Why Gove MUST keep on caning the Left
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/artic ... z2sjP1WVJQ
" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No, WTF. This argument makes no sense at all.
Michael Gove has had yet another tough week as Education Secretary. For daring to dispense with the services of Labour-supporting Baroness Morgan as chairman of Ofsted, he has received relentless vilification from the Left-wing media.
Also known as "reporting the news". It would be fairly dodgy if they attempted to hush the dispute up, no?
But he is not replacing Lady Morgan at the education inspectorate because he is partisan. He is doing so because state education in this country is in such a mess.
And it's all her fault...except even Gove himself said she did well in the job.
For decades so-called ‘educationists’ have dictated, from an aggressively Left-wing standpoint, the terms of mass education in this country. The result is a system that militates against excellence, suffocates potential, and turns out too many young people unfit to thrive in the modern, ultra-competitive world in which they must find their way.
The way to make them totally competitive with, say, China, would be to have barracks of them in Special Economic Zones or laogai, churning out goodies for the rest of the world. I don't think knowing English history, advanced mathematics or Latin would be much help there.
When Mr Gove talks of a nine or ten-hour day for state pupils, and more rigorous teaching in subjects such as English and maths, practices that are normal in public schools — it’s in the hope of avoiding such outcomes. But teachers and their unions absolutely hate it.
To the idea that this is "normal in public schools" and that's how the little geniuses came to rule the world, bollocks. It is not "more rigorous teaching" and longer days that mean public school students are more likely to end up in Cabinet, it's the connections made. They often do not get a better education, but they get a knowledge of who is well connected and who can help them out.
When I went to university in the early 2000s, the first thing a lot of people asked is "What school did you go to?". Mine was a comprehensive that at the time ranked very low in the area due to ongoing problems. It's strange that when I told them they became very uninterested in talking to me...
Low standards can no longer be tolerated. The schools inspectorate must be ruthless in weeding out bad teachers. It needs to be resolute in the face of obstruction from the teaching unions and those Left-wing academics whose discredited theories are finally being put in the dustbin.
The inspectorate is not there to judge academic theory or the teachers' unions. It is there to measure performance, and that is all. "Bad" teachers may be bad for a number of reasons - they may be bad because they are unfitted to teach, but they could also be struggling to teach a class with many children from deprived backgrounds, ESL issues, special educational needs - that's a completely different profile from Eton.
Significantly, only last week the Office for National Statistics’ analysis of the 2011 census suggested that 785,000 people speak English so badly that it is likely to handicap their ability to find work. This follows decades of teachers arguing that self-expression of whatever quality is more important than correct grammar, use of words and spelling.
Absolute shite, what teacher ever has argued that use of words, grammar and spelling aren't important? If you are teaching a child with SEN you would be happy if they wrote something and encourage them to write more, rather than pouncing on the fact that they couldn't spell. Spelling will come with time and encouragement, not with discipline and aggression.
As for "speaking English badly" what does that mean? Do they speak in local dialect? Scots? Do they have Gaelic or Welsh as a first language? Are they speaking English as a foreign language? That is so vague as to be incomprehensible.
Bureaucrats and quangocrats must, in a democracy, yield to the policies of an elected secretary of state, and not persistently try to obstruct them.
Belonging to the evil public sector, I have to say that this is what we do. We yield to the policies, but we will also object to things we don't think will work, because that is part of our remit as well.