Evolution is a Mystery

As evolution gains another victory for sense and reason against the superstitious forces of ignorance and religion, with the announcement that the theory will soon be added to the primary school curriculum here in the UK, I feel it’s finally time to dispel a ludicrous myth that has been doing the rounds under the guise of "journalism” over the past few weeks.

"Teach both evolution and creationism say 54% of Britons" ran a headline in the Guardian on Monday, October 26th, followed by the worrying first paragraph: “More than half of British adults think that intelligent design and creationism should be taught alongside evolution in school science lessons – a proportion higher than in the US”, and for the next 24 hours, you couldn’t move online without seeing a link somewhere to this report, citing it as some kind of evidence of our intellectual downfall as a nation.

54% of people in favour of teaching creationism?  What are we – America?

Well, what people didn’t seem too keen on exploring was the actual details behind this misleading headline.  Namely, that the question within the Ipsos Mori survey which led to this supposed conclusion did not actually ask British adults whether or not they thought that creationism should be taught in schools alongside the theory of evolution.  Rather, it asked if participants agreed or disagreed with the statement: "Evolutionary theories should be taught in science lessons in schools together with other possible perspectives, such as intelligent design and creationism."

Of the 973 people polled, about 54% said that they “agreed”.

So really, the headline is that the majority of people polled believed that evolution, not creationism, should be taught in schools, alongside theories such as “intelligent” design and creationism, which the wording of the question makes it appear are already being taught there, with evolution pitched as the interloper.

Maybe as well as adding evolution to the primary school curriculum, we might do well to add a little critical thinking and philosophy in there too, to prevent any further misunderstandings of relatively simple poll data?

Technorati Tags: Education,Evolution,Media,Creationism,Science,Religion,Statistics,Links,UK Politics,Politics,Schools

Troops to Teachers?

I wonder how long it will be before putting soldiers in every classroom turns into: “everyone should do a little character-building military service to iron out these discipline problems.  Hey, I know!  Why don’t we bring back conscription?”

This morning, shadow schools secretary, Michael Gove, announced that, under a Tory government – alongside a stealth privatization plan to end the “state monopoly” of schools and turn more and more “failing” schools into privately sponsored “academies” – a new emphasis on student discipline will see Army professionals entering the classroom in a “troops to teachers” programme designed to use military-style regulation to keep our children in line.

On top of a renewed emphasis on school uniform – blazers and ties (straightjackets and leashes) – this comes, of course, alongside an earlier announcement to reintroduce learning by rote, and assorted other 1950s educational methods, into contemporary schooling if the Tories get elected to power in 2010.

Do we really want a generation of robot children – regurgitating whatever they are told, without question, under the watchful eye of intimidating soldiers?  Do we really want a “state monopoly” of schools to be replaced with a curriculum designed by private enterprise, looking only to create the next generation of workers instead of well-rounded human beings? 

I will admit, there are countless problems with the education as it is, and has been, under Labour – but lack of discipline is not the problem; it is a symptom.

School kids misbehave and act unruly only when they are not engaged; when the lessons they are being taught seem pointless and removed from anything useful or interesting in their lives.

I say this from experience – I am a fairly bright and inquisitive person who got straight As at A-Level, a first class BA, a Masters degree (with distinction) and a Ph.D., yet I absolutely hated school. 

Whilst I got As in the subjects that I enjoyed at GCSE level, in subjects where the teachers were dull, the content was mind-numbing, and the purpose was unclear, I couldn’t give a damn. 

I messed around; I chatted; I played up.

I had the capability to be a fantastic student at school, but even someone like me became undisciplined under the yawn-fest that was British secondary schooling between 1993 and 1998 (the majority of which was under a Tory government, by the way).

As soon as I became engaged in my education, however, by an exceptional foursome of Sixth Form College teachers (Dermott O’Keeffe, Elaine Varty, Mike Wright, and Sandra Phillips from Solihull Sixth Form College, if you must know) I was unstoppable.  I worked my ass off, above and beyond the call of duty, and I never looked back.

