Ed Balls is a man on a mission but that mission as nothing to do with education! He is actually a career minded New Labour politician not a minister who has education running through his veins.
As a career minded politician he is defintely fit for purpose. Every perceived failing is someone else's fault and every success, large or small, happens because Ed has 'seen the light', he's almost T Bliar re-incarnated.
However as a educationalist he has never been fit for purpose and attempting to position himself to take over the Labour party when Gordon is eventually 'knifed in the back' by some seething but as yet anonymous New Labour backbenchers, or when the the secretive Bilderbergs withdraw their support for him, Mr Balls is shafting education big time.
Have a read and convince me I am wrong.
Link
Ed Balls yesterday launched a fresh assault on selective education by holding grammars responsible for failing neighbouring schools.
The Schools Secretary attempted to blame the 11-plus for poor results by secondaries in popular grammar school areas such as Kent and Gloucestershire.
He said this was because the exam makes pupils feel like failures even before they begin their secondary careers.
If pupils arrive in secondary school ' having been told that they didn't succeed' then there are problems around aspiration and belief, he said.
Mr Balls added that non-selective schools in selective areas face 'extra challenges', but not necessarily because of more deprivation.
He also said that head teachers need extra support to deal with the fall-out and to bring pupils up to standard in English and maths
Mr Balls's claims came despite recent research from Durham University which failed to find evidence of grammars causing 'collateral harm' to other schools.
And grammar school campaigners accused the Government of launching a 'backdoor political attack on selection'.
Mr Balls has now sent a hit squad of advisers to Kent - which has the largestnumber of grammars in the country - to discover whether the Tory-run local authority is doing enough to support nonselective schools.
A team of advisers has already been sent to examine nonselective Gloucestershire schools and the Government is awaiting its report.
Support remains strong for grammar schools in these counties despite Government attacks on their status.
The criticism came as Mr Balls revealed one in 12 secondary schools across the country are still failing to meet a controversial Government target for GCSE results.
Under the National Challenge Initiative, every school must have at least 30 per cent of its pupils getting five C grades at GCSE, including English and maths, by 2011.
However, the number of schools below this minimum standard has dropped by nearly 40 per cent from 440 last year.
That means that as many as 270 schools, including 40 academies, could still face closure or being merged with better performing schools.
Mr Balls said he was 'obviously concerned' by the performance of schools in Kent and Gloucestershire.
In Kent, 22 schools - a fifth of those in the authority - are below the 30 per cent target. Only three schools moved above the threshold this year.
In Gloucestershire, the number of schools failing to reach the target has risen from four to five over the last year.
But another five are only just above this benchmark. If the local authorities fail to tackle the problems, Mr Balls could use his powers to trigger Ofsted inspections in consistently underperforming schools and also replace their governors.
He said: 'I've always said that non-selective schools in selective areas face extra challenges.
'It's harder but it's not necessarily harder because there's more deprivation or because it can't be done.
'There's no doubt in my mind that if you have a new cohort of young people who have all arrived in secondary school having been told that they didn't succeed then you have greater issues around aspiration and belief.
'So they do need extra support. Our challenge, if you like, to the local authorities which have got a higher proportion and substantial numbers of non-selective schools (secondary moderns) in selective areas is, "are you doing enough"?'
Mr Balls said he didn't 'buy the argument that says if you are a nonselective school in a selective area we should have lower expectations' even though they will need 'extra support and engagement'.
Expert advisers are also being sent in to Suffolk local education authority amid concerns not enough is being done to boost performance in some schools.
Blackpool has also undergone a similar review.
There are 164 grammar schools in England, with 33 in Kent and six in Gloucestershire.
A recent study led by Dr Robert Coe at Durham University 'failed to find any evidence of collateral harm to any other schools, arising from the existence of grammar schools'.
It added: 'Overall, schools are just as likely to be performing well, whether or not they are "creamed" by a grammar school.'
A spokesman for the National Grammar Schools Association accused Mr Balls of launching 'another sneaky attack' on selective education.
He said: 'If some schools are having problems, it's not the fault of grammar schools. It's the fault of individual schools themselves.'
