Posted: March 18th, 2023
Throughout the world there is an emphasis placed on education; the United Kingdom is no exception. The United Kingdom has long been revered for the educational structure that exist with the country, The country has always believed that headmasters play a vital role in ensuring that educational institutions provide students with the best instruction possible. More specifically the Labour Party has initiated a policy of Superheadism. The purpose of this discussion is to describe the aforementioned initiative and discuss what role it plays in fostering school improvement. In addition, the essay will discuss other education initiatives that have been wrought by the Labour Party. We will also discuss the likely success or failure of the superheadism initiative.
Origins of the Education problem in the United Kingdom
According to an article found in the journal, Education, the super head initiative was brought about by the labor party as a response to the educational atmosphere that they inherited from the Tories. When the Labour party came into power, the educational situation in the United Kingdom was in great need of repair (Marshall, 2001). According to the article, teachers’ salaries were declining and the overall expenditures for education were also decreasing (Marshall, 2001).
The article explains that for this reason Prime Minister Tony Blair named education as a top priority for the labour party (Marshall, 2001). The author also explains that the conditions at many schools were deplorable as teachers were forced to teach in overcrowded classrooms and buildings were falling apart (Marshall, 2001).
Marshall (2001) asserts that one of the most significant obstacles that the labor party had to overcome was the competitive educational environment that the Conservatives pioneered (Marshall, 2001). The Conservatives supposed that they could apply the theory of competition that is used in business, to enhance the standards of schools in the United Kingdom (Marshall, 2001). The conservatives believed that the success of such a policy could be found in exam results. The author reports, “For the first time, a stock exchange of school performance, the so-called league tables, were to be published to enable parents to trade their children against a school’s future success. In the event it was shrewd investors and schools already rich in cultural capital, to use the sociologist Bourdieu’s term, who profited by the system (Marshall, 2001).”
The author explains that this system was extremely problematic. The author discusses the finding made by Stephen Bali, Sharon Gerwirtz and Richard Bowe, which brought into question the integrity of such a system (Marshall, 2001). The research found that “the education market privileged those parents who knew how to work the system (Marshall, 2001).” The research discovered that some schools profited from the market instead of the consuming parents. Marshall (2001) explains that As schools grew in popularity, so they became oversubscribed, and more often than not this led to selection via the back door, either because the house prices in the catchment area became so prohibitively expensive that only the well-to-do could afford them, or because the schools themselves began to introduce screening devices through entrance tests and interviews, to ensure that only the academically able or socially adjusted gained entrance (Marshall, 2001).”
Marshall (2001) maintains that over time these schools were described as grant maintained institutions. Such a label allowed the schools to govern their entrance procedures instead of being governed by local authorities (Marshall, 2001). Such governance meant that they could deny certain students entrance, which the local authority schools could not Marshall, 2001). For instance, the grant maintained institutions could deny students that were excluded from other schools and disabled students (Marshall, 2001). The author also asserts that the grant maintained institutions were allotted separate governmental funding. The author concluded that this type of structure that so badly bruised schools in the United Kingdom.
Indeed this system seemed to place all the “good” schools in wealthier neighborhoods and the “bad” schools in poor neighborhoods (Marshall, 2001). Now exist there a huge gap between those schools that were grant maintained and those that were under the control of local authorities. The parents that had the wherewithal and could afford to find the best schools for their children benefited from this system but those that could not had to place their children into schools that were suffering.
At the time, this situation might not have struck legislators as problematic, since their children would not be the ones affected. However, over time, this system has failed to educate a great number of young people who will have a difficult time finding employment; lack of employment coupled with poverty will affect everyone.
To combat the system that had been created by the conservatives the first education bill presented by the labour party was designed to bridge the divide between the grant maintained schools and the local authority schools (Marshall, 2001). This bill gave authority over grant maintained schools back to local authority. The schools were then labeled as foundation schools, and they did not receive separate funding (Marshall, 2001). In addition, they no longer had sole authority over entrance procedures or the students that could enroll in the schools (Marshall, 2001). The author writes, “for the first time in over a decade, regained some say in the allocation of pupils to all the schools in their area. Governing bodies had once more to include local representation from the political parties (Marshall, 2001).”
