The School Where Pupils Rate Their Teachers Pupils observe their teacher at the George Mitchell School in London There is nothing on the outside of George Mitchell School, in east London, to show that it is anything but the usual kind of old London secondary school, built to last but badly in need of a coat of paint. Inside, however, education is being rapidly propelled into the 2tst century, and the people who are doing it are the pupils. At George Mitchell, pupils have been given 'ownership' of their schooling. They observe and criticise lessons, make suggestions to teachers about how they could teach better, and interview candidates for teaching posts. The scheme has gone so well that the school is now giving students even more responsibility by abandoning traditional homework in favour of optional out-of-class work which students can decide whether they will do or not. 'There is a lot of lip service given to the idea of student involvement in education,' says head teacher Helen Jeffery, 'but I had never seen pupils given an honest say. We wanted our students to have this. 'And the feedback we've had from them has been amazing. My experience with children told me they would rise to the occasion and there has not been one single instance where children have behaved maliciously or malevolently.' George Mitchell is an 11-to-16 school serving a multi-ethnic community in a poor part of Leyton, east London. 69% of pupils don't speak English at home, and nearly half are on free school meals. The idea for student involvement started two years ago when Helen Jeffery came in to take over what was then an ailing school and appointed a young assistant head, Matthew Savage, who immediately involved students in making the classes in his English department better. The pupils observed teachers at work, attended departmental meetings and advised on seating, displays and how lessons could be made more interesting. Now the scheme has spread throughout the school, with nearly a quarter of all pupils, of all ages and abilities, acting as consultants on the so-called Making Learning Better (MLB) programme. 'It is fun getting to do what the teachers do,' says Duha Abdulghaffar, 13, a maths consultant. 'When we helped appoint a teacher we looked for someone who was strict but fair. We watched them teach a lesson. Some of them were too strict and old-fashioned, and some of them couldn't control the class properly.' Not all teachers were comfortable with the shake-up and some left. 'They didn't say it was because of MLB,' says Matthew Savage, 'but it might as well have been.' Other teachers, according to Helen Jeffery, were worried that it sounded 'a bit American'. Now all accept it, even though it means they have to teach under the eyes of student observers. MLB consultants are appointed—by teachers—for each subject, in each year group, with lead consultants whoattend meetings. They are introduced to aspects of teaching and learning, such as the idea that people learn in different ways, and how teachers are supposed to try and cater for all different ability levels of pupils. They observe lessons in mixed-age pairs, checking off a list of a dozen points. They list three strengths of the lesson and three areas for improvement. Observations take place in each department every couple of weeks, and each haff-term some aspect of classroom life, such as wall displays, or seating arrangements, comes under the spotlight. The young observers have proved stern critics. When interviewing and watching the trial lessons of teachers applying for jobs, they told Helen Jeffery that 'they were not prepared to let one of them through to the afternoon' and that, of one group of candidates, 'nobody was good enough to work at the school'. New teacher David Hogg remembers that he went away after his interview 'thinking I had been properly grilled'. Helen Jeffery says some of her fellow heads throw up their hands in horror when they hear how much power she is