Evaluation of the Villiers Park Scholars Programme

An evaluation of the Villiers Park Scholars Programme was carried out by Louise Gazeley, Judy Sebba, Sarah Aynsley and Angela Jacklin from the Department of Education at the University of Sussex between 2009 and 2011. The Villiers Park Scholars Programme identified young people from less advantaged backgrounds who displayed high academic potential and sought to improve their chances of gaining entry to 'centres of excellence at leading universities'. The evaluating team focused on tracking the impact of the programme on its first cohorts of scholars over a two year period. A multi-site case study approach was adopted for which data was collected in three phases for each of the 10 participating institutions. The main impact at school level related to improvements in the identification of high potential. Analysis of the quantitaive data showed Year 11 scholars in three schools performing favourably at GCSE level in relation to the top 25 per cent of their peer group. Feedback from the scholars themselves indicated that the mentoring they had received had contributed to changes in their academic and study skills that contributed to improved attainment. Staff, parents and scholars all felt that changes in the performance of identified scholars was seen in their motivation, self-esteem and confidence in particular. Greater impact was seen in relation to Year 11 scholars and those without a parent who had been to university. Staff and scholars also considered that the programme had improved scholars' knowledge of higher education. Analysis of the destinations data for Year 13 scholars revealed that around half of those for whom data was available took up places in 'leading' universities. Scholars who did not have a parent who went to university were found to be more likely to say that their involvement in the programme had changed their future plane

‘English a foreign tongue’:The 2011 Census in England and the misunderstanding of multilingualism

The 2011 UK Census was the first decennial census to ask a question about language in England. The period during which the census was planned coincided with a period of intense politicisation of the language issue. The census results showed that 98.3% of the adult population either spoke English as their main language, or could speak it well or very well. These statistics produced a media frenzy focussed on the number of people who supposedly could not speak English. There were misunderstandings among journalists and politicians about what the statistics meant, with ‘not speaking English as a main language’ being interpreted as ‘not speaking English’. This paper discusses the census in England and its aftermath, revealing a lack of understanding of multilingualism and literacies by the monolingual majority. Not only were the census questions possibly flawed, but the results fed into anti-immigration discourse and were used to reduce services for non-speakers of English

Why Were There No Jokes After the 2021 Meron Crowd Crush? On Israeli “Joking Relationships”

The vast research literature on disaster jokes demonstrates that no calamity is too horrific to be followed by jokes that typically recontextualize traumatic events and channel the threatening voices that these events provoke. Why, then, did no jokes circulate after the deadliest civil disaster in Israel’s history, which occurred on Mount Meron during the Lag Ba’Omer celebrations in April 2021? Drawing upon the ethnographic concept of “joking relationships,” this essay documents representations of ultra-Orthodox Jews (Haredim) in contemporary Israeli memes and explains the restraint that Israeli society shows toward this group with whom the Meron disaster is associated. The absence of jokes is employed here as a prism through which one can gain insight not only into prevalent Israeli beliefs, emotions, and perceptions but also into the function of jokes in delineating internal social boundaries