However as a educationalist he has never been fit for purpose and attempting to position himself to take over the Labour party when Gordon is eventually 'knifed in the back' by some seething but as yet anonymous New Labour backbenchers, or when the the secretive Bilderbergs withdraw their support for him, Mr Balls is shafting education big time.
Have a read and convince me I am wrong.
Link
Ed Balls yesterday launched a fresh assault on selective education by holding grammars responsible for failing neighbouring schools.
The Schools Secretary attempted to blame the 11-plus for poor results by secondaries in popular grammar school areas such as Kent and Gloucestershire.
He said this was because the exam makes pupils feel like failures even before they begin their secondary careers.
If pupils arrive in secondary school ' having been told that they didn't succeed' then there are problems around aspiration and belief, he said.
Mr Balls added that non-selective schools in selective areas face 'extra challenges', but not necessarily because of more deprivation.
He also said that head teachers need extra support to deal with the fall-out and to bring pupils up to standard in English and maths
Mr Balls's claims came despite recent research from Durham University which failed to find evidence of grammars causing 'collateral harm' to other schools.
And grammar school campaigners accused the Government of launching a 'backdoor political attack on selection'.
Mr Balls has now sent a hit squad of advisers to Kent - which has the largestnumber of grammars in the country - to discover whether the Tory-run local authority is doing enough to support nonselective schools.
A team of advisers has already been sent to examine nonselective Gloucestershire schools and the Government is awaiting its report.
Support remains strong for grammar schools in these counties despite Government attacks on their status.
The criticism came as Mr Balls revealed one in 12 secondary schools across the country are still failing to meet a controversial Government target for GCSE results.
Under the National Challenge Initiative, every school must have at least 30 per cent of its pupils getting five C grades at GCSE, including English and maths, by 2011.
However, the number of schools below this minimum standard has dropped by nearly 40 per cent from 440 last year.
That means that as many as 270 schools, including 40 academies, could still face closure or being merged with better performing schools.
Mr Balls said he was 'obviously concerned' by the performance of schools in Kent and Gloucestershire.
In Kent, 22 schools - a fifth of those in the authority - are below the 30 per cent target. Only three schools moved above the threshold this year.
In Gloucestershire, the number of schools failing to reach the target has risen from four to five over the last year.
But another five are only just above this benchmark. If the local authorities fail to tackle the problems, Mr Balls could use his powers to trigger Ofsted inspections in consistently underperforming schools and also replace their governors.
He said: 'I've always said that non-selective schools in selective areas face extra challenges.
'It's harder but it's not necessarily harder because there's more deprivation or because it can't be done.
'There's no doubt in my mind that if you have a new cohort of young people who have all arrived in secondary school having been told that they didn't succeed then you have greater issues around aspiration and belief.
'So they do need extra support. Our challenge, if you like, to the local authorities which have got a higher proportion and substantial numbers of non-selective schools (secondary moderns) in selective areas is, "are you doing enough"?'
Mr Balls said he didn't 'buy the argument that says if you are a nonselective school in a selective area we should have lower expectations' even though they will need 'extra support and engagement'.
Expert advisers are also being sent in to Suffolk local education authority amid concerns not enough is being done to boost performance in some schools.
Blackpool has also undergone a similar review.
There are 164 grammar schools in England, with 33 in Kent and six in Gloucestershire.
A recent study led by Dr Robert Coe at Durham University 'failed to find any evidence of collateral harm to any other schools, arising from the existence of grammar schools'.
It added: 'Overall, schools are just as likely to be performing well, whether or not they are "creamed" by a grammar school.'
A spokesman for the National Grammar Schools Association accused Mr Balls of launching 'another sneaky attack' on selective education.
He said: 'If some schools are having problems, it's not the fault of grammar schools. It's the fault of individual schools themselves.'
You are so right about this man.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575102/Ed-Balls-red-faced-after-Singing-a-Rainbow.html
And he deigns to tell Barrovians that an Academy For Barrow is required to 'raise standards'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This guy is so full of his own self importance he must be able to see daylight. He is so incompetent and inept how could anyone in their right mind put him in charge of education. He does not have the first idea about education and is only concerned with getting his face on the television at every opportunity. The sooner he, Brown and co are humiliatingly kicked out the better. Too late for Barrow though the damage has been done.