It is common knowledge that during the consumerist age that we live in institutions such as healthcare and education have slowly (like everything else it seems) become more ‘privatised‘ and less ‘public’, but what possible negative effects are these changes having (or potentially having)? Below I have summarised two points, please comment and add more
–A less localised institution – as institutions become more consumer focused within their approach to working with people (or ‘for’ people) it is a very real issue that services are likely to be made more ‘for the masses’ and the aims become generalised rather than for local individuals who receive the service on a face-to-face level. This could further enhance the globalisation process that we are currently in and be more likely to change local cultures to be more ‘global’ friendly or ‘market’ friendly (or perhaps a mixture of those things?) Is this what we want people to be learning from our health and education?
–A reinforcement of capitalism – with privatisation comes competition for services and although competition can be a very good thing (for example development comes from healthy competition) competition for the right to produce services such as healthcare and education will surely focus work more around targets, statistics and agendas than around people, and their ‘needs’ or ‘wants’. Competition for these services will enhance the statistic war of who can provide the most ‘cost effective’ and ‘results based’ service. Those of us who work in the field of health, education, youth or community work can compare this to the current trend of ‘results-based accountability’ which has positives and negatives of its own.
This privatisation is a global topic, some people may be endorsing it and others may be trying to reject it (see attached picture!) it is a very real thing that is happening all around the globe with positive and negative results. I hope that through sharing knowledge and discussing the topic we may learn from each other.
Information learnt and paraphrased from: Peter Jarvis, 2007. Globalisation, Lifelong Learning and the Learning Society Sociological Perspectives. Oxon: Routledge. It can be found in google books here:
After there have been so many cut backs in the funding for youth and community projects all over the UK both within the public sector and within the voluntary sector it has come as a low blow to may organisations that the government may end up financing private sector projects instead…
Within funding available for working with young people as part of the big society agenda Serco and co have applied for what may be £100m for two years. So where are youth and community services going now? Will private and voluntary projects work together in areas where public services have been taken? Or will voluntary and public services all buy into the private sector? One issue that cannot be ignored is that ‘One in 10 charities told researchers for a report by New Philanthropy Capital that they could close within the year due to cuts.’
Taking this info directly from the youtube link
‘This animate was adapted from a talk given at the RSA by Sir Ken Robinson, world-renowned education and creativity expert and recipient of the RSA’s Benjamin Franklin award.
For more information on Sir Ken’s work visit: http://www.sirkenrobinson.com’
It refers to American education but can be applied to other industrialised countries educational as well.
When individuals commit crimes of theft and destruction on a large scale within society our reaction is to aslongside penalising individuals involved also ask why did this happen and how can we provent it from happening again?
Below is a summary of the findings of this report…please feel free to comment and add to this yourselves.
The report calls for
opportunities for all (including the young), people to respect where they live and each other, people to feel they have a stake within society, greater inter-partnership of voluntary and statutory services working for individuals in society who are struggling, police and public law to uphold the law and order, a penalising and reformative criminal justice system within all communities.
After the Riots states that there are different reasons why people may commit crimes and anti-social/anti-community behaviour and highlight 6 key areas that would build economic and social resilience within our communities.
Children and Parents :- many communities involved in the research believed they rioting was a result of poor parenting. Therefore the report states that there is a need to make sure children are getting support, guidance and control from their families. The report continues to talk about the government ‘Troubled Families Programme which is believed (in a poll of 80 local authorities) to overlap with rioters families by 5%. There are key principles outlined for services that work with families; early intervention, evidence based support for the communities to access, planning for families and not just individuals, to share data across agencies working with families to save time, an advocate for children who need to reach their potential as opposed to looking at their deficits, giving children positive role models within families or communities (including contacting absent fathers about there children).
Building Personal Resilience :- many young people expressed hopelessness to the panel, the panels suggests that families are to instil character into young people including self discipline, application and the ablility to deal with set backs. Where families cannot do this children’s and young people’s services are responsible for this. Also there is also a need for schools to develop their policies on building character, testing their pupils on their character development.