Marshall (2001) argues that many were opposed to the initial bill because it reeked of privatization, which has been proven ineffective in the United States and other places. Marshall (2001) asserts that privatization is seen as detrimental because when business and education are combined one always seems to suffer and it is usually education. Still others felt that the league tables were not an accurate way of measuring school success. The article contends that For Labour, as with the Conservatives before them, the league tables are a key mechanism for holding schools accountable. Yet, as we have seen, for this to make sense as a policy, the rhetoric of any government must assume a level playing field between schools to begin with, in order to suggest that these tables accurately reflect the quality of education in these institutions. Any admittance that this is not so, and that social conditions, for example, play a part, would automatically call into question the efficacy of the league tables as a measure of school performance (Marshall, 2001).”
The labor party has also admitted that the league tables are problematic and have suggested the use of value added tables. However, the Labour party continued to reply upon the results obtained by the league tables to measure the success of schools.
The author argues that many of the Labour party’s suggestions for improving education in the United Kingdom have ignored the real issue of poverty (Marshall, 2001). The poorly performing schools have consistently been located in the poorest areas (Marshall, 2001). The author asserts that there is a direct correlation between poverty and poor academic performance. Marshall (2001) contends that until the issue of poverty is properly addressed schools that are located in poor economic areas will continue to perform poorly (Marshall, 2001). Others agree explaining that,
It is crucial that policy makers desist from claiming that school improvement — by itself and in the absence of extra resources — can solve the problems. Whilst it may be true in “advantaged” schools, it is certainly not true in disadvantaged schools… Whilst some schools can succeed against the odds, the possibility of their doing so, year in and year out, still appears remote, given that the long-term patterning of educational inequality has been strikingly consistent throughout the history of public education in most countries… We must be aware of the dangers of basing a national strategy for change on the efforts of outstanding individuals in exceptional circumstances (Marshall, 2001).”
Indeed the real issue in underperforming schools is correlated with the poverty and squalor that many students live in. The Labor party has attempted to address these issues with more breakfast and after school programs. However, some deep-seated psychological issues that poverty creates cannot be easily solved. Poverty creates resentment and a mindset of victimization. When there are huge disparities between the rich and the poor, which is present in most nations in the world, hostilities arise, and people feel disenfranchised; when you add to this an educational structure that systematically places most poor people in poorly performing schools, people are disenfranchised even further. In addition, the feelings of victimization are solidified. If children come to school feeling disenfranchised and victimized, it is not likely that they will be the best learners. In addition, depending on how old the child is, they may have some understanding that rich kids go to schools that are far better, this creates an inferiority complex, and there is no motivation to do well in school. An article found in the New Statesmen describes this best saying, “if you bundle all the children from all the poorest families, with all the greatest social problems, from the areas with the highest crime rates, into one school, you will end up with a place in which it is pretty near impossible to teach effectively. Nearly all failing schools fit this description (Six Secrets of School Success 2000).” If a country is to overcome educational problems, they must take into account the mentality that poverty creates and how that mentality deteriorates the wherewithal to do well in school.
Although poverty is the issue that affects most underachieving schools, the idea of the super head was conceived as the answer to poorly performing schools. According to Marshall (2001), recruiting exceptional headmasters to improve schools was begun with what was once known as the Hammersmith County School (Marshall, 2001). The local authority school was located in the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (Marshall, 2001). The neighboring schools were grant maintained and church schools (Marshall, 2001). The Hammersmith School was being closed because of poor results and OFSTED reports (Marshall, 2001). However, instead of closing the school the administration decided to reopen it and called it the Phoenix School (Marshall, 2001).
To improve the performance of the school they opted to bring in a headmaster that had been proven as an effective administrator (Marshall, 2001).
The head chosen for this position was Willie Atkinson (Marshall, 2001).
Willie Atkinson has served on several Labour Party advisory committees and has argued that having an exceptional headmaster is essential to improving failing schools (Marshall, 2001). However, the impact of his presence on the Phoenix school does not provide evidence for his argument (Marshall, 2001). The article reports that Since he took over, results at Phoenix high have never reached the levels achieved before his appointment. In 1999 only 3 per cent of pupils gained five A*-C grades at GCSE. To compare the results of this school with those of the London Oratory, where over 90 per cent of the boys achieved five A*-C grades at GCSE, as the very form of the league tables suggest we must, was and is a nonsense. Whichever way the evidence is sliced, it is impossible to escape the conclusion that the biggest single factor in explaining the disparity in performance, be it of an individual school or a local authority, is the level of social deprivation of the community it serves (Marshall, 2001).”
