Comprehensive Cover

With the beginning of term underway and the world (well my world anyway) back into a routine, I have found myself contemplating the experiment of comprehensive education which began over fifty years ago. I say ‘experiment’ because it continues to be a work in progress, an ongoing project that needs to be recurrently challenged and reassessed.

Professionally I have always worked in the private and state sectors and have at times wriggled uncomfortably at the contrasts between both. I went to state schools, my kids go to state schools, Big C went to state schools and all of my siblings went to state schools. Am I about to say therefore that I am a fantabulous example of state education? A shiny successful citizen glowing with accomplishment, goodness and money? Errr… no. Nor however I am going to portray myself and those dear to me as victims of the comprehensive system - managing to function in society despite state education. The reality is more complicated, awkward, untidy.

The idea of universal, equitable education is a good one; rather like the NHS it works on the principle that cradle to grave care and learning means individuals have a chance to exploit their strengths, challenge their weaknesses and nurture a lifelong appetite for learning and self-improvement. It should mean that opportunities are more equal, fairer and would result in all of us feeling we have at least been given the chance to develop in the way we wish. Perhaps more importantly it should work because we don’t need to worry about the cost; everyone is contributing.

Trying to make such an unwieldy concept work for the whole of society however has always been demanding - partly because from the very start people haven’t trusted it. Comprehensive education was trying to replace grammar schools, secondary moderns and private schools and super-impose the model onto a glaringly class-ridden system. I have noticed through years of teaching that offspring of the comfortably off middle classes - children of doctors, dentists, lawyers, company directors - rarely end up in comprehensive secondary schools. Many of those parents make the choice that they would rather stretch to find the fees for a private school than risk sending their child to a place with two thousand pupils, dilapidated buildings and huge class sizes. Much better to see your child hang out with like-minded families, decent facilities, classes of no more than fifteen children and - in theory at least - a safer environment. The accusation of snobbery can be thrown at those parents, but most of them would simply say they are trying to do the best for their child. Wouldn’t we all?

The problem is, it is the very absence of these families that has made comprehensive education much more challenging sociologically. I remember coaching on a music course on the site of a rather lovely private school in Cambridge, where there was a brand new, state-of-the-art theatre. The quality of the building didn’t surprise me - I have seen hundreds of similar projects in private schools all over the country - but I was startled by a plaque fixed to the side of the building, on which was printed the names of multiple donors. Seeing such a stark statement of privilege left such a feeling of despondency. How could these people have been persuaded that a donation to an already wealthy place of learning was more important than a far more needy local secondary school? How is it that these generous donors felt that giving to the 7% of privately educated children was more worthy than the other 93%? Let’s just say that again - ninety-three percent. What on earth is going on? The thing is, such an apparently innocent, munificent gesture shouldn’t be an issue - but it perfectly sums up the gigantic problem that exists. As long as the upper middle classes continue to take their children out of their local secondary schools, then all that wealth, expertise and aspiration is placed elsewhere. Of course that doesn’t mean that comprehensive schools are entirely without these things, but they are significantly watered down.

So how not to water down? We live in a liberal democracy and families have the right to choose their eduction (in theory at least). But we also know that a superb example of where truly comprehensive education worked was through music education in the 1970s and 80s. That was when thriving County and Borough music services offered free instrumental tuition in school to those who wanted to learn. The ensemble activities at local and county level were also free and it meant that children of all social groups could make music together, mix socially and pursue an activity for the sake of creating wonderful music. It was fantastically successful. The profile of music in schools was raised, all the pedagogical advantages of learning an instrument were available and there were wonderful adventures to be had. Not everyone took up the offer, but it was there and far-reaching. I have written about all of these opportunities in my post ‘County Lines’ and have never forgotten the quality and extra dimension it gave to my life during school; let’s face it - I and many others made a career out of it.

Facing it and understanding the Comprehensive issue still doesn’t solve it unfortunately. We all know where this is going; we need money - and lots of it. Finance will only be available when successive governments realise that shit schools or just managing schools simply aren’t good enough. Every single person in society has to pay the price for this and - because I am a bit of a hippy - I think that one person’s pain and deprivation will ultimately affect all of us. We need to grasp the nettle and pay for really decent education that values the arts, sport, the environment, spiritual well-being and academia. It’s expensive. We need to understand that paying for this will need to come through taxation; not some fancy scheme that allows the very rich to avoid paying; income tax will do. It is only then that the comfortably off will feel confident in sending their child to their local secondary school and education will be enriched with all branches of society.

Uplifting music of the day: I’ve conducted lots of Philip Sparke pieces as he is such a good writer for concert bands. Today I choose ‘Jubilee Overture’ because as usual he writes a great tune in the middle, exciting rhythms and loads of energy. Listen and smile.

Contemplative music of the day: The second movement of Ravel’s piano concerto in G is so beautiful. I had forgotten how delicious and poignant this piece is, but was reminded hearing it live at a Prom this summer. It made my eyes water. You choose your own version.

And finally… I have always enjoyed having a good debate about such issues. I like talking, writing, thinking, raising the profile of music, education, the arts. It leaves me despondent however to say I probably won’t win this one. Trying to persuade people - or those in charge at least - that these things matter isn’t likely to get through. Wouldn’t it be lovely though just to feel that the message is seeping in? Let me know your thoughts.