Do you want what Gove wants for your grandchildren?

My pleasure Anno. I just get very when I read undigested tabloid rubbish about England "sliding down the league tables", without any understanding, as the Telegraph article points out, of just how invalid the data are.
I also just don't understand how people can "like" Gove without any evidence that any of his policies are raising (or are likely to raise) standards. How does setting up a few Free Schools for a few hundred pupils raise standards for the rest? How does a narrow, academic curriculum aimed at the brightest children, raise standards for the rest?
Call me a pernickety old school inspector, but could we have some hard evidence?

You won't get any from me, mamie! My sneaky admiration for Gove is based on what I've seen of his personality, his enthusiasm and his commitment to his job. I am not and never have been a teacher, and don't know enough about current educational practises to make any judgements about his proposed measures.

Perhaps I was wrong, and there are no gransnetters at all who have a good word to say about them...

Fair enough Ana. Some do say he is very charming and chacune à son goût etc. I think (notwithstanding the 1066 and All That comment), that he would probably make a very good History teacher in the right prep school.

Ana, what you see as 'enthusiasm and commitment to his job' many of us interpret as irrational and fanatical attachment to an ideological position that has no logical or evidential basis. However, we agree to differ.

Mamie thanks for your excellent resume of Gove's 'good ideas'!

Let's also remember his department's suggestion of upping the numbers for ratios of children under 5.

I have spent a long career ( still going!) as a teacher, head, inspector/advisor etc and rarely in 40 yrs have I met teachers who have not wanted the best for the kids they are working with. On the few occasions when there has been poor teaching or weak leadership then existing processes have been used to deal with it. e.g my DH is currently running a governing body, at the request of a LA,because the Governors were not dealing with the falling results /poor leadership quickly enough. If this was central government managing the school I think it would have taken longer to identify the problem. The worst thing I had to do as a head was to sack a teacher. Lovely person, rubbish teacher and the children have to take priority!

Gove needs to stop and really listen , research and consider more carefully the evidence of what supports a thriving, well established education system. Often it is not just what happens in classrooms. Countries where education is perceived as successful have a whole lot of other cultural/social processes that support educational success.

Gove like most ministers want to be seen to be doing things and make their mark (especially if you would like to be PM) Because they are only 5 years to do so between elections ministers often rush in and tinker about without thinking things through...

Excellent post, ej.

Yes the change in ratios for under 5s is, fortunately, dead in the water. It was not adding up was it - this heroic "reforming" government was going to improve the quality of childcare and make it cheaper at a stroke.
What I can't understand is why anyone would want to apply for the headship of a secondary school with a below average intake. The special individuals who do, and make a success of it (only to be told they have failed, because the sec of state has moved the goal posts again) have my undying admiration.

Gove is very ambitious with plans for leading the Tory party and thus becoming Prime Minister. That is why he works so hard to be appealing. He always reminds me of the boy desperate to be picked for the first team but aware that he has two left feet.

JessM any headship tbh! The expectation that to be judged good, never mind outstanding, the majority of children have to make better than expected progress is hard to achieve!

I'm a bit worried to see the words "charming" and " appealing" being used about him. I've always found him really creepy, like the teacher you don't want to be left alone with but you're not sure why.
I think the big failings with secondary education have been the lack of vocational training for less academic children and the idea that almost anyone can go to university. Surely it is better to work with a child's natural talents and work to produce a successful adult with a career in front of them. For those with the ability university is great but it is not the only path to success.

Mamie thank you for the link which I did read. I'm well aware that statistics and league tables are possibly unreliable indicators of progress or lack of it. Like Ana I am not a teacher nor have I been involved in education. My thoughts spring more from seeing the quality of the end product. I can't remember who dismissed my radical thought that the purpose of education was to prepare children to earn a living - hopefully, in the sphere they choose to do so. If not that, then what? Possibly marry well or hope for rich parents to die young?

There has been a broad consensus of opinion in business that some schools were not preparing children for the adult world of work. I don't just mean at 16, or 18 but at graduate level too.

What is worrying is the amount of competition our children/grandchildren face - graduates chasing jobs now have to compete in an international sphere, not just against their peers here.