Although Atkinson has not proven that headmasters are essential to improving failing schools, the Labour Party has instituted a policy of using super heads to improve the conditions of the nation’s schools (Marshall, 2001). The next few paragraphs will discuss this initiative and other initiatives created by the Labour party (Marshall, 2001).
The Labour Party and Education Initiatives
The need for reform at educational institutions is nothing new and is usually required as a society changes and grows. According to a book entitled Managing Colleges and Universities: Issues for Leadership there are two main views that pervade educational reform. “The first is that confrontation with change and its companions, contradiction and ambiguity, is endemic to management (Quinn 1991). The second view is that the significance of change is socially constructed, invented, or fabricated by managers and organizational participants and based upon preexisting interpretations and understandings of organization (Hoffman et al., 2000).” However, the authors assert that because there is often no consensus on the understanding of organizational behavior reform may bring about conflicting values and opinions. Thus is the case with the labour party’s handling of education reform in the United Kingdom.
The party has founded various initiatives in an effort to improve the quality of education available at the nation’s schools. The people of the United Kingdom have expressed their dismay at the state of affairs as it relates to the education system. The Labour Party has promised to fix poor performing schools and provide equal education opportunities for all students.
According to the official website of the Labour Party, education is at the forefront of the party’s policies to initiate change in Britain (Education 2004). The party asserts that the mission to reform the educational structure in Britain begins at the nursery school level with free part time nursery care for three and four-year-old children (Education 2004). Additionally, since the labour party came to power in 1997 there has been a marked change in the educational system (Education 2004). The party’s website reports that there have been drastic improvements in the quality of education at the primary level, increases in the number of teachers and teaching assistants (Education 2004). The Labour party has also made a commitment to refurbish all secondary schools in the next 15 years (Education 2004). In addition, the Labour party also pledges to increase spending per pupil and ensure that eventually half of all young people will receive a University education (Education 2004).
In addition to the aforementioned initiatives, the Labour party began an initiative known as superheadism. The BBC reports that under this initiative the finest secondary head teachers became “chief executives” and assigned to underperforming schools. Through this initiative, the “super heads” were responsible for overseeing the underperforming schools and improving the educational environment at the school (Mixed feelings from ‘super heads’, 2002). The BBC explains that the initiative is designed to bring all schools up to certain standards (Mixed feelings from ‘super heads’, 2002). The article asserts that using super heads to accomplish this goal is essential to the improvement of the nation’s schools. The super heads have the expertise and the knowledge to bring the schools up to par (Mixed feelings from ‘super heads’, 2002). Additionally under the initiative,
These head teachers would take charge of 300 “advanced specialist” schools – which would be created alongside a higher target of 2,000 specialist schools by 2006. Moreover, head teachers who underachieved would lose their jobs. This tough approach would be backed by the carrot and stick of funding. A Â£125,000 per year “leadership incentive grant,” aimed at 1,400 inner-city schools, would only go directly to those schools with effective heads (Top heads to be ‘chief executives’, 2002).
This initiative has been met with both optimism and disgust. Some are optimistic because they believe that employing super heads to “straighten out” underperforming schools will be the cure all for the fledging education system. The optimists seem to believe that the main reason for the underachievement of students is school management. They contend that by placing a “super head” in these schools, they will in effect eliminate poor school performance.
On the other hand, Many experts in the field of education believe that this initiative is an attempt to quickly solve a problem that took years to create. They assert that this type of program cannot be maintained over time because of the cost to human capital. In addition, many parents at high achieving schools believe that the quality of education at those schools will decrease because their heads will be concentrated on improving the performance of other schools.
Another major initiative to monitor the progress made in schools is known as Office for Standards in Education (OFSTED), which was designed to monitor teacher training (Bell, 1999).
