Myths abound in education debate

This dismissive approach was also apparent during my cordial exchange with Deputy Lowe during her doorstep electioneering. I suggested there might be value in her visiting some successful comprehensive schools in the UK. She declined, saying it 'would be pointless' because she didn't have 'expertise in that area'. She cited nuclear power stations and waste recycling plants as other examples where specialised knowledge was a prerequisite. She explained that she would instead confine herself to reading 'reports, if they aren't biased like Education's' and would continue to 'represent the people of the Vale'. Her candid admission about lacking relevant educational expertise was appreciated. But her remarks also revealed a fundamental self-contradiction in her approach. Deputy Lowe has arrived at her position of opposing inclusive, all-ability secondary education by prioritising views elicited from a sample of her electorate. But the parishioners she defers to are unqualified, according to Deputy Lowe's very own criteria, as they too lack expertise on matters of education. And importantly, very few of them would argue that fading memories of their own school days or an awareness of their children's or grandchildren's school experiences makes them into educational experts.

Of most concern, though, has been the insinuation that state-sector educational staff, who favour scrapping the 11-plus, have 'a vested interest'. Education, Sport & Culture president Paul Le Pelley asserted, 'there may very well be other reasons why the teachers would prefer it not to be an 11-plus selection'. He later expanded on this claiming teachers would personally gain by avoiding the extra administration associated with the selection process. Deputy Brouard presented two differing explanations in his speeches to the Assembly. First he suggested that teachers may be influenced because of their disinclination to go 'against the flow that is coming down from the top … of their pyramidical hierarchical structure' (?). He later asserted that the primary school staff were biased because of their reluctance to deal with aggravation arising from the '75% of parents' who are 'probably going to be unhappy about the result (of the 11-plus exam)'. These claims of 'vested interest' are unsubstantiated, offensive and belittle the teachers' professional opinions. What these dedicated teachers do have to motivate them is a passionate interest in delivering the very best possible educational experience for their pupils.

However, the staunch pro-selection supporter, Deputy Trott, did recognise the value of the teachers' contribution in his speech during the 2001 precursor debate. Back then he stated, 'But the problem I've had all along throughout this debate is what we don't know. Whether or not the majority of educationalists support the Torode amendment (to retain selection at 11) because conveniently we have never been told their views. And that is my main criticism of the Council because if they could have come to the States saying: "Yes proper balloting conditions. There's the result. I for one would have had great difficulty arguing against that."' (26/4/01 Billet D'État VII).

Another tactic has involved some pro-selection deputies drawing heavily on the straw polls they carried out during doorstep canvassing. Sparse and anecdotal data has been presented as if it were incontrovertible evidence. And discrepancies have arisen. For example, Deputy Lowe admitted that she wasn't surprised at the disparity between her doorstep findings and Laurie Queripel's, her fellow Vale deputy. He felt that the electorate were 'about split'. She explained, 'Certainly, if you are up in the public domain supporting something, they will contact you or are more likely to contact you than everybody.' Deputy Lowe is alluding here to the potential trap of amplifying a vociferous minority group. Back in the 2001 Education debate, she warned deputies about the risks of bolstering their arguments by disclosing the volume of mail they received. 'Yes, we can all play the letters game,' she advised. But in any case conducting doorstep polls instantly creates role incompatibility – a campaigning deputy with a manifesto already distributed doubling up as a non-aligned pollster. Would this comply with any code of conduct for political market research?

And of course there are the persistent myths about comprehensive education which generate false arguments and stoke up groundless fears. These myths are parroted by the media and then peddled by uncritical politicians. They are often delivered in the form of a snappy strapline, without any validation and serve only as a hindrance to effective deliberation. These include: 'Comprehensive education has failed in the UK', 'One-size-fits-all schools don't work', 'Comprehensive schools lower standards', 'Excellence is all about selection', 'Colleges put at risk of closure by 11-plus changes' and, of course, the perennial but quite irrelevant 'If it ain't broke don't fix it'. The way to dispel these myths is to explore the evidence. All deputies are paid salaries to do just that.

However, reading all the relevant research reports and articles on the selection/non-selection debate may be daunting for some. So, if you're interested in a quick overview, fast-track with these four sources: 1.) Former Deputy Sherbourne's distillation of the key fact in the March debate, quote 'All the evidence regarding comprehensive schools shows that the top 25% of students achieve just as well as they would have in a grammar school, but the rest do better than they would have done in a secondary modern'; 2.) The Education Policy Institute's 'Grammar Schools and Social Mobility – Key Findings' (http://epi.org.uk/report/grammar-schools-social-mobility/); 3.) The 2014 ISI Validation Report on the Guernsey Grammar School used a five-point scale to evaluate the school's performance. Despite a chorus of deputies claiming it to be a 'centre of excellence', the highest rating the ISI gave was 'well developed' and not the top rating of excellent (web.grammar.sch.gg/files/managed/guernsey_gssfc_parent_summary_report.pdf) and 4.) an introduction to the Growth Mindset approach to learning set out by the Education Department (www.gov.gg/growthmindset).

Alternatively searching out successful comprehensives in the UK (or elsewhere) is illuminating. They are not difficult to find. Visit Hampshire, for example, or simply carry out a virtual tour (www.compare-school-performance.service. gov.uk. Select LA, secondary, Final 2015 data. Then explore in detail the respective schools via their own websites). There you'll find the Hampshire LEA has over 30 comprehensives schools which have outperformed the Bailiwick schools on the 'Gold Standard', i.e. the three-year rolling average of % pupils with 5(+) A*-C GCSEs including English and maths for the period 2013-2015. This was accomplished despite there being over 15 independent schools located in this county. The top three comprehensive schools achieved impressive ratings, ranging from 81% to 86%, while operating inclusive, all-ability admissions policies. The all Bailiwick schools recorded a 'Gold Standard' of 61%. Moreover, the Hampshire comprehensives which achieved a lower KS4 academic attainment rating than the Bailiwick were in the minority and had significant demographic handicaps. For example, on average 25% of their pupils were designated disadvantaged and in some EAL pupils were significantly over-represented.

The Hampshire comparison, just one example of many, should make even the most entrenched pro-selection deputy reflect on their own intransigence. Deputy De Lisle's much used accolade that the Bailiwick's education system is the 'envy of many in the UK' looks preposterous when Guernsey is compared to areas within UK LEAs which have a similar population and demographic. He has flippantly chosen to compare the Bailiwick's KS4 results with the all UK schools average – an exercise which is as superficial as it is flawed.

In truth our local education system has enjoyed many instances of excellence, especially recently in the high schools. This is a testament to the efforts and aspirations of the pupils, teaching staff, parents and the Education Department. However, the prevailing evidence shows that the Bailiwick's secondary education system as a whole has been delivering at best a mediocre service. The upgrade to exceptional, world-class education for all children in the Bailiwick is overdue – some believe by 15 years. And critically a large majority of local, educational professionals have identified our suboptimal, selective education system as the principal impediment to this transformation.

JON LANGLOIS,

Le Couogn,

Vale.