I would totally agree that vocational training should be encouraged for those less academically able. Hopefully people will re-think the crazy idea that everyone should go to University. All that happens in the world of work is that the bar gets higher and qualifications more meaningless. If everyone has a degree then what is it worth?

I admire Michael Gove for trying to change things. I don't know if the means by which he is attempting to do so are right but I do know they need changing. I admire him too for taking on the teaching unions - education today appears to be more about teachers needs and rights than those of children and I pity those children who are condemned to indifferent teachers who believe competition, hard work and ambition are wrong.

Sel - surely you do not think the sole purpose of education is to provide employees for businesses? Is that all you would want from it for your own family? Gradgrind springs to mind.
Graduates are competing for jobs because of the financial meltdown caused by greedy capitalists. The huge rise in fees and the lack of appropriate jobs has seen a sharp downturn in applications for university places, which may be no bad thing.
You talk very disparagingly about teachers - how many do you actually know? I know a lot and they care very much about their pupils and work very hard.
You say you admire Gove for trying to change things - surely change for change's sake is not a good thing?
You make no comment about his perversion of statistics to suit his own agenda - do you think that is an honourable thing to do?

Sel - what you said about teachers and education being about their needs and rights would be an utter disgrace if it wasn't so laughable.

Greatnan what I said was the purpose of education is to prepare children to earn a living in whatever sphere they chose. I did not say it's purpose was to provide employees for businesses. This is not the first time you have attributed that comment to me. What do you think the purpose of education is, if not to prepare children to earn a living?

My children have all been lucky enough to benefit from time spent at excellent schools and good Universities and now, thankfully have careers which they thoroughly enjoy.

No, of course change for change's sake is wrong but things do need to change if you want your grandchildren or great-grandchildren to have happy and fulfilling lives. Having children leave school at 16 with a good command of English and basic Maths would be a start.

Bluebell you may see my comment as an utter disgrace if you wish but it's indicative of many peoples' views. It depends with whom one surrounds oneself I guess.

Undoubtedly one of the purposes of education is to prepare children for earning a living as adults, but it is certainly not the only purpose. I don't know whether Sel agrees or disagrees with this but it is quite clear that Michael Gove sees education's sole purpose as creating future workers in, ironically, an almost Marxist sense.

Sel, I completely agree that schools and universities should, amongst other things, prepare pupils for the world of work. Where we differ, is that my observations of school leavers tell me that the vast majority do leave school well-taught and well-prepared whereas you and your friends and acquaintances obviously have a very different and negative view. I don't think we can do anything, but agree to differ on that. I know many people in business and industry who are positive about the young people they recruit, I suppose it is possible that they have better policies for recruitment, induction and training?
I know that Michael Gove's reforms as they stand are unlikely to change anything for the better. I know that the vast majority of teachers are hard working and want the best for their pupils. I know that there is a minority of pupils who present a challenge, because of a cycle of poverty, lack of parental expectation and lack of employment prospects. There is much more that can be achieved by addressing underlying these social problems than by ill-conceived change for change's sake in the education system.

Just a few suggestions, Sel. How about learning to evaluate data, to come to decisions based on evidence, to be introduced to poetry, art and music and literature, to work in co-operation with others, to be able to their own research, to find their own creative talents or to see how politics works? I am sure others can suggest even more 'uses' for education. Do you not think these things could be worth teaching?

Some children will be lucky enough to have this kind of stimulation at home, but many will not. I am sure you are familiar with Hard Times and the utilitarian view of education. Most enlightened people have rejected the view that all school is for is to turn out 'drawers of water and hewers of wood'.
Of course it is necessary for children to have the necessary numeracy and literacy skills, not just for earning a living but for making the most of their personal development. Nobody is arguing against that - we are saying only that there are other purposes of education.

Perhaps you could tell us if you think employers have a responsibility to train their staff in the skills pertinent to their particular area?

I find the notion that vocational training should be for 'the less academically able' truly ridiculous.

Of course it all depends what is meant by vocation. Is it medicine, the law, engineering or horticulture?