Bell (1999) explains teacher training is increasingly informed by a technical rationality based on a preoccupation with means and outputs rather than with purpose. Quality and efficiency are the dominant modes of discourse. Thus, to focus all teacher training on the improvement of classroom teaching and pupil learning with the intention of achieving specific and limited educational outcomes is to move towards post-Fordist teacher training which perpetuates the myth that teaching is a mechanistic process. This is reinforced by the frequency and nature of OFSTED inspections. These are intended to inspect quality in ITT by concentrating on making judgements about the quality of training by measuring outcomes against predetermined criteria (Bell, 1999).”
Another article found in the New Statesman found states that other initiatives include education action zones, specialist schools, beacon schools, and Fresh Start schools. The fresh start initiative was discussed previously in this paper and involves “closing a school and then reopening it under new management and a new name (and probably new teachers, since the old staff have to reapply for their own jobs) (Six Secrets of School Success 2000).”
As was stated previously the Fresh Start programs used the expertise of super heads to bring about improvements. Failing secondary schools were often threatened with being replaced by a fresh start school if they did not improve (Six Secrets of School Success 2000). However, the article reports that “the superheads” of three of the ten schools previously given this treatment (the policy was launched in 1997) had resigned. The three superheads– two running the schools with fancy names in Islington and Brighton, the third in Newcastle — had decided, after wrestling against overwhelming odds for periods of between six and 18 months here on Earth that they would be better off on Planet Zog (Six Secrets of School Success 2000).”
Another type of initiative that was launched by the Labour party was known and the city academy. This initiative was designed to substitute failing schools with an educational system that is “built and managed by partnerships involving the state, voluntary, church and business sponsors (Six Secrets of School Success 2000).”
The article explains that the city academies were designed to be outside of the control of local councils (Six Secrets of School Success 2000). These schools will undoubtedly fall into the hands of the private sector (Six Secrets of School Success 2000).
The author insists that this type of rebranding can be effective as it has been in the United States with “Magnet schools” (Six Secrets of School Success 2000). This type of initiative can be effective because it attract the middle class back into the inner city (Six Secrets of School Success 2000). They bring with them better-qualified teachers and the diversity the children living in the inner-city need to thrive in school (Six Secrets of School Success 2000).
However, there is a catch to such an initiative. The article reports that this can be evidenced at Kings College, Guildford, which is now managed by the private sector (Six Secrets of School Success 2000). The article explains that approximately a third of the previous school’s population was not granted enrollment at other Guilford schools but King’s college will not accept these students (Six Secrets of School Success 2000). In addition, some of the old students that had attendance and behavioural problems will not be able to attend the new school (Six Secrets of School Success 2000).
As a result, if the school becomes successful this success will be attributed to the involvement of the private sector instead of the fact that the school got rid of portions of the student population that were deemed “troubled” (Six Secrets of School Success 2000). In addition, the unwanted students will be placed into some other school, which will become a “dumping ground” for unwanted students and be labeled a failing school (Six Secrets of School Success 2000). The author asserts that this is a major problem with rebranding because “Privately run schools do not tolerate failure — there is too much at stake. But they do not, as their propagandists would like us to believe, perform some alchemy that turns failure into success. They simply export it elsewhere (Six Secrets of School Success 2000).”
Indeed, the Labour Party has spearheaded many initiatives, which have attempted to provide a solution for the problems facing the realm of education in the United Kingdom. It is obvious that there are no easy answers to resolving the issues facing inner city schools because the issues facing such school are multilayered.
This means that there is a foundational issue of poverty, which creates several other issues resulting in a very complex situation. The Labour Party may attempt many more initiatives but until the issue of poverty and the inability to attract a diverse student body to inner-city schools is addressed, the United Kingdom will continue to have major problems in the area of education. It is vitally important that the party realize that deploying super heads to intervene at failing schools and rebranding schools are only two pieces of an extremely large puzzle.
The likely success or failure of the superheadism initiative
The success of the super head initiative is dependent upon the ability of all participants to understand that the super head initiative by itself will not be enough to transform the school system in England. In other words, the super head initiative will only work if it is coupled with community development, community outreach, diversification of the student body, increases in teacher salaries and the adequate training of teachers. These essential components are not easy to create, but are necessary if a lasting change is to take place in the Educational System.
