Those who support or lean towards the Labour Party, why?

[Kardan]

So why then do you and your party seemingly wish to ban them?



If your issue is unqualified staff teaching and those stats are true, shouldn't you instead be arguing for the closure of state comprehensives too?



If you go by what counts as qualified nowadays, then I would beg to differ. I have already given my own example of comparing a university educated teacher with an old school teacher who came from the private sector. He didn't follow the trendy teaching methods that they're told to do now by the government, nor did he have a degree: yet he could keep a class under control, he could teach his subject superb and he could teach things outside of his own subject.

All what the supposed qualified, New Labour educated teacher couldn't do.

Because we're building free schools where they're not needed. You've said that class sizes are being driven up - then why don't we build schools in those areas rather in areas where we already have enough school places? That makes sense, does it not?

I'm not arguing for the closure of free schools purely because of unqualified teachers - it's because it's not being efficient with where the school places are. If I wanted to close the free schools just because they employed unqualified teachers, then yes, I'd have to be closing down all the state schools as well.

And of course, I forgot that one example of an unqualified teacher being good and a qualified teacher being crap means that must be the case for the whole of the country.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Because we're building free schools where they're not needed. You've said that class sizes are being driven up - then why don't we build schools in those areas rather in areas where we already have enough school places? That makes sense, does it not?

If free schools are being built where they are needed, then they wouldn't be able to function due to a shortage of children so you are inventing a story here. I think what you really mean is that they're not being built where there is a shortage, rather than why they are being built which is because the existing comprehensive state schools are so bad that parents living in the area have decided they want a choice other than that awful local state comprehensive: hence the free school being built to offer an alternative choice.

Now why should parents have that choice taken away from them by you?

I'm not arguing for the closure of free schools purely because of unqualified teachers - it's because it's not being efficient with where the school places are. If I wanted to close the free schools just because they employed unqualified teachers, then yes, I'd have to be closing down all the state schools as well.

And of course, I forgot that one example of an unqualified teacher being good and a qualified teacher being crap means that must be the case for the whole of the country.

If teachers like the one I spoke about are being marked as qualified by the government, then yes as always with government policy there will be much worse. Give me teachers with some real life experience rather than weakling university graduates who the kids walk all over anyday. Like it used to be.

Instead of complaining about free schools unqualified teachers (which seem quite popular given people are opting to go through all the hassle of setting up these schools are then sending their children there) why don't you worry about the state comprehensive school mess that the Labour Party, aided by the Conservatives, have created and grown from the 1960s onwards? You remind me in wanting to close free schools of those on the left who want to close private schools for the reason that they embarass you in how well they do compared to your state comprehensives.

In other words, the competition is so good and is making a show of us... so lets ban them!

[scottish]

[-:Undertaker:-]

@scottish;

Unless you're an English girl under the age of 16 living in northern England, in which case be very afraid.