Whilst most people
with any leanings towards fairness and
justice want to see an end to this Tory-dominated coalition as quickly as
possible, a Labour victory in the May election still cannot be taken for
granted. One would think Tory interference in education, with Gove`s totally
unnecessary assessment reforms, forced academisation of schools, and repeated
criticism of teachers, would have guaranteed Labour gaining the support of all
those associated with state education, but, sadly, this is not the case. Even
when the Tories make absurd claims about the success of their reforms, the
response from Labour appears weak and confused.
Take
free schools, for instance, with the Tories , not content to have spent
millions of taxpayers` money on such
vanity projects, now planning to build many more. It would be expecting too
much for them to base their policies on empirical evidence,
given Gove`s examination reforms, but even the report by Tory think-tank,
Policy Exchange, on which their "500 more free
schools" announcement is founded, admits its limitations. The fact
that the report confesses its own "data cannot demonstrate
conclusively" that any improvements in state schools have anything to do
with being near a free school, beggars belief; they should have added,
"despite what the prime minister will say"!
But, despite
their intention to "scrap" the free school scheme, Labour failed
to capitalise on this Tory nonsense by alienating teachers on another front.
How many experienced teachers in the
public sector were consulted before
Tristram`s latest policy initiative? Of course, the country needs to "make
the most of the talents of all our young people", as the shadow education
secretary said, but how can that be achieved by identifying only a small
proportion, the so-called "gifted and talented", and giving them
special treatment? The huge majority of teachers know that all children
have talents and deserve an educational system which will stretch them to the
limit, and that designating some as worthy of a more
expensive education than others, is clearly unfair. It a should not be featuring in an education
policy of any political party, let alone Labour`s! Whatever happened to the
idea of equality of opportunity?
Unfortunately, Tristram appears to have the knack of demonstrating his
ignorance of state schools at a time when one would assume the teachers` vote
was Labour`s for the taking. Does he and his advisers really think that support
will be gained by harping on about "character education", based on
the mistaken premise that pupils in state schools today lack
sufficient "character and resilience". Hunt frequently has
remarked on the alleged difference in this respect between the state and
privately educated, but is this not an example of merely carrying on where
Gove left off, making huge generalisations about education without the
empirical evidence to substantiate them?
Naturally, the DfE has joined the
debate, and their definition of “character” includes everything from
"perseverance, drive, and grit" to "honesty and dignity",
but how can they even begin to think that all of these characteristics, and
more, do not abound in state schools? As for resilence, state pupils
constantly display the ability to recover from setbacks. How often have
they had to bounce back in the face of assessment "goalposts"
being frequently moved, and their excellent examination results being criticised
and challenged by politicians from all parties, not to mention the personal
economic and social problems many face? Then there`s the Education
Maintenance Allowance being removed, 6th form courses being dropped because of
lack of government funding, university fees being hiked, and the ever-present
preference shown by the so-called top universities for students from the
private sector, despite recent research showing how state-educated
undergraduates do better at university than students educated at the so-called
"schools of character", with similar A-level grades.
Of course, the "enrichment
activities that help cultivate well-rounded young people" are under threat
in state schools, and perhaps it is here where Hunt`s attention needs to be
focussed, rather than on England becoming in the DfE`s words, a "global
leader of teaching character", with its inevitable criticism of teachers,
albeit implicit this time.
Teachers have, since Hunt`s promotion to the post, been faced with many
of his proposals, ranging from the unfair, support for Performance Related Pay,
to the ludicrous, the need for teachers to be re-licensed every five years or so,
to the absurd, the teachers` oath.
Consequently, it is difficult to find any real educational reasons for
teachers to vote for Labour; just as well there are so many for them not to
vote Tory or Lib Dem!
Nevertheless, an all-out campaign to woo
all those involved in the state education sector, in the last few weeks before
the election, can still prove electorally fruitful. Every opportunity should be
taken to sympathise with teachers for what
they have had to endure in the last five years, and congratulate them for what
they have achieved. Above all, promise them that things will improve under
Labour, and that a Labour education secretary would meet with teacher union
leaders on a regular basis, to discuss problems and find solutions – hardly rocket
science!
No comments:
Post a Comment