It is also important to note that the success of the super head program is also dependent upon placing the right super head with the right failing school. Some heads are better than others in any given situation are. Based on their experiences some super heads can be effective in situations that other super heads cannot. Therefore placing the super heads into environments where they can be the most effective is essential.
Additionally the government must have realistic expectations of what can be accomplished at a failing school. For instance, the government should not give super heads unrealistic time lines for when a failing school should have a certain number of students making certain grades. This approach adds to the stress that many super heads feel. In addition, the approach is to general as it blankets all schools with the same expectations although they are facing different challenges. Instead, the government must play an active role in understanding what challenges each school faces and provide these schools with a tailored realistic timeline and a game plan for success. Anything less would set the school up to fail.
Additionally super heads should be warned about the stress related to the job. In addition, the issues related to continuing to manage the schools that the super heads were originally assigned to becomes more problematic. A report from the BBC explains that many super heads and opponents of the system assert that this type of initiative places a strain on the super heads (Mixed feelings from ‘super heads’, 2002). The BBC reports that many super heads have experienced a great deal of stress attempting to manage more then one successful school. One super head explains that it was not unusual for him to work 10 to 12 hours a day (Mixed feelings from ‘super heads’, 2002). The super head asserted that it takes a great deal of energy to be a part of such an initiative (Mixed feelings from ‘super heads’, 2002).
Another issue pertaining to the success of the super head initiative has to do with the actions of parents and students at both failing and successful schools. Parents of failing schools must get more involved in the education of their students and make a concerted effort to address the needs of their children. In addition, students at failing schools must make a decision to be successful regardless of the conditions that they may live in. Additionally, parents at successful schools must realize that the heads that manage their children’s schools have valuable skill sets that are needed by other students. These skill sets will benefit the failing schools and benefit the entire community, the students at successful school have to want for other kids the same opportunities that their children have. Leveling the playing field will shrink the gap between the have and the have-nots.
One head master at a successful school argues that one school will suffer if a headmaster is forced to manage more than one school. (Mixed feelings from ‘super heads’, 2002) He explains, “To run a school well you need to give that school your heart and your soul…You need to be there every day, you need to be walking the corridors and sensing exactly what is happening… I also do not think that anyone running a successful school has any surplus energy left to run a second place as well (Mixed feelings from ‘super heads’, 2002).”
In addition to the long working hours, many super heads have found that the standards that they are expected to meet are impossible. Marshall (2001) asserts that staff retention has been extremely problematic. The article reports that at one school “even the head had resigned (a pattern repeated with the majority of the first tranche of superheads, a number leaving within days of the government’s announcing that they needed to meet targets of 15 per cent A*-C over three years). By making the future of such schools endlessly open to speculation, and the conditions in which they operate so hard, there is a sense in which Labour’s policies have ended up punishing those who most need their help (Marshall (2001).”
Superheads at the most challenging schools should also be offered incentives and pay raises. The BBC reports that the National Association of Head Teachers believes that the government must rethink how they reward teachers (‘Superheads’ call for Â£120k a year, 2000). The association asserts that many fresh start super heads resigned because they were not being adequately rewarded for their services (‘Superheads’ call for Â£120k a year, 2000). The report asserts that the rewards available to super heads in the private sector must be reflected in the public sector if the Labour party expects to see lasting change (‘Superheads’ call for Â£120k a year, 2000). The association has recommended that head teachers receiving salaries up to Â£120,000 with the prospect of an extra Â£90,000 performance bonus after five years This pay scale would be applied to the head teachers running fresh start schools, where “new” schools are re-opened on the site of failed schools which are judged to be beyond recovery. It would also be on offer to the heads of the forthcoming city academies, which will seek to raise educational standards in deprived areas (‘Superheads’ call for Â£120k a year, 2000).”
Additionally the association asserts that super heads need more flexibility within schools (‘Superheads’ call for Â£120k a year, 2000). The report asserts that super heads should have the authority to remove students that are extraordinarily disruptive (‘Superheads’ call for Â£120k a year, 2000). In addition, the association believes the super heads should have the authority to abandon curriculums that are not working at the school (‘Superheads’ call for Â£120k a year, 2000)l. They also believe that they should be able to set their own terms and timetables (‘Superheads’ call for Â£120k a year, 2000).
