Opposition needs to get going!

Your editorial rightly states that workers "cannot trust the government or employers to ensure their safety" and that any second wave of the virus will almost certainly be blamed on the people`s "irresponsible behaviour" (Star, 21/09/20). We know that this appalling Tory government is adept at "passing the buck", whether it be to Ofqual for the A-level debacle, or to Public Health England for the mismanagement of the coronavirus crisis. Refusing to accept responsibility for anything which goes wrong is the default position of this Johnson/Cummings administration, as is giving massive contracts paid for with taxpayers` money to past associates and friends of Gove and the prime minister`s advisor. The trouble is that we should not be reading about the antics of one of the most incompetent, corrupt and arrogant UK governments in modern history in your editorials, excellent as they frequently are, but in one of many reports on the front page, of speeches by the leader of the Opposition. He and his colleagues should be shouting from the rooftops about our absentee prime minister, his government`s degenerate cronyism, the damage it is doing to every facet of ordinary people`s lives, and the danger it creates for every worker in the country. Outlining details of manifesto policies can come later, but highlighting what is being done now cannot be delayed! The lead held by the Tories in the polls will not be seriously challenged until the public is more aware of what Starmer`s Labour stands for, and until that happens, the misgovernment continues unabated! Editorial should comprise comments evaluating the action of the government and other parties, pointing out shortcomings and omissions, not having to take the place of the Opposition. What on earth are Starmer and the others thinking? At the moment , Johnson and co. know they can do what they like!

Stressing Tories` incompetence is insufficient!

Andy Beckett rightly states that calling for competence in government "is not a rival programme for office", but Starmer cannot afford to wait "until parliament returns next month" to make Labour`s case (Nobody denies Johnson`s government is incompetent. But do enough voters care? 22/08/20). Showing the "unsuitability of many Tory ideas, barely changed since the Thatcher era" would be a good start, and where better than the economy? The £2tn debt story will inevitably be developed by many Tories into an excuse for austerity and higher taxes, so Starmer should be demanding the Bank of England`s quantitative easing be on the agenda, along with the flawed evidence behind the Laffer curve, and the positive effects on economic growth of having a debt-to-GDP ratio of over 90% (Coronavirus drives national debt to £2tn for first time, 22/08/20). Emphasising the difference between government and household debt is essential. Labour strategists certainly have a point when stressing that "establishing competence comes first", but that is where Beckett`s "displacement activity" comes in (Starmer playing long game in undermining Tories, 22/08/20). Pointing out the government`s ineptness, for example, over the "exams fiasco" only gains votes if Labour`s alternative looks better, but there wasn`t one, not even the practicable system of sending predicted grades along with samples of work to exam board markers, all of whom will have been chosen long before the lockdown! Of course, Starmer and his colleagues should be shouting from the rooftops about the absentee prime minister, his government`s degenerate cronyism, and the damage being done to every facet of ordinary people`s lives. Outlining details of manifesto policies can come later, but the public have to be made aware of what Starmer`s Labour stands for, and until that happens, Johnson`s misgovernment continues unabated!

"Served his masters well"

"Making up policy on the hoof", as Williamson was clearly doing throughout the A-level results fiasco, and as your editorial stated, is obviously the default position for this government (Exam fiasco just the latest betrayal of our children, 16.08.20). As it took until the weekend for the Education Secretary to realise that there were in his words "real concerns about what a large number of students were getting", it is more than likely that he will never realise what a good job he has done for his Tory leaders. With a rise of 4.7% in the number of A/A* grades for private school pupils, no public outcry about such grade inflation, and no media inquiry into the number of students in the independent sector whose grades were actually Pre-U qualifications, rather than actual A-levels, Williamson has served his masters well. So-called "elite" universities will have already guaranteed places for these pupils, providing an excuse again for denying most of the genuinely talented students from disadvantaged backgrounds a chance to show their true potential. Another U-turn, this time on examination results, is par for the course as far as this government is concerned, but no Pre-U turn means yet another victory for the privileged! No doubt this will be replicated with the GCSE results, and the lack of detail relating to the private schools` preferred choice, iGCSE. Another reason for Johnson and Cummings to defer Williamson`s sacking!