It's this sheep and goats attitude which had bedevilled education in this country for generations. I can see no point in making the sort of sweeping generalisations that have been made up thread, but Gove's nonsense of a prescriptive and restrictive curriculum and structure imposed on schools, seems designed to return to the attitudes of a mythical yesteryear where a fact heavy diet and emphasis on competion rather than cooperation was designed to exclude rather than include, and siphon off the 'less academically able' to poorly paid work with poor prospects.

In Germany vocational training in areas like engineering has had a much higher status.
I think it is a huge pity that Gove's education has not prepared him to evaluate data and evidence. His one source reference seems to be his own schooling which he obviously thinks was excellent.

My eldest grandson read anthropology at Durham - not an obviously utilitarian subject, but at 29 he is a director of a large company of conference organisers. Some of my other grandchildren are taking/have taken/will take degrees in nursing, biomedical sciences, marine biology, law, computer studies and clinical psychology. Two others will enter the navies of Britain and New Zealand. (Big families are such a drag on the economy!)They all attended 'bog standard' comprehensive schools in Kent and Yorkshire. They enjoyed their time at school and have nothing but praise for the huge majority of their teachers. They took part in many creative and sporting activities and most of them also did voluntary work and took part-time jobs.

Historical and philosophical studies are amongst the top ten subjects with the highest rate of graduate employment. It appears some employers take a broader view of education.
However, if anybody wants a guaranteed job, they should attend The school of Pharmacy, which has a 100% graduate employment record. Universities specialising in teacher training also have a high rate of success in placing graduates in work.
Scottish universities come out very well from the statistics.
Of course, many people believe that attending university is not just about fitting yourself for employment but I am sure there are some people who would not agree!

I have always thought that education helped someone be prepared for life, not merely for that part of life which provided them with a living (useful though that is).

In all the discussions about education policy in this country, FE colleges hardly ever get a mention! They are the genuinely comprehensive institutions, providing education and training from elementary to degree level and covering the whole range of academic and vocational ( yes, you're right Mice but it's a kind of shorthand) education. Schools get the headlines. I once attended a national conference where the then minister admitted total ignorance of FE. I suspect Govey is in the same position. All our policy makers think in terms of school, university. There is an educational system much wider than that!

Most of the political tinkering and interference is at secondary level. This is what gets the headlines - 16+ results. Trouble is, for the politicians, that it takes about 5 years for the changes to feed through to the results stage.
Primary relatively ignored and can you imagine if they tried to interfere with universities like they do with secondaries?
I was explaining to my 13 yr old friend last week that in uni there are no big exams at the end any more - it is all modular. But Gove wants to go back to the big exam at the end model. (she was wondering whether GCSEs would be 'stressful" - i begged to disagree )

You are right, Lilygran. Somehow the idea that "A" Levels and university are a "must have" for everyone permeates secondary schools, and then students who can't make the standard are disillusioned. At an FE college, they would have the opportunity to combine academic and vocational (sorry!) subjects and succeed.

At my last school, which is an OFsTED "outstanding" comprehensive, albeit in a leafy lanes suburb, parents and students would have nothing to do with anything, post 16, that wasn't an "A" Level. In my time there, I saw many good ideas introduced and then fail through lack of support, and lots of students struggling with subjects they really didn't want to do. So a change of attitude and understanding is needed too.

Thanks for that reminder, Lilygran. I spent the better part of my career in further and adult education - from teaching 'general studies' to stroppy day-release motor mechanics to access courses for university entry: quite a contrast! I learnt a lot and hope that some of them did too. A plug for adult ed: it has been squeezed by spending cuts over many years by governments of different persuasions. The access courses for mature students who missed out on school were a lifeline for many of them but also gave them the opportunity to become more 'productive' members of society as well as more fulfilled individuals. There are reasons why people don't succeed in school - undiagnosed dyslexia is quite common; some have been confused about their sexuality and sometimes been bullied at school; others come from unsatisfactory home backgrounds. All were highly motivated to succeed and I'm glad to say that most of them did. There will always be those who fall through the net of school and adult education has provided and should continue to provide a safety net from which they can bounce up again. I could go on and tell you about the personal fulfilment that adult students gain from evening classes (which have also been squeezed), but I should think that a lot of you know about these from personal experience.