In addition to the super heads, the labour party must understand that teachers are just as important. This means that teachers must make salaries that reflect the vital role they play in the educational environment. Teachers are the backbone of any school, good teachers are hard to find, and many have left the profession. A BBC article explains “The efforts teachers make must be acknowledged by government in order to change the present mood of pessimism into one of optimism, where teachers can look forward to embracing the promised reforms which will free them to concentrate on the things they do so well – teach (Teachers told: Time for change, 2002).”
As was stated previously, failure will surely be the legacy of this initiative if it does not have realistic goals for the super heads. The government is setting the schools up to fail by imposing upon them goals that cannot be met in the allotted time. However, if the labour party is careful and chooses to really investigate each school and create a plan of action the super heads may be able to do their jobs successfully. In addition, the labour party must not put all its eggs in one basket. They must look at every possible reason why failing schools exists and formulate solutions based on the findings. Overall, the initiative can be successful but only if it is properly implemented.
The purpose of this discussion was to describe the super head initiative and discuss what role it plays in fostering school improvement. Our research found that the super head initiative was developed by the labor party and was formulated to address the needs of failing schools. The research suggests that the super head initiative was designed to encourage headmasters at successful schools to oversee the management of failing schools. The Labour party felt that having a skillful super head would allow failing schools to thrive. This initiative has brought a great deal of skepticism and optimism about the education system in the United Kingdom. Many feel that such a system will inevitably fail as super heads become over worked. While others believe that, it is the only way to save failing schools.
In addition, the essay discussed other education initiatives that have been wrought by the Labour Party. We found that other education initiatives included fresh start and the development of city academies. The research found that both of these initiatives ar attempts at rebranding schools. The fresh start initiatives involve closing schools and reopening them under another name. It also involves the hiring of a super head to place the school on the right track. The fresh start initiative has come under a great deal of criticism because the government seems to have unrealistic standards about what can be accomplished in a short period. In addition, there are problems associated with rebranding because the most troubled students are often excluded from enrollment. We also found that there is an initiative called OFSTED that monitors the training of teachers and provides insight into the quality of education that students are receiving.
Finally, we discussed the likely success or failure of the superheadism initiative. We found that the success or failure of the super head initiative to be dependent upon the actions of the government and the communities. We concluded that the government must have realistic expectations of what super heads can accomplish and pay them what they are worth. In addition, we found that the success of the super heads is greatly dependent upon teachers. The research suggests that teachers must be paid higher wages. Additionally we concluded there are a myriad of other factors that will contribute to the success of the super head initiative in the United Kingdom.
Education. 2004. Official Site of the Labor Party. retrieved January 15, 2005 from;
Mixed feelings from ‘super heads’. retrieved January 15, 2005 from; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2132516.stm
Superheads’ call for Â£120k a year, (2000). retrieved January 15, 2005 from; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/914516.stm
Teachers told: Time for change. (2002) retrieved January 15, 2005 from; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/2132104.stm
Six Secrets of School Success. March 20, 2000. New Statesman. Volume: 129 (4478). Pg: 5.
Bell, Les. (1999) Chronicles of Wasted Time? Initial Teacher Education in England: 1960-1999. Australian Journal of Education. 43 (2). Pg: 186.
Hoffman et al. (2000) Managing Colleges and Universities: Issues for Leadership. Bergin & Garvey. Westport, CT.
Kelly, J. December 16, 2003. A new way of bringing schools together is being encouraged ministers, reports. The Guardian
Marshall, Bethan. (2001) Including the Socially Excluded: League Tables and Labour’s Schools Policy. Education. 43(1).Pg.: 30.
Are you busy and do not have time to handle your assignment? Are you scared that your paper will not make the grade? Do you have responsibilities that may hinder you from turning in your assignment on time? Are you tired and can barely handle your assignment? Are your grades inconsistent?
Whichever your reason is, it is valid! You can get professional academic help from our service at affordable rates. We have a team of professional academic writers who can handle all your assignments.
Students barely have time to read. We got you! Have your literature essay or book review written without having the hassle of reading the book. You can get your literature paper custom-written for you by our literature specialists.
