Ruth Kelly - Hypocrite
Ruth Kelly's feeble attempt to use the sympathy vote to explain why she has chosen to send her child to a public school does nothing to escape the truth. She has made that choice because, in her eyes, the schools of choice are failing and because she can afford it.
I have no issue with Public School, it is a legitimate choice; it offer advantages such as lower staff to pupil ratios and a methodology that engenders self-confidence. We also live in a capitalist society which is driven by aspiration, being able to aspire to earn sufficient money to be able to send your child to public school is a positive thing.
However, this Labour Government believe in none of those things. They are wedded to a Comprehensive system that they claim is succeeding, so for a former Education Secretary to send a child to a public school because State Schools cannot cater for the needs of her child is hypocritical.
I should add that I am Comprehensive School educated and proud of it, so are my two children. Good Comprehensive education also offers significant benefits, such as a real, bottom up perspective on what life is about. Public School is there for those who have worked hard enough and/or smart enough (or been lucky enough) to reach a position where they can afford to make that decision. The role of Government is to make that choice as difficult as possible by beefing up the quality of our State system. Ruth Kelly has just proven that, in this respect, the Government has failed.
I have no issue with Public School, it is a legitimate choice; it offer advantages such as lower staff to pupil ratios and a methodology that engenders self-confidence. We also live in a capitalist society which is driven by aspiration, being able to aspire to earn sufficient money to be able to send your child to public school is a positive thing.
However, this Labour Government believe in none of those things. They are wedded to a Comprehensive system that they claim is succeeding, so for a former Education Secretary to send a child to a public school because State Schools cannot cater for the needs of her child is hypocritical.
I should add that I am Comprehensive School educated and proud of it, so are my two children. Good Comprehensive education also offers significant benefits, such as a real, bottom up perspective on what life is about. Public School is there for those who have worked hard enough and/or smart enough (or been lucky enough) to reach a position where they can afford to make that decision. The role of Government is to make that choice as difficult as possible by beefing up the quality of our State system. Ruth Kelly has just proven that, in this respect, the Government has failed.
Labels: education, Ruth Kelly
posted by Martin Curtis at 10:15 AM
1 Comments:
According to the newspapers(not that you can always believe them of course!)"Her claim that her son has "substantial learning difficulties" was contradicted by local authority sources quoted in The Sun who claimed he had only "mild dyslexia".
I had to beg and grovel for money for my child's educational needs, she is six and IS profoundly autistic.I would love to know how Ruth Kelly would cope with a Special Needs Tribunal.
Aly
Post a Comment
<< Home