on the teaching profession with an ideological certitude that won him many enemies in the field (while giving the tabloids much ammunition for their attacks on a profession that they similarly regarded as outrageously trendy and compromised). Despite the scandals that clouded the final days of his career as Chief Inspector of Schools, his convictions remain unshaken as this cogently argued volume demonstrates. It's a moot point as to who its target audience might be: most teachers will scorn it, but there are enough Woodhead supporters to ensure respectable sales.

Chris Woodhead, the notorious and controversial former Chief Inspector for Schools, here sets out in typically forthright fashion his views on what is wrong with the education system and ways in which it might be improved. (Note that, despite the title, his analysis is based on the English system and does not reflect the situation in Britain as a whole.) More than this, however, he uses the book as a vehicle for defending his turbulent time in office and for hitting back at those who, he feels, have criticized him unfairly. Woodhead pulls no punches as, in the outspoken style which characterized his time at the helm of OFSTED, he discusses the topical issues in education which exercise parents and professionals alike. Chapter 1 deals with the question of standards, and discusses the much-debated topic of whether exams have got easier. He then goes on, in 'The Lunacy of Learnacy', to consider current theory and practice of education, arguing against progressive teaching methods. Chapter 3, on teachers and teaching, discusses in some depth the problems of class size (he argues cogently that a reduction by even a significant number of pupils in each class will make no difference to the quality of education received), low morale among teachers, discipline and pay. In a section on OFSTED Woodhead describes the work of the inspectorate and the particular measures introduced during his tenure and defends himself against the charges of flawed methodology, demoralisation of the profession and politicisation of the job that have been levelled against him. Finally, after chapters on Local Education Authorities and universities, he puts forward some radical ideas for improvement in the system, among them the privatisation of certain services, abolition of LEAs, phasing out of university teacher training in favour of teaching 'apprenticeships' in the classroom and a voucher system allowing access for all to independent schools. Although marred to some extent by a combative style and, arguably, unnecessarily personal criticism of educational professionals and politicians (he can now give full vent to his disdain for left-wing ideologies), Woodhead's provocative arguments provide food for thought for all those interested in the state of education today and its future development. (Kirkus UK)

About the Author
Chris Woodhead attended state primary and grammar schools, then Bristol University, before working as an idealistic and progressive teacher in the early seventies. After eight years as an LEA officer he became Chief Inspector of Schools under both the John Major and Tony Blair administrations.

Customer Reviews

Required reading...
... for anyone in education, any parent, any tax payer - anyone at all. Mr Woodhead's arguments are so strong that occasionally he's in danger of them running away from him; but otherwise a very important critique of public education in the UK, together with sensible and practical proposals for clearing up the mess.

Very courageous!
If you were to believe anybody's verdict on the British educational system, it would be Chris Woodhead,
who has worked for the last thirty years in British education, the last six years as Chief Inspector for Schools within
OFSTED, the Office for Standards in Education. His verdict on the state of British education is not necessarily
favourable and I enjoyed reading his devastating remarks on trendy teaching methods, grade inflation or short-sighted measures taken by politicians
only to achieve immediate results. Woodhead pleads for more private initiative in establishing independent schools,
based on the model of so-called charter schools, recently introduced in Arizona. These are schools funded
by the state, but which operate outside the state bureaucracy.

Much of Woodhead's courageous criticism on British schools would also apply to our German schools.

Dumbing Down - LEAs & Adult Illiteracy
Like Chris Woodhead, I was taught to be a trendy teacher at College of Education in the 1960's.

Children were not to hear the word "no", or see a sum marked with an "x" - this would undermine their already fragile self-image.

A society was to be created like that of Samoa - without stress or competition.

Meanwhile out in the real world huge numbers of children, and in particular boys, were leaving school functionally illiterate, and therefore unable to learn further skills.

All this had the total support of "inspectors" and "advisors" in the LEAs, the people who promoted those teachers who could feed back to them, on interview, the same trendy waffle: the integrated day, learning through discovery, teaching through topic work.

Candidates evincing a commitment to basic skills soon found there way into the wilderness.

Woodhead is right: LEAs have failed totally, and should be abloished.