No Pre-U turn

The Tories` "U-turn on their A-level grading system" was indeed, as your article stated, deeply "humiliating" for the government, and, of course, it was most welcome, as it did repair a huge level of injustice heaped on thousands of young people (Star, 18/08/20).What it didn't do, however, was to change the way our so-called "top" universities are dominated by undergraduates who received their earlier education in private schools. The rise in A/A* grades of 4.7% was the epitome of grade inflation, yet the mainstream press and media largely ignored it. It wasn`t affected by Williamson`s change of heart, so these advantaged students were able to book their places at Oxbridge and the rest, without any challenge or furore. As it took until last weekend for Gavin Williamson to realise that there were, in his words, "real concerns about what a large number of students were getting", it is more than likely that he will never realise what a good job he has done for his Tory leaders. With no public outcry about private schools` grade inflation, and no media inquiry into the number of students in the independent sector whose grades were actually Pre-U qualifications, rather than actual A-levels, Williamson has served his masters well. Their guaranteed university places will no doubt provide the excuse they need to deny most of the genuinely talented students from disadvantaged backgrounds a chance to show their true potential, whilst the secrecy surrounding Pre-U grades, and the way they were decided, remains. Thursday`s GCSE results, despite the U-turn, will almost certainly fail to reveal the disparities between actual GCSE grades and those of the preferred exams in the independent sector at this age, the iGCSEs. Another U-turn, this time on examination results, is par for the course as far as this government is concerned, but no Pre-U turn means yet another victory for the privileged! Another reason, too, for Johnson and Cummings to defer Williamson`s sacking - for now! As it took until last weekend for Gavin Williamson to realise that "there were real concerns about what a large number of students were getting", it is more than likely that he will never realise what a good job he has done for his Tory leaders (Government forced into humiliating exams U-turn, 18/08/20). With a rise of 4.7% in the number of A/A* grades for private school pupils, no public outcry about such grade inflation, and no media inquiry into the number of students in the independent sector whose grades were actually Pre-U qualifications, rather than actual A-levels, Williamson has served his masters well. So-called "elite" universities will have already guaranteed places for these pupils, providing an excuse again for denying most of the genuinely talented students from disadvantaged backgrounds a chance to show their true potential. Another U-turn, this time on examination results, is par for the course as far as this government is concerned, but no Pre-U turn means yet another victory for the privileged! Another reason, too, for Johnson and Cummings to defer Williamson`s sacking (Why Johnson wants to keep minister in place - for now, 18/08/20). With 49% of entries by students in private schools in England receiving an A/A* grade, compared with 20% for state-educated students, the inevitable increased domination of so-called "elite" universities by students from the independent sector is, as your editorial rightly says, "not just unfair but grotesque" (Ministers, not pupils, are the ones who have messed up this year`s A-levels, 14/08/20). It is not a new phenomenon, of course, especially with private schools in recent years choosing Pre-U examinations in preference to A-levels. and increased entries this year for such qualifications. Totally predictable, too, is the secrecy which not only again surrounds Pre-U examination results and the proportion of entries awarded top grades, but, of course, the way the final results were determined. According to the website, predicted grades, rank orders and previous performance were taken into account, but whether an algorithm decided a predicted B candidate should be awarded an E because of the previous teaching group`s results in 2019 is unknown. Huy Duong described the "information Ofqual had made available about its methodology" as "scant", but imagine if he had been working on Pre-U exams rather than A-levels (Concerned father who predicted the A-level results farce, 15/08/20)! Rather than subsume Pre-U results in their A-level ones, shouldn't all private schools, and the relatively few state schools which use them, be forced to separate the two, so that a clearer picture of how the examination system is being abused emerges? Pre-U examinations are being phased out over the next few years, but that still means hundreds of university places will be gained by students taking an alternative route. And the government still insists on calling it "a level playing-field"! Comments like "national outrage" and "rolling disaster" were inevitable as soon as the government decided to award A-level grades "based on an algorithm conceived by the regulator Ofqual" (Mocks proposal "shows failure to understand how system works ",13/08/20). With previous results a factor, it was always likely that pupils who "made progress since GCSE" would "lose out significantly ". The teachers' predicted grades and orders of merit should have gone to the same subject markets along with samples of pupils' work, and the final grades decided after the usual careful moderation. By persisting with such an obviously flawed system this government shows itself not only lacking trust in the teaching profession and completely out of touch with the workings of state education, but also intent on exacerbating inequality rather than reducing it! Strangely there appears to have been no fuss over the awarding of grades for Pre-U exams, the ones preferred to A-levels in most of our private schools!

A-level results fiasco

With so many things completely wrong and unfair about this year`s A-level results` procedure, one dreads to think what will be the outcome after Thursday`s GCSE results (Star, 14/08/20)! What is absolutely clear is that giving so little credence to teachers` expert evaluation of their students` progress, and so much to pupils` previous results and the schools` previous performance, is quite simply wrong! Research has shown that past results to be taken into account should not be GCSEs taken two years earlier, as they do not indicate the improvements most pupils make, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds. The teachers' predicted grades and orders of merit should have gone to the same subject markers as in ordinary years, along with four or five samples of pupils' work, and the final grades decided after the usual careful moderation. By persisting with such an obviously flawed system this government shows itself not only lacking trust in the teaching profession and completely out of touch with the workings of state education, but also intent on exacerbating inequality rather than reducing it! Strangely there appears to have been no fuss over the awarding of grades for Pre-U exams, the ones preferred to A-levels in most of our private schools! Rather than subsume Pre-U results in their A-level ones, shouldn't all private schools, and the relatively few state schools which use them, be forced to separate the two, so that a clearer picture of how the examination system is being abused emerges? Pre-U examinations are being phased out over the next few years, but that still means hundreds of university places will be gained by students taking an alternative route. And the government still insists on calling it "a level playing-field"!

