Education letters

Maverick interpretation The maverick Terence Kealey, vice-chancellor of Buckingham University, is at least partially right about quite a lot of things ( Shocked, shocked! 29 June ). Left and right can unite on the need for less central state involvement in higher education – albeit, perhaps, for different reasons. The rub might come over what Kealey means by "private". If he means universities free of central state direction and surveillance, but still somehow funded through the community, then many could support such a vision; if he means profit-making universities run as private businesses narrowly tuned into "the needs of the economy", and with commodified learning as their main raison d'être, that would be a catastrophe. In any public debate about these issues that transcends left–right polarities, Kealey's voice will be one we need to listen to. Dr Richard House Roehampton University • As Linda Smith used to say, why give the oxygen of publicity to someone you'd begrudge giving the oxygen of oxygen to? Tehillim online • Well I think he's right. The American (private) universities are way ahead of ours now, and they're pulling further away. We can't afford to fund them under the current model anyway. Mestizo online Wrongful appeals? Independent appeal panels offer crucial protection to children with special educational needs who are disproportionately represented in exclusion figures ( Lewis Hamilton didn't do it, 29 June ). We know that 27% of children with autism have been excluded; this compares to 4% of other children. In our experience challenging behaviour is frequently the by-product of a lack of understanding and support. Whatever the future of appeal panels, there must be safeguards in place to protect children with SEN. Furthermore, teachers must have the training and the resources to prevent inappropriate exclusions in the first place. Mark Lever The National Autistic Society , London EC1 • 8,000-odd exclusions. 710 hearings. 60 pupils returned to school. And out of those 60, how many are really corrections of an injustice? The stats show that the appeal process is pretty much redundant. We cannot afford 650 pointless tribunals a year. DoctorWhom online • To give the headteacher absolute power in the decision to exclude a pupil is to assume that all headteachers are never wrong and/or would never have any agenda other than putting the school's needs first. Both of which are terrible assumptions to make about human beings in pressure situations. MikeInfinitum online • The central issue is Cameron's intent to remove the final part of the appeal procedure. This is contrary to the rules on natural justice and breaches the individual's right to a fully independent hearing. I have grave concern about putting quite vulnerable children, some with behavioural problems, literally on the street without support. redtaxpayeruk66 online • If appeals panels are got rid of then I am definitely leaving the Lib Dems party. This would be the final straw. Clarence online Cruelty to teachers Teacher Rick Jones described how some pupils bait their teachers with abuse Unfortunately kids do spot targets easily. I have done a lot of on call, and have always found an iPod with microphone to record conversations a very powerful tool. Especially good for confronting parents and kids in "restorative approach" meetings. Parents are usually mortified by their kids' behaviour. Datters online