Academic selection is not a problem for poor children, but the curriculum is and policy makers are responsible.

paceni's avatarThe Parental Alliance for Choice in Education blog

It’s the Curriculum, Stupid: why the Executive Office IliAD Report was a Waste of Public Money

Darwin 3

“If the misery of our poor be caused not by the laws of nature, but by our institutions, great is our sin.” Charles Darwin

Introduction

This essay concerns the Investigating Links in Achievement and Deprivation (ILiAD) Report, volume three of which was placed in the public domain on September 5th 2017 by the Northern Ireland Executive Office (formerly OFMDFM). The research was commissioned from Queen’s University Belfast with Professor Ruth Leitch as principal investigator  in 2012.   In the next section, I will argue that the focus on the role academic selection plays in explaining the attainment gap between rich and poor is unjustified.  I will identify the real culprit, namely, the curriculum and demonstrate that my analysis is confirmed by the international literature.  Furthermore, given the Curriculum Vitae of the Queen’s University academics…

View original post 1,295 more words

The Greater Shankill Scam

The Greater Shankill Partnership [“GSP”] is masterminded from the Spectrum Centre.

The Greater Shankill Neighbourhood Renewal Plan was ‘declared’ in 2007.

[NB. It is always important to apply imposing names to these matters.]

Who and what is the ‘Greater Shankill’?

It’s an area of North Belfast, mostly the Protestant bit, though 12% may be Roman Catholic. Its population is 18,028, at the last census.

In the last year that figures are available, the GSP spent £974,000 on wages.

It has produced an “Action Plan” for 2017-2018. This plan has achieved legitimacy because it was approved by the “Greater Shankill Community Convention” and adopted by “the area’s Neighbourhood Partnership”.

So there! When I think of the Convention I think of Revolutionary France. How those delegates in the Spectrum Centre must have questioned the management!

Before examining the plan , let’s examine some statistics.

The percentage seeking jobseekers allowance has increased from 7% in 2003 to 10.8% in 2014. Much greater than the general populace.

Income support has also increased compared to the outside world.

Education

Those in the area achieving Key Stage 1 level 2 or above in maths fell from 92.2% in 2005/6 to 85.4% in 2011/12. The national figure in 2011/12 was 95.8%.

In English, on the same basis, the GSP figure for 2011/12 was 82.3% ; the national figure was 94.8%.

Not so bad , you might think. But consider the next statistic.

At least 5 GCSE passes at A*-C including English and maths. In 2007/08 the GSP figure was 18.9%. This showed a significant improvement to 36.5% in 2012/13. But the national figure that year was 65.9%, almost double.

The GSP don’t even bother with A level statistics.

How many children are we talking about? It would appear that the figure of those of school age is significantly under 2,000, perhaps 1,700.

So, what’s the plan?

Well, this organisation which employs over fifty people and spends nearly one million pounds a year on wages, doesn’t really have one.

Here’s their action plan for 2017/18.

They are going to “engage in conversations with 100 children and young people”. They are going to “audit ” services. They are going to give “sustained support co-ordinated for 100 children and young people”.
They are going to “Establish a platform for the Zone’s development and implementation”, and continue working with QUB.
At this point in time , Dear Reader, your bullshit detector may be tweeting.
Don’t you love a “platform” “implementation” and the addition of a pretty discredited university?
You are correct. There is not one word as to how this plan will be measured for success or not.
Meantime those fifty plus people, including some who are paid well above the national average, will keep their jobs, slaving away in the Spectrum Centre.
That’s over £500 for every child of school age on the Shankill.
If you desire some acupuncture it’s free but if you want your child to avail of the summer programme for moving to secondary school, it will cost you £10. This must say something about the management.
But there is worse!
Glenwood Primary School is yards from the Spectrum Centre.
The Education and Training Inspectorate report conclusion in January 2013 stated:
“In almost all of the areas inspected, the quality of education provided in this school is inadequate; the areas for improvement outweigh the strengths in the provision. The inspection has identified significant areas for improvement in leadership and management, standards, and learning and teaching which need to be addressed urgently if the school is to meet effectively the needs of the all the children.”
A subsequent report , in May 2104 , concluded:
“In the areas inspected, the quality of education provided by this school is now good. The school has important strengths in most of its educational (and pastoral) provision. The inspection has identified an area for improvement which the school has demonstrated the capacity to address.
There remains the need to:

• continue to raise the standards achieved in literacy and numeracy and embed the good practice which has begun.

