Talking the Talk – Michael Gove and Education Reform

Regardless of your political leanings, everyone agrees standards in school need to improve and in particular with regard to literacy and numeracy, but while Education Secretary Michael Gove talks the talk, there are serious doubts about his ability to walk the walk.

Saying the right words is the easiest thing to do in politics, but unfortunately statements need to be backed up by actions and it is in the latter category Mr Gove is found seriously wanting.

His big education policy speech this week focused on three main areas:

1.       Longer school days

2.       More testing

3.       Stricter discipline

All of these will be popular with the wider population and, in particular, parents. However two of these make little sense and the third is, almost unbearably, vague.

Longer school days sound like a great idea. The longer the kids stay in school the more they will learn. Unfortunately, it is not that simple.

Children are not able to concentrate for extended periods of time, so more hours do not equal more learning and extending the school day also restricts the amount of time available for emotional growth, where kids develop friendships away from the classroom, a vital part of development.

Secondly, without improving teacher quality extending school hours counts for nothing. If a child has a bad teacher they could be in class 24 hours a day without any tangible benefit.

Ideally extended school hours would be used for participation in extra-curricular activities, a central part of any child’s education, but this then begs the question why did the Conservatives completely defund youth centres offering this service when they first came to power.

Longer hours could in fact end up being detrimental to teaching standards.

Anyone who knows people in the teaching profession will be aware of how many hours outside of school time go into marking and lesson planning. Extending the school day simply reduces the amount of time available for this essential work and puts people off joining the profession.

The child care cost reductions involved in longer school days are certainly a valid point, but would any parent choose to reduce the cost of care at the expense of their child’s education?

Increased testing, and specifically the introduction of a Common Entrance exam before entering secondary school, is an even more bizarre suggestion.

Every study conducted recently has promoted a reduction in the number of written tests taken by younger children, not an increase, and while it is important to ensure basic standards are being met there are far more effective in-classroom methods.

On that point, what are these tests going to be used for anyway? Are state secondary’s suddenly going to start selecting students on exam grades like independent public schools?

Stricter discipline is certainly an area requiring improvement and is something you hear time and time again from those in the classroom.

What is to be done in this area is certainly a complex question and Mr Gove should be applauded for facing up to it, but detentions and writing lines are not exactly what you would call progressive measures.

Overall, the education secretary’s main point was state and fee-paying schools should be indistinguishable, apparently meaning public schools are the model on which state funded schools should be based.

Yes, public schools are fantastic, get higher grades, have greater percentage go to university and into high-quality jobs and so on, but suggesting public schools should use the independent system as a model is at best misguided.

For starters independent schools invest a lot more money per student than the state system and this matters a lot resulting in better equipment, investment in facilities and, most importantly, smaller class sizes.

Just because it bases itself on Eton does not mean inner city high schools are going to start educating future Prime Ministers.

The focus in this area surely has to be on levelling the playing field so GCSE and A-level results are not gradated on where you happened to study, a goal which is only harmed by the introduction of free schools.

The fact is if you are looking for a model to imitate then Harrow and Marlborough are probably not realistic options.

However, there is a system very close by which is worth closer examination (no pun intended).

The Scandinavian state school system gets fantastic results in literacy and numeracy, however, they go about teaching in a very different way.

Firstly, younger children do not start full-time formal education until 7 or 8-years old.

Before this they learn in a much more relaxed environment with a combination of learn-by-play, group activities, creative time and some formal studying which is increased the closer they get to school age.

So why is the current Education Secretary looking at an old-fashioned, unrealistic model, which many people do not care for, instead of the proven, effective and modern approach adopted by those across the North Sea?

The crux of the problem is in fact very simple. Money.

While it is certainly not the be-all and end-all of education investment is vital.

For decades studies have shown kids do better in well-maintained schools. No child wants to learn in a damp, draughty and drab school room.

In fact, the success of one of the stand-out education policies of the last decade, academies, is largely down to the investment private companies put into the facilities, turning run-down inner city schools into pleasant learning environments.

Better equipment, more computers, up-to-date text books, smaller class sizes, all of these vital components come down to financial investment, and the same is true of teachers.

Training and hiring better teachers has to be a central part of improving education standards and yet this issue does not seem to feature in Mr Gove’s plans and, judging by his rhetoric, he seems to have nothing but contempt for those on the front line of education.

The best and the brightest need to be encouraged to become teachers and this comes down to better salaries and pensions, not cutting them.

However, what is most worrying is Mr Gove’s inability to listen to anyone in the teaching profession.

Yes, there are problems in what the media describe as ‘The Blob’, but in most peoples experience teachers are not ridged, inflexible and unreceptive to change.

In fact the opposite is true. They are smart, sensible and grounded individuals who care deeply about the next generation and would welcome with open arms any chance to improve standards.

What they do not appreciate is someone with no experience in the industry telling them how to do their job, something we call all sympathise with.

Nobody knows how the education system needs to be reformed better than teachers as they are ones on the front line dealing with these problems on a day-to-day basis.

You would not come up with a new law and order strategy without speaking to police officers about implementation, so why should education be any different.

Some have referred to Gove as a revolutionary, but many struggle to see how this conclusion was arrived at, when his model seems to involve a reversion to 1950s style education methods.

If Gove wants to improve education, as all of us do, he needs to do more than just say the things everyone wants to hear and actually put forward proposals which moves education forward and, most importantly, pay attention to the reasonable points raised by those who understand the business best, teachers.