Why is it that two of the most important jobs in the world require no experience, training or qualifications?  Politics and parenting.
This century, we have seen the rise of the 'professional politician', i.e. people who have worked only in the political sphere, be it in PR or political internships.  Some of the best teachers I have known had a hinterland, a background of differing occupations and interests.  So too with politicians - the best, the most in touch with their public are usually the ones who have worked in areas of employment dissociated from the political world, seasoned by their experience.  In any case, the expression 'professional politician' is a misnomer.  Skills such as smooth public speaking, the ability to deceive and conceal, and the willingness to sell your scruples to obtain power and prominence will see almost anyone ambitious enough into parliament.


As for parenting, it is true that there are parenting classes now, but the usual response to my original question is that parenting is 'natural and instinctive'.  To some degree this is true, but far too may simply repeat the pattern of their own childhoods, whether good or bad.  Future and present parents should question the way they were brought up.  For most people, much of it will be replete with sensible and pleasant memories, though there is always a danger of sentimentalising a troubled childhood.  But the most important aspect of this questioning is to reflect on those attitudes and actions which you recall as cruel or just plain wrong.  The worse the childhood, the more important it is to 'break the chain', to overturn the past and treat your own children in a supportive and loving way.  Some manage to do this, but far too many still won't look back in order to go forward.

This year I intend to broaden my blog beyond the School v Education theme.  Both school and education will be recurring themes, but the scope of the blog content will be wider.


In a previous post, I mentioned Homer Lane, the American 'educator', and his tremendous success with young offenders. His book Talks to Parents and Teachers might sound uninspiring, but really it is a masterpiece of sheer insight into human nature and human behaviour.
Lane was an enigmatic person who employed methods that were at complete odds with Victorian and Edwardian thinking on the subject of 'juvenile delinquents'. Methods that were revolutionary then and are still revolutionary, 100 years later.  In the homes he ran for young offenders, the recidivist rate was close to zero, whereas today, 60-70% return to crime, once released. That our authorities have learned nothing from Lane is despicable.
Lane was so engaging and so thought-provoking that he attracted a wide variety of people, including Christopher Isherwood, W.H. Auden, The Bishop of Liverpool, and the Viceroy of India, Lord Lytton.  Lytton's tribute to Homer lane, after Lane's death at 50, is one of the most beautiful, touching, perceptive eulogies I have ever read or heard.


In 1978, it was my pleasure and privilege to meet Lane's biographer, David W. Wills.  At his suggestion, I visited one of the many homes Wills and the Homer Lane Trust had established - homes for seriously abused children, from neglect to violence, all emotionally damaged.  During my 5 day visit I met some deeply scarred kids, but had to keep my distance.  Each child had bonded with a particular adult, and in any case, an attachment between myself and a child was not advisable with such a short stay.  But it was difficult not to respond when a little girl held out her arms to me and cried "Love me!"
The home was a place of genuine healing, since the entire culture was based on patience, tolerance and love, with the total absence of punishment, something they had had too much of already.
Curiously, the most interesting part of the week was when I was driven, by the head's secretary, to Gloucester Station to return to London.  She was a local woman who had worked at the home for 2 years.  She said that when she began work there, she was taken aback by the atmosphere and ethos of the place - not in any moral sense, but because the approach made her revalue the way she was bringing up her own children.  She then added that the home was 'deeply curative' and that she had been won over to Homer Lane and his 'great faith in human nature'.

There have been many stories told about teachers, both real and imaginary.  Two contrasting stories, both fictional, highlight very different types of teacher - Terence Rattigan's play and film The Browning Version and Muriel Spark's book and film The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie.

The Browning Version tells the tale of a teacher who is near retirement, the kind of teacher most of us have experienced in our school life, a humourless, very strict man, dedicated to teaching, but as remote from his pupils as you can get.  One day, a pupil he has taught, presents him with a farewell gift, Robert Browning's translation of Homer's The Illiad.  This boy, like so many young people, sees beyond his teacher's austere demeanour.  The effect of this kind act devastates the teacher and makes him realise that his nickname, 'Himmler' is well earned but something, right at the end of his career, that he bitterly regrets.  At the final assembly, he apologies profoundly to the pupils for his severe approach over the years.

The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie is a cautionary tale about charismatic teachers.  Jean Brodie is almost the opposite of the teacher in Rattigan's story, a woman so involved with her pupils that she is resented by most of her colleagues, and especially by the headmistress.  Miss Brodie is one of those teachers whose charisma overwhelms most of her pupils - to the extent that one of them dies as a result of her teacher's misguided enthusiasm.  Eventually Miss Brodie is reported by one of her pupils.  The girl rightly says to her:
"You're not good for people".

I once heard a teacher say:
"Heaven save us from charismatic headteachers."
The problem of such heads is that though they might improve schools during their tenure, when they leave, the schools decline.  If the culture of a school is good, then the head will not have to be either charismatic or uninspiring.

"Imagination is more important than knowledge".  Even out of its scientific context, Einstein's observation is true.
The word 'imagination' to most people means the ability to invent stories, or create paintings or compose music and therefore is the domain of a small minority of people.


When people say "I have no imagination", they are in denial.  We all have imagination.
Children live in their imagination, mainly to escape life in the giant shadow of the adult world. A child will turn a stick into a sword, an overgrown garden into a magic forest.


As adults, we live far more in the realm of the imagination than we care to admit.  We get involved in the plots and characters in novels, short stories, films, television drama and comedy, and theatre.  So it's not just inventors who use their imagination, but all readers, viewers, listeners.
Who doesn't fantasise occasionally about being in a better place, or being a happier person?  We imagine some future occasion we are looking forward to, or outwitting an enemy, or making love.  Eugene O'Neill said:
"A life of illusions is a tragic life, but a life devoid of illusions would be intolerable".


Great leaps in science, as well as the arts, in mathematics, in the perception and understanding of life, have all come from the human imagination.


The best use of the imagination I believe is the ability to imagine what someone else feels, to empathise with them.  The 'golden rule' Do unto others as you would have them do unto you' is based on this very ability, or lack of.


Our school systems are based on acquiring knowledge, with very little room for the imagination.  There should be room for both.  Exercising and developing the imagination can be employed in all subjects and makes those subjects come alive.  When will politicians stop sacrificing children's imagination on the altar of knowledge, because until they do stop, they are all culpable criminals?