The Education and Training Inspectorate will monitor, through district inspection activity, the school’s progress on the area for improvement.”

It is truly astonishing that those who were governors of this school in the relevant years, allowed it to sink to a position where the ETI had to intervene.

So let’s wait a year and see what the Spectrum Centre produces for those 1,700 or so children of the deprived Shankill.

Aside from their own salaries and pensions.

Perjury-what me?

The Guardian ran an article by Henry McDonald on 21st August entitled “Stakeknife could face perjury charges , says senior police officer”.

Before you ask, the ‘senior UK police officer’ is not named. Quelle surprise.

So the theory is this. Scappaticci went to court in 2003 to force the NI security minister to state publicly that he was not Stakeknife and therefore not an agent.

Now, says McDonald, he could be prosecuted for going to court and “denying he was a spy”.

But hold on a minute. He denied that he was a spy and the NI minister confirmed that.

So who would be prosecuted?

The NI minister who wrongly said he was not a spy, when he was? Or Scap who falsely said that he wasn’t when he was?

So would one or both be prosecuted? Lets look at the legislation

The Perjury (Northern Ireland) Order 1979

Perjury

  1. – (1) Any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding who wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which he knows to be false, or does not believe to be true, shall be guilty of perjury, and shall, on conviction on indictment, be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding seven years, or to a fine, or to both.

(2) The expression “judicial proceeding” includes a proceeding before any court, tribunal, or person having by law power to hear, receive, and examine evidence on oath.

(3) Where a statement made for the purposes of a judicial proceeding is not made before the tribunal itself, but is made on oath before a person authorised by law to administer an oath to the person who makes the statement, and to record or authenticate the statement, it shall, for the purposes of this Article, be treated as having been made in a judicial proceeding.

(4) A statement made by a person lawfully sworn in Northern Ireland for the purposes of a judicial proceeding-

(a) in another part of Her Majesty’s dominions; or

(b) in a British tribunal lawfully constituted in any place by sea or land outside Her Majesty’s dominions; or

(c) in a tribunal of any foreign state;

shall, for the purposes of this Article, be treated as a statement made in a judicial proceeding in Northern Ireland.

(5) The question whether a statement on which perjury is assigned was material is a question of law to be determined by the court at the trial.

 

 

False written statements tendered in evidence
  1. – (1) Any person who in a written statement tendered in evidence in criminal proceedings by virtue of-

(a) section 1 of the Criminal Justice (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act (Northern Ireland) 1968, or

(b) Article 33 of the Magistrates’ Courts (Northern Ireland) Order 1981,

wilfully makes a statement material in those proceedings which he knows to be false, or does not believe to be true, shall be guilty of an offence.

(2) Any person who in a written statement made in Northern Ireland and tendered in evidence in the Republic of Ireland in any criminal proceedings wilfully makes a statement material in those proceedings which he knows to be false, or does not believe to be true, shall be guilty of an offence.

(3) A person guilty of an offence under paragraph (1) or (2) shall be liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine, or to both.

(4) This Article is without prejudice to Article 3, and paragraph (1) applies whether the written statement is made in Northern Ireland, Great Britain or the Republic of Ireland

 

Aiders, abettors, suborners, etc.

  1. – (1) Any person who aids, abets, counsels, procures, or suborns another-person to commit an offence against this Order shall be liable to be proceeded against, indicted, tried and punished as if he were a principal offender.

(2) Any person who incites another person to commit an offence against this Order shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction on indictment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine, or to both.

Corroboration
  1. A person shall not be liable to be convicted of any offence against this Order, or of any offence declared by any other enactment to be perjury or subornation of perjury, or to be punishable as perjury or subornation of perjury, solely upon the evidence of one witness as to the falsity of any statement alleged to be false.

 

So it seems that the Minister could be prosecuted for falsely stating in judicial proceedings that he was not a spy and that Scap could be prosecuted for falsely making the same claim. In addition her civil servants and members of MI5, Special Branch, the Army or MI6 could also be prosecuted.

Sadly , the response of Jon Boutcher, if accurately reported, leaves a great deal to be desired.

The devil is in the detail of Article 14. At least two witnesses are needed for the Crown to prove perjury. Who will they be?

Answers please….?

Meanwhile one has to ask who sponsored the Guardian article- dark forces, Henry?