Do you struggle with finance? No need to torture yourself if finance is not your cup of tea. You can order your finance paper from our academic writing service and get 100% original work from competent finance experts.
While psychology may be an interesting subject, you may lack sufficient time to handle your assignments. Don’t despair; by using our academic writing service, you can be assured of perfect grades. Moreover, your grades will be consistent.
Engineering is quite a demanding subject. Students face a lot of pressure and barely have enough time to do what they love to do. Our academic writing service got you covered! Our engineering specialists follow the paper instructions and ensure timely delivery of the paper.
In the nursing course, you may have difficulties with literature reviews, annotated bibliographies, critical essays, and other assignments. Our nursing assignment writers will offer you professional nursing paper help at low prices.
Truth be told, sociology papers can be quite exhausting. Our academic writing service relieves you of fatigue, pressure, and stress. You can relax and have peace of mind as our academic writers handle your sociology assignment.
We take pride in having some of the best business writers in the industry. Our business writers have a lot of experience in the field. They are reliable, and you can be assured of a high-grade paper. They are able to handle business papers of any subject, length, deadline, and difficulty!
We boast of having some of the most experienced statistics experts in the industry. Our statistics experts have diverse skills, expertise, and knowledge to handle any kind of assignment. They have access to all kinds of software to get your assignment done.
Writing a law essay may prove to be an insurmountable obstacle, especially when you need to know the peculiarities of the legislative framework. Take advantage of our top-notch law specialists and get superb grades and 100% satisfaction.
We have highlighted some of the most popular subjects we handle above. Those are just a tip of the iceberg. We deal in all academic disciplines since our writers are as diverse. They have been drawn from across all disciplines, and orders are assigned to those writers believed to be the best in the field. In a nutshell, there is no task we cannot handle; all you need to do is place your order with us. As long as your instructions are clear, just trust we shall deliver irrespective of the discipline.
Our essay writers are graduates with bachelor's, masters, Ph.D., and doctorate degrees in various subjects. The minimum requirement to be an essay writer with our essay writing service is to have a college degree. All our academic writers have a minimum of two years of academic writing. We have a stringent recruitment process to ensure that we get only the most competent essay writers in the industry. We also ensure that the writers are handsomely compensated for their value. The majority of our writers are native English speakers. As such, the fluency of language and grammar is impeccable.
There is a very low likelihood that you won’t like the paper.
Not at all. All papers are written from scratch. There is no way your tutor or instructor will realize that you did not write the paper yourself. In fact, we recommend using our assignment help services for consistent results.
We check all papers for plagiarism before we submit them. We use powerful plagiarism checking software such as SafeAssign, LopesWrite, and Turnitin. We also upload the plagiarism report so that you can review it. We understand that plagiarism is academic suicide. We would not take the risk of submitting plagiarized work and jeopardize your academic journey. Furthermore, we do not sell or use prewritten papers, and each paper is written from scratch.
You determine when you get the paper by setting the deadline when placing the order. All papers are delivered within the deadline. We are well aware that we operate in a time-sensitive industry. As such, we have laid out strategies to ensure that the client receives the paper on time and they never miss the deadline. We understand that papers that are submitted late have some points deducted. We do not want you to miss any points due to late submission. We work on beating deadlines by huge margins in order to ensure that you have ample time to review the paper before you submit it.
We have a privacy and confidentiality policy that guides our work. We NEVER share any customer information with third parties. Noone will ever know that you used our assignment help services. It’s only between you and us. We are bound by our policies to protect the customer’s identity and information. All your information, such as your names, phone number, email, order information, and so on, are protected. We have robust security systems that ensure that your data is protected. Hacking our systems is close to impossible, and it has never happened.
You fill all the paper instructions in the order form. Make sure you include all the helpful materials so that our academic writers can deliver the perfect paper. It will also help to eliminate unnecessary revisions.
Proceed to pay for the paper so that it can be assigned to one of our expert academic writers. The paper subject is matched with the writer’s area of specialization.
You communicate with the writer and know about the progress of the paper. The client can ask the writer for drafts of the paper. The client can upload extra material and include additional instructions from the lecturer. Receive a paper.
The paper is sent to your email and uploaded to your personal account. You also get a plagiarism report attached to your paper.
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!
Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.