Ministers to ban creationist teaching aids in science lessons
Well, it was never to governments positioning to allow creationism to sneak into science classrooms anyway, so one must certinally wonder why it took them so long and why more action hasn't been took agaisn't "Truth in science" - an orgainisation seeking to allow the teaching of creationism (a religious belif) in a science classroom.
One would think that with the government doing a U-turn on its position regarding faith schools admissions it would not at the same time be encouraging young people to become scientists. Yet that is what our detestable spin machine of a government has indeed done. Its not that encouraging young people to become scientists is a bad thing, its merely that if you are genuinely serious and passionate about such a proposal the last thing you do is change your stance on an issue which will possibly weaken those who seek do discredit the teachings of virtually proven science not with a different perspective of science but blind faith. The same obviously goes for the undemocratic process of academies which in my opinion are even more damaging as they allow any nut job to run a state of the art school providing they have the money to pay for a small percentage of the costs. Do we want a next generation of scientists? Or do we want a generation of creationists? Whatever the case what I would really love to see is a government that states what its plans are and then does not contradict them.
Local Coverage At Last
Well, not where I live, but in Blyth/Northumberland where a new academy (sponsored by emmanuel schools) has been proposed a local paper (News Post Leader) has interviewed me and has mentioned the site. For the article click here. In the same paper labour councillors are opposing the plan. Is the labour party really united in its goals? It is my belief a great majority of labour members/activists/representatives are still old school who are merely preaching to a majority of middle England in order to keep clutch of the power that they thirsted for for so long. But now the public are getting bored I fear....
Mother loses legal challenge
A mother has lost a High Court challenge over a proposal to replace a north London school with an academy.Hayley Powers, whose two children go to St Mary Magdalene CofE Primary School, Islington, argued the move would weaken the rights of parents and pupils. In March, the independent schools adjudicator approved the closure of the school, to be replaced by a London Diocesan Board-sponsored academy. Judge Mr Justice Wilkie ruled that this decision had not been unlawful. After the ruling, lawyers issued a statement on behalf of Mrs Powers expressing her disappointment over the result.
The education secretary Alan Johnson stated that: "The judgement confirms that the government is right to proceed with academies to give children the chance of a good education rather than accept a status quo which let down too many,"
Right, so, it does that how? Sir, it’s a disgrace that you who are currently being paid an obscene amount of taxpayer money can either be so ignorant of the institutions of academies, or, as I suspect as a realist, you are simply administering out more government spin to a vastly ignorant public. The academy scheme not only reinforces the status quo within schools, but also does so to a dangerous extent. Power is transferred from the parents (the same people who according to the government, love academies) to private sponsorship with their own agendas. What’s in it for them? Why is this “labour” government protecting and increasing the interests of private business? Therefore, more to the point, what’s in it for the government? Ah, yes, that thing that makes the world go round, money. When we learn that power corrupts?
Legal Case Approved
The legal fight to stop an academy is underway. Rob Macdonald, from south-west London, is seeking a judicial review of Merton Borough Council's plans to convert his son's school, Tamworth Manor.
He admitted his son's school had been struggling, but said parents "did not deserve to lose control" of their local schools.
"I don't believe putting schools into private hands is a step forward, I think it's a step back," he said.
The government is arguing that academies are still very popular with parents. While this may indeed be true, from the conversations i have had with many parents, its only that way because the majority of them are apathetic to politics and are thus ignorant to what type of legal privitised system academies are allowed to run under. This case will surely help to raise some awareness. Thier site is in the links section.
Flagship Academy!... Still failing?
One of the government's first flagship academies has been criticised again by Ofstead, one year after a failing inspection. The academy, Unity city academy in Middlesbrough, is in a area of "very challenging circumstances" according to the school's new chief executive David Triggs. Doesn't this show that academies aren't always the divine answer Blair makes them out to be? Modern buildings and up to date fittings - YES! Strong links with local community - YES! Accountability to the public - YES! Privatisation? Sorry, it hasn't worked with the electricity / water companies, will it hell work with children’s education. On that note also, I find it despicable that the government has playing with politics throughout this whole scheme in a most sensitive area that should never be used to score any kind of political points - the lives of children.
Sponsorships do care about education! Honestly...
To be honest I can't believe I havent found this sooner. This is on the inside cover of the year book of the kings academy 2004-2005. To see the whole thing online click here.
Hm, you know, I guess sponsorships aren't interested in just simply advertising thier company at all. They really do care! It's good to know that YOUR tax money is funding the publication of private adverts to the young children of our society.
Sponsors
Selective? Us? Of corse not!
The archbishop of Canterbury has shot down claims that faith schools are cherry picking the brightest pupils. While I admit openly that I'm not particularly learned in this area there are two things I'd like to point out in relation to academies. They can in fact select 10% of their intake policy, but also, and indeed more scarily, there have been reports of faith academies (or should I say Christian academies) only employing Christian teachers - indeed I even vaguely remember one of the deputy heads of my old academy stating that if your not a Christian why would you want to work in a Christian school? To back what I am saying up, the only non-Christian deputy head (and there was only one!) was effectively banned from giving assemblies, also the head's of the departments in the schools were all "Christians" too, except rather curiously the head of science.
To be quite frank, with all the hundreds of academies supposedly being planned by the government - and with the ready evangelical millionaire sponsors - many teachers don't have much of a choice. Also surely its illegal, no for that case, immoral to only employ teachers of a certain faith that is in line with yours? I think this is coming back to the "WHAT WE WANT" type of philosophy as stated below by Mr McQouid.