Getting kids to pay attention in school doesn’t come from military drills, smarter uniforms or the repetition of dry facts until they are memorized by rote…it comes from engaging pupils with a substantive and meaningful education that is intrinsically valuable in itself, and not merely a stepping stone to future jobs and qualifications.

With so much talk these days about the “value” of GCSEs, A-Levels and University Degrees on the job market, is it any wonder that our children don’t see their schooling as anything other than an instrumental means to this other – apparently more important –end; working so that they can get the piece of paper that will impress a future employer, not so that they can amass their knowledge of the world and engage their natural curiosities.

As a result, schoolwork is seen merely as an obstacle – a stultifying journey to a dull but necessary destination: qualifications, and thus employment. 

Students mess around in class and don’t respect their teachers because they have been taught by society that nothing they do in the classroom is as important as what they will have to do once they leave it. 

No Troops to Teachers programme is going to change that. 

Technorati Tags: Conservative Party Conference,Conservative Party,General Election,UK Politics,Education,Politics,Michael Gove,Military,Troops to Teachers,Conscription,Privatization

The CBI in Inevitable Pro-Business Shocker!

Does anyone else get annoyed when obviously biased bodies make completely predictable announcements about issues in which they have a specifically partisan interest, and then those unsurprising announcements are treated as legitimate news stories by a media who really should know better?

Earlier this week, an umbrella group representing the business end of the UK music industry, UK Music, came out in favour of recent government proposals to block broadband access for those individuals found illegally file-sharing. Indeed, they applauded any “government intervention” on the matter of downloading music for free that might help save their dying industry.

Well, duh!

Of course they would! If the music industry dies, then so does UK Music and all it represents. More specifically, if the music industry as we know it dies, but adapts into something else (something where massive labels and media providers no longer hold so much power over consumer spending, and one can no longer charge £15 for a CD that costs less than a pound to produce), then the business interests of the members of UK Music are thwarted. Therefore, UK Music is not interested in protecting “the music industry” – as they claim - but only the current business model of the UK music industry, from which they all benefit.

This is not news.

This is a bunch of business men and women getting together and working out how best they can keep hold of their current dominance over an industry which is slowly slipping from their grasp. To report it, is like reporting that The Group of Associated Computer Makers believe that people should buy more computers; or that Booksellers UK have come out in favour of reading – a total no-brainer!

Which is why I can’t believe the amount of coverage received by this morning’s announcement of the Confederation of British Industry, regarding University education in the UK!

Basically, this pro-business, pro-private-profit group which represents the collective interests of UK business has decided – surprise, surprise – that UK Universities should be run more like businesses and make more money!

Raise the tuition fees, they say. Restrict grants, increase interest paid on student loans…basically, make the UK University a much more lucrative business model; an elites-only, self-sufficient, profit-making institution that will not suffer financially when the government makes “inevitable” cuts in education spending.

The idea of “inevitable” cuts in education spending at play here gets me incredibly angry. Notice how this lobby group for UK business does not assume that Alistair Darling’s predicted cuts will (or should) be made on corporate welfare, export credit guarantees, public private partnership programmes, or any other form of public financing of private UK businesses. Nor do they suggest that the best way to put more money into the depleted government coffers, would be to raise the taxes paid by big business and the richer private citizens who own them.

No. All of these measures are, predictably, off the table in the CBI’s plans for University funding – because the CBI is not an education body, or even an objective policy body – it is a private confederation of British Industry; with its own political and ideological agenda.

Hence, the idea of education for education’s sake, is – again, predictably – not anywhere in their recommendations either. Such a view is irrelevant to the aims and objectives of the CBI, for whom University can only be seen as a tool to benefit UK industry. Nor is the problem of social equality dealt with. That children from poorer backgrounds might not actually be able to afford University under these new proposals is not an issue that causes the members of the CBI much concern. Not because they are inhuman monsters, but because it is literally not their problem. The organization’s only purpose in life is to represent the interests and goals of British Industry – not to promote an egalitarian vision of education for all. British Industry does not need a nation of degree-educated people; it needs low-level workers as well as high-level workers, and its recommendations reflect that. Who gets to do what job in the end doesn’t matter to the members of the CBI, so long as it continues to make them some money and doesn’t interfere with their current economic and ideological interests.

