I was on a popular social networking site recently where someone was commenting that the teaching fraternity shouldn't waste too much energy trying to get rid of Michael Gove as he's actually better than a previous one, namely Ed Balls. And this got me thinking.
I've been teaching for over ten years now and in my experience we haven't had a decent or supportive Secretary of State for Education in my entire career. There have been numerous changes in the curriculum, which costs money and energy in stress/replanning and this ultimately helps no-one: teachers or children. We have had numerous new (and again expensive) initiatives, none of which have lasted very long.
In my time as a teacher I have never felt appreciated or valued by either politicians or the public in general - small violins please. The public's attitude has a lot to do with the politicians and their press releases. The job of Secretary of State for Education is fairly small fry in the grand scheme of politics and the job is seen as a stepping stone to greater things meaning that those in the educational seat are looking to make an impact and move on up the ladder.
So lets look at the candidates from the last 15 years:
David Blunkett - lasted about 4 years and was generally disliked by teachers but I can't remember him doing anything too drastic, but maybe that's because I was wet behind the ears and too busy panicking about the next day's lessons. According to the internet he took on the unions and increased the number of teachers by tens of thousands. He spent a lot more on education than anyone else had done before, so job's a good'un it appears. The worse thing during his time was that Chris Woodhead was the Chief Inspector of Schools.
Estelle Morris - a former teacher if I'm not much mistaken and therefore had the potential to show a bit of empathy and understanding. She was hounded out about 18 months later by the press. Did essentially nothing in her time.
Charles Clarke - a funny looking individual at the best of times, who actually visited a school I was teaching in, but was introduced only to top set kids and the head (I was hidden away in the dark recesses of the building). He lasted a couple of years before moving on to better things. Most of his policies were university based.
Ruth Kelly - a non- descript type who only lasted 18 months or so. Made schools stay open longer and have to provide child care. She did reject the scrapping of the A Level for a four-tier diploma, which was probably a good thing.
Allan Johnson - lasted about a year before moving up the food chain. Actually tried (unsuccessfully) to get teachers a better deal on pay and said that children shouldn't use the excuse of separated parents to blame their bad behaviour on.
Ed Balls - an odious character who is hell-bent on becoming prime minister, no matter who he tramples on. Look out for him changing his rosette depending upon election forecasts. He lasted about 3 years. He did get rid of SATs, so he's not all bad, just mostly.
Michael Gove - I must stop before I vomit. Oh, ok, he's just trying to annoy the teaching profession intensely with every breath.
What most of these people have in common is that they have no experience of schools other than they had once attended one. When looking at them, most are using the job as a way to get noticed.
The other common denominator is that none of them has ever asked a practising teacher what they think - former headteachers are not worth asking, I hasten to add. When are politicians going to swallow their pride and actually admit that they could do with advice? I disagree that Michael Gove is better than the previous incumbents of the job, but he's not much worse than any of the others.
No comments:
Post a Comment