Sponsor an academy, get a knighthood!
In today's prime minister's questions (8.02.2006), Tony Blair was questioned by one of his own MP's, Gordon Prentice (Pendle) about why there is a common conception that sponsorships of academies are receiving knighthoods and peerages. Here's what he said:
"Why is it that so many influential people outside the House think that knighthoods and peerages can be bought by sponsoring city academies? Is it because six sponsors have been honoured so far? What about independent trust schools that are seeking partners in the private sector? What is in it for Tesco, B & Q, Burger King and Virgin Mobile?" - http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2006-02-08a.868.5
Blair's response? Typical politician, or at least a typical blair response. He simply praised city academies, never once did he deny that knighthoods and peerages are being bought. Money certainly does speak. Much more than the principals of democracy ever can do!
Should we educate ministers about their own policies?
In an interview today on The Daily Politics Show (BBC2 7.2.06) when being interviewed about sex education in school's the current minister of state at the department of work and pensions, and the previous minister for children young people and families Margaret Hodge, said:
"..the governing bodies (of school's) will represent the interests of local people.."
However, with academies this simply is not true. "Ownership" of the school is sold out to private sponsorship, who has total control of the governing body. ONLY ONE PARENT, representing potentially hundreds of families, has a seat on academies governing board's. Some representation!
Soaring Truancy Rates
In the same article (below) It's noted that 3 of the flag ship city academies are in the bottom 50 for truancy rates. Well, I thought it'd be fun if I did my own little investigation, to see if there was any difference between my old "failing" school, and my city academy. The number of unauthorised absences for the failing school? 0.7% (2002). Number of unauthorised absences for the flag ship? 7.3% (2005). What an improvment! If you don't belive me please visit the offical sites:
In a recent article published by The Times (19.01.06) - http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,564-1999941,00.html It has been revealed, (although I think the information has been there for some time) that the school league tables don't have to take into account main core subjects such as English, Math's and Science. So basically, a student could do really good in a GNVQ (worth 4 GCSE's), just scrape a C in another subject and totally fail all other subjects. Because many "failing" students in city academies have been "nudged" into doing GNVQ's, statistics has obviously been effected. However, when the main subjects are also taken into consideration the national statistics are very much altered indeed, dropping 12 points from 56.3% to 44.3%. In the results 3 of the 14 academies (open long enough to be able to assess) were in the bottom 50 schools in the country, and 7 were in the worst 200. Not looking like the devine answer that was promised, is it?
Sponsors
More Homophobia From McQuoid!
Ok so I admit his comments in the article below might be slightly covertly homophobic, but I think if his comments in the red pepper article (links) are anything to go by, we can confrom Nigel's secret hate: ‘the Bible states clearly that homosexuality is against God’s design; I would indicate that clearly to young folk.’ And to think, this was the guy who said it was "facist" to not allow the bible's creationism to be tought along side Darwins theory of Evolution. Smell the hypocracy?
Homophobic Ethos?
I admit this is actually old news, but something which perhaps is important to remember.
Would it be fair to say that children lead by example? Right, well, apart from parents and possibly TV who has a great influence in what children think? The school perhaps? Now what Im curious to know is that how is it possible that the Head teacher of the school can be anti-gay? And, if such a character exists, what type of school will he or she be the head of? What religion will he or she have? What class and race will he or she belong to? Is it going to be a he or she?
Sadly, this picture of a homophobic person is very stereotypical - Male, White, Middle Class, Fundamental Christian*, previous head of two city academies, now director of the private sponsorship's schools foundation. The emmanuel foundation.
Meet Nigel McQuoid.
The reason why I label him such a thing as homophobic, is because of comments on repealing section 28 (that basically forbids the promotion of homosexuality by local authorities). Here are his comments:
"I think we would lose the message that heterosexual marriage for life is the value that we wish to promote.I think we would cloud the issue and schools would become places where instead of saying 'This is what we want', we would be saying 'Here are a variety of options, choose which ever one you want'." - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/631451.stm
Well, isn't that what life's about, self discovery? What if pupils are already gay? Would it be fair to assume that they would not be welcome in any school that you are the head of? And finally, how can you justify yourself to have moral supremacy over anyone, telling young children "what we want"? To me, this is another perfect example of how too much power over school authority can be very damaging indeed when placed in the wrong, or in case homophobic hands.
Site Navigation 
s expressing her disappointment over the result.
One of the government's first flagship academies has been criticised again by Ofstead, one year after a failing inspection. The academy, Unity city academy in Middlesbrough, is in a area of "very challenging circumstances" according to the school's new chief executive David Triggs. Doesn't this show that academies aren't always the divine answer Blair makes them out to be? Modern buildings and up to date fittings - YES! Strong links with local community - YES! Accountability to the public - YES! Privatisation? Sorry, it hasn't worked with the electricity / water companies, will it hell work with children’s education. On that note also, I find it despicable that the government has playing with politics throughout this whole scheme in a most sensitive area that should never be used to score any kind of political points - the lives of children.
The archbishop of 
In an interview today on The Daily Politics Show (BBC2 7.2.06) when being interviewed about sex education in school's the current minister of state at the department of work and pensions, and the previous minister for children young people and families Margaret Hodge, said: