Do you want what Gove wants for your grandchildren?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

Excellent post, ej.

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...

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.

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.

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...

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?

Mamie - thank you for your complete demolition of the ideologue Gove.

I think literacy, numeracy and ICT are the essential core skills that everyone needs. I think that we had excellent strategies in place which were raising standards in these areas and we should have continued to refine, develop and improve them. I think the National Curriculum was broad and balanced. There was work in progress to make it less restricting and to allow more cross-curricular development; this needed more time, money and resources.
I think we should celebrate and trust our many excellent school leaders, teachers and support staff. I think LEAs should have been allowed to continue to support and challenge less effective schools. I think Ofsted should be free from political interference and should provide a clear system of accountability for evaluating strengths and weaknesses in schools and ensuring improvement. I think every school should be secular and comprehensive.
I think politicians should respect professionals and allow them to do their jobs without constant "reform".
I think every business person who wants to criticise schools should go and work as a teaching assistant for a term.
I think we should recognise the true impact of poverty and unemployment on children and their performance in school.

My question asking what do people want their children to be and how they should be schooled to get there was an attempt to open the debate. Do we want to be successful in the mode of Singapore & China or would we prefer to lose our place in the world and have well rounded & educated people who are not burnt out by their 30s, given that they'll all have to work until they are 70 in the future? It is a real dilemma whatever your political stance. Seeing what I observed in Singapore made my stomach churn. Gove has a very singular style that will draw people to him or against him, again whatever your political affiliation.

Re teaching assistants, didn't they arise from the idea of a previous Tory Ed Minister, John Patten, about having a 'Mum's army' of helpers?

I am curious, Sel. You choose to take part in a debate, but regard any views you don't share as 'flak'. Why not simply reply to the points raised?

Gad - thanks. Mamie- respect!!! I shall be using no. 9 from now on in many situations! Come GAS- give us the evidence

Great thread to read with my morning coffee, it's quite cheered me up to see the (almost) universal dislike of Gove's assault on education and all who sail in her. Totally ideologically driven, nothing evidence based - so depressing.

Mamie that's masterly and very comprehensive. I would have added, 'finally destroying local education authorities'. Where do schools go now for support, advice and services? And where is the accountability of education now?

Nice post mamie
Free schools are funnelling off money that should be being used to support boroughs where there is a genuine need for more school places.
TBH his agenda as minister seems to be : to get a headline as often as possible.
Amongst other wild cards played to get his name in the papers he has had a go at school governors and teaching assistants.
I am so glad that I finally bowed out as chair of governors 12 months ago after 10 years as I would by now have pulled all my hair out.

What a silly generalisation about not turning out employable youngsters! Perhaps it depends on how you view the purpose of schooling. You can regard schooling as part of a person's education – the part that teaches them how to learn, how to adapt. Or you can regard schooling as a gradgrindish factory attempt to churn out machine tools for employers.