2. 职称英语
  3. Nothing is more terrifying than a mother who scents a threat to her offsprin

Nothing is more terrifying than a mother who scents a threat to her offsprin

游客2025-01-12  25
问题     Nothing is more terrifying than a mother who scents a threat to her offspring. So it is not surprising that residents of the posher parts of Brighton and Hove, a seaside town with an eclectic social mix, are on the warpath about a change to the way school places are awarded. Threatening e-mails, allegations of gerrymandering and warnings that parents would sue were only part of the reaction to this week’s news that, from 2008, the local authority will allocate places in popular schools by lottery.
    Until now, if more children applied to a school than it had room for, those who lived nearest usually won out. As a result, houses next to the most sought-after schools soared in value—entrenching the schools as middle-class ghettoes and increasing their desirability still further. Those who could not afford to live within spitting distance had to go elsewhere. Families living in east Brighton, with no schools nearby, were left to squabble over the crumbs.
    Eight secondary schools have been divided into six "catchment areas", two of which have pairs of adjacent schools. If a school cannot accommodate all the children who apply, the council will allocate places randomly, giving preference to those within the catchment area. Some children who would previously have walked to the school around the corner will be bused or driven past children going the opposite way.
    The scheme has been two years in the hatching. It was nearly derailed by the bitter opposition of parents who had paid top prices for houses next to the schools they liked. They now face not only the possible frustration of their educational hopes for their children but also the prospect that their investment will slump in value.
    In the end these parents were defeated by the nifty footwork of Labour councillors determined to push the plan through. The vice-chairman of the committee that voted on the scheme was sacked by the city’s Labour leader just two hours before the vote on February 27th—after she made it clear that she would be voting against. It went through only on the chairman’s casting vote.
    Similar battles may soon be fought all over Britain. On February 28th a new admissions code for schools in England and Wales came into force, setting out how a school may decide among the competing claims of children who apply. Religion, proximity and having siblings at the school are all still acceptable, but very popular schools are "encouraged" to use lotteries, as some academies in Britain and charter schools in America now do. They are also urged to consider "fair banding"—working out what mix of abilities their area provides, getting children to take an entrance exam, and then admitting representative numbers from each level of ability.
    The admissions code was a sop to left-wingers who hate the government’s broader reforms to free schools from the control of councils, fearing that more segregation will result. Both the code and the Brighton row confirm a depressing aspect of the debate over school choice and standards: an obsession with sharing out places at the best schools rather than creating more of them.
    Prospective winners in Brighton are as elated as the losers are despondent. They now have a chance to send their children to schools that they could not previously aspire to. That puts those schools on their mettle: they must prove that it was their teaching and facilities that won good grades, not their middle-class pupils. If they fail, expect to see more children in Brighton going private. [br] What is "fair-banding"?
选项
答案 Working out what mix of abilities their area provides, getting children to take an entrance exam, and then admitting representative numbers from each level of ability.
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3908943.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)