Hope and Dreams :- record youth unemployment among other things were mentioned in regards to young people’s lack of hopes and dreams. In a survey 43% f people thought that schools prepared people for work, there was also an accusation that schools exclude and transfer students for the wrong reasons. A fifth of school leavers have literacy skills of or below that of an 11 year old, there is a recommendation that schools which fail to provide people with the appropriate literacy skills should pay the cost of raising their attainment via the new provider. There are also recommendations that schools to more to stop truancy and to only exclude as a last resort, there should also be inspection into transfers to ensure a transferred student has not lost any quality in their education. The report states that there is a need for a careers support quality guarantee for all pupils expressing what a child can expect in terms of guidance and support. Businesses should be an ambassador for schools. Core NEETs (those out of education, employment or training for a year) should have a job promise form the government and a job guarantee for those NEET for two years.
Riots and the Brands :- a majority of shops targeted stocked high value goods, the panel asks businesses to adopt CSR (corporate social responsibility) including apprenticeships and work opportunities. The panel asks the government to support businesses to give something back to the communities such as offering shareholder participation to shorten the growing capitalist wealth gap. In order to address concerns that pressure is put on young people through advertisement the panel writes that the Advertising Standards Authority include materialism into their engagement with young people to build their resilience to it.
Usual Suspects :- the need for early intervention with offenders such as Triage, improving resources for offenders and effective punishment and rehabilitation of offenders is suggested by the panel. Alongside suggestions for community projects for offenders including unpaid work, there is also a need for inter-partnership working and mentoring for each offender. Due to negative images of police services integrity within communities the panel states that police engage with the communities they work within to tackle negative perceptions, including improving the treatment of individuals on minor occasions by the police.
Community Engagement, Involvement and Cohesion :- there needs to develop community engagement and communication capabilities as the report found that community members felt they could not interfere with other’s lives but also felt their is a need for communities to help develop families and households. The use of community members within community projects is vital the report found as people will react more effectively with their ‘peers’ than their ‘officials’. The report suggests that volunteering be at the heart of community development.
Well I haven’t blogged for while as I’ve been busy in my family life over the holidays, just thought I’d get back into the habit by commenting on a couple of stories that caught my eye in the Metro newspaper.
Was about accusations that teachers have been bribing pupils to stay off school and out of the way during inspections. Allegations (which have been made to the Educational Times Supplement) stated that pupils have been paid sums of money to miss the day or have even been taken on theme park trips so that inspectors do not witness their behaviour. Ofsted are treating 38 complaints as a ‘handful’ of ‘possible misrepresentation’ of schools positions.
All this makes me wonder, first of all who in their right mind as a teacher prioritises hiding badly behaved young people during inspections so much that they’re willing to risk bribery? How do these young people feel about being hidden from school inspections? And what does it teach people about behaviour, consequences and accountability? It would be interested to see whether this has actually been happening in schools and how it can be combated in the future. It’s sad that teachers fell this much pressure to achieve during inspections, and I think if these allegations are true it may be because teachers ultimately want their school to have a good reputation.
Cases of teaching misconduct and incompetence are too be abandoned due to unavailable scheduling of hearings before the General Teaching Council for England is ‘abolished’ (metro). Cases seen as highest priority will still be address, but lesser cases will have to remain unheard and unresolved. If this is true I wonder what kind of justice this offers the people who are involved in the cases. Mostly you can assume a lot of the reports against teachers will have been made by pupils as they are the main witnesses to teachers during the school hours (although they will not be the only ones to complain). If a person has taken the time, effort and confidence to question a teachers behaviour and complain about it then it’s a shame that the cases may not receive hearings and be resolved/have appropriate action taken. Also it’s a shame that where allegations have been falsely made teachers will not have the opportunity to be heard and to prove their competence, which would make it harder to combat any rumours which may arise from the issue.
If anyone has any information or insight into these issues please fell free to comment as I’d like to be further enlightened on them
Referrence: Metro Friday, January 6th 2012. Front page and page 5.