Unpublished Observer letter on Starmer

With the country in the grip of a pandemic and economic crisis, and simultaneously governed by one of the most incompetent administrations in British history, one would expect the leader of the opposition to figure prominently in the UK 's leading left-leaning Sunday newspaper. In last week's edition, however, with excellent, analytical articles on reaction to Covid-related government policies, wealth taxes, fears for the future of private tenants, forthcoming economic recession, loss of prisoners' rights, abuses of parliament's power, the existence and purpose of the house of Lords, the need for action on inequality, and unfair examination results, the very issues about which Labour should be raising the roof, there was no mention of Labour's policy on the subject, or even of the party leader's name! Neither the letters page nor the editorial whose conclusion on the government's white paper, "Planning for the future", that it "will take a lot more to address the housing crisis", cried out for a comment on the opposition's response, mentioned Labour or Starmer either (Tinkering with the rules won't solve the housing crisis, 09.08.20)! The only times he did get a name-check were when donations to the Labour party were reported on (Big Labour donors returning to the party, 09.08.20), and when William Keegan, somewhat surprisingly in the circumstances, wrote that Starmer "is proving a formidable opponent"(In my view, 09.08.20). We don't necessarily want Labour's manifesto details for the next election straightaway, but providing policies on current issues surely has to be a major requirement of the opposition leader, formidable or otherwise!

2 letters on teacher assessment (March and April)

Gaby Hinsliff's excellent article on the long term effects of the current crisis makes a pertinent point about examinations (The coronavirus crisis will pass, but life may never be "normal" again, 13/04/20). "Squeezing thousands of children into exam halls", especially with probably hundreds of them feeling below par but determined nevertheless to get those all-important grades, makes no sense, so why not award GCSE grades this year based on teacher assessment? As the examination boards will have already appointed their examiners and allocated their schools, teachers could be required to send them two examples of pupils' work, perhaps mock exam or test papers which have been already marked, along with a brief comment to justify the grade suggested. The examiners' job then would be to verify in most cases, and query in a few, the subject teachers' assessment. This would provide teachers with a unique opportunity to display their expertise and professionalism, and act as an experiment in assessment without causing the stress and mental health problems associated with our current examination system. The criteria for awarding the qualifications which would have previously depended on end-of-course examinations do indeed, as your editorial makes clear, "need to be carefully thought through", but obstacles will only arise if insufficient faith is placed in the teachers` professionalism (The closure of schools is the latest step in the long march to lockdown Britain, 19/03/20). Why not award GCSE and A-level grades this year based on teacher assessment? As the examination boards will have already appointed their examiners and allocated them schools, teachers could be required to send them two or three examples of pupils' work, perhaps mock exams or other work done under test conditions, which have been already marked, along with a brief comment to justify the grade suggested. The examiners' job then would be to verify in most cases, and query in a few, the accuracy of the subject teachers' assessment. Many politicians appear to believe that examining and assessing pupils` progress continually throughout the examination courses only happens in private schools! There should be plenty of evidence available in all schools to ensure that pupils get the grade they deserve, and if some haven`t yet proved their ability, having arrogantly wasted five terms, hoping to catch up at the end, then so be it! This system would provide teachers with an excellent opportunity to display their expertise and professionalism, and act as an experiment for future assessment which would no longer cause the stress and mental health problems associated with our current examination system.

The Cummings handbook

The "premature rush", as your editorial states, to relaxing the lockdown rules is the "real problem", not the "tightening of restrictions", but there is one other factor also causing so many lives to be endangered, but not mentioned (The real problem is the government`s acceleration, not its use of brakes, 01/08/20). By claiming that there are signs of a "second wave" of the pandemic in Europe, and that it could possibly spread to the UK, Johnson and Cummings are giving the false impression that the first "wave" here is under control. With "one in 1500 people now having Covid-19", it is clear that it is not, and failing to admit it is another reason for trust in this administration to decrease further. Informing the public of the true situation would improve positive reaction to government announcements, and make a full-blown resurgence of the coronavirus less likely. It would also entail, however, an admission of failure through wrong or belated decisions, so will not happen. Instead there is now a "whiff of the government blaming the public" for failing to follow the guidance, and, of course, yet more criticism of European countries. Accepting responsibility and admitting culpability clearly are not in the Cummings handbook for advising prime ministers; attributing deaths to a "second wave" from Europe evidently is!