This is not to condemn the CBI for doing what it is designed to do, but to condemn the news media for thinking that its conclusions on higher education are anything more than they are: utterly self-serving pieces of pro-business propaganda.

Make more money and give us more ways of making money from you in loan repayments, subsidized private research and debt collection…

There is not a single thing which the CBI said about Universities that wasn’t entirely predictable: Pro-Business Lobbyists Make Another Predictably Pro-Business Announcement. Why that should constitute as news at all – let alone as headline news – is a mystery to me?

Technorati Tags: Higher Education,Education,Academia,Confederation of British Industry,CBI,Politics,Spending Cuts,Public Spending,Alistair Darling,File-Sharing,Media,Music Industry

Darling’s Choice…

On Tuesday, the Prime Minister announced that it would be necessary to make some cuts in public spending.  Today, Alistair Darling will hold a series of one-on-one meetings with Cabinet colleagues to discuss which areas should receive the cuts, and which areas should be spared.

But has it ever occurred to the Chancellor that there is a simple, far more democratic, way of adjusting government spending than asking a cabal of Cabinet colleagues what they think we should do?  Namely, asking the citizens – the ones who pay the taxes – what it is they want their money to be spent on.

Imagine, if you will, a once-a-year form from the treasury, sent to every tax-paying individual in the country, whereby each citizen can designate the specific areas in which they want their taxes to be spent.  The results of these polls are then tallied and processed, and the total taxed income of everyone is divided according to a national average.  (i.e. if 62% of the population wish for an average of 58% of their yearly taxes to be spent on the NHS and associated services, then that is what will happen.)

How hard could that be?

Instead of the relatively unaccountable Chancellor dividing the budget into what he believes to be the best interests of the nation, we let the nation do it themselves.

On my own personal form, I would ask that the majority of my money went into healthcare, education, and other important areas of the underfunded welfare state, and I would prohibit any of my money being spent on “defence” and the ongoing illegal wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  To some, that simply highlights the major flaws in such a plan – if everyone were like me, the military would have no money; conversely, if everyone thought the opposite, defence spending could skyrocket whilst schools and hospitals suffered.  But the fact is, the genius of such a system is that by averaging the total national results, extreme views such as my own will be tempered down by more sober-minded and utilitarian citizens.  In reality, the likely outcome would simply be an accurate reflection of what the nation really wants: institutions the public need and care about would receive the most money, and those they think are bloated or over-budgeted would get cuts (the wisdom of crowds and all that).

Under such a radical change of system, government would be forced to listen to the true demands of its people; the public would hold the purse-strings, and thus the key to policy. 

With this new distribution strategy being an annual, or even six-monthly, occurrence, as national priorities change, so too would our individual designations, making it a much more flexible and responsive system than our current budgetary procedure, beholden each year to outdated historical precedents and Whitehall in-fighting. 

Underfunded schools failing our children?  Give ‘em a little more cash.

Overfunded schools still failing our children?  Take the money away until they produce results.

An inflated military budget allowing never-ending and unjustified overseas wars that kill thousands of innocents each year?  Put the money somewhere else and bring “our boys” back home until they learn to behave.

Mass unemployment because of an ongoing financial crisis for which the majority of people are not responsible?  Refuse to give more hand-outs to the banks and corporations that caused this mess, and help ensure nobody gets kicked off their Jobseeker’s Allowance because of lack of funding.

It’s simple Mr. Darling…at least, it would be if we actually lived in any kind of democracy.  As it is, I expect the result of the Chancellor’s meetings will be pretty predictable: cuts in benefits, welfare, education and healthcare; no major changes in defence spending (there’s an illegal war to win in Afghanistan you know!); and a further extension of insidious public/private partnerships (such as the Private Finance Initiative) that claim to cut public expenditure by selling our souls – and institutions – out to big business.  

In other words: same shit different day in the corridors of power.

Technorati Tags: Economy,Economic Policy,Alistair Darling,Gordon Brown,Politics,Afghanistan,Democracy,healthcare,welfare,education,military budget,the wisdom of crowds