So, it seems that Mr Gove really did not know about the bullying environment in the DfE. The Select Committee accepted his assertion that nobody told him and a senior Civil Servant has corroborated that. Therefore, Education Monkey is happy to apologise for stirring the pot a bit more.
Mind you, SHOULD he have known?
The monkey would now like now to read that Mr Gove does not know about the bullying tactics employed by the DfE in respect of his academisation programme.
He's not optimistic.
Thursday 14 March 2013
Monday 11 March 2013
Jackboots, Bribery and the man from the DfE
There is a very worrying sense that the DfE and Michael Gove have a separate life that lies parallel to but somewhat outside the conventions of democratic government. We have seen Gove's underhand way of working intended to avoid the darker side of his dealings coming under public scrutiny and we have seen a steady flow of press reports about the unpleasant, some would say unprofessional conduct of his Spads, or Special Advisers. The Education Select Committee has recently recalled the Secretary of State, claiming that he misled parliament about the tactics used by Special Adviser Dominic Cummings and his head of communications James Frayne and this is becoming pretty much par for the course. The bullying stories that are emerging from the DfE are very concerning.
However, for those of us in education, it is the DfE tactics in respect of schools that are the most concerning. The manipulation of data, the massaging of statistics, the lack of consultation are more suited to an extremist regime than one that allegedly espouses democracy. And, most worryingly of all, the voice of the protesters is stilled time and time again. Just look at any forced academy. If in any doubt, watch the film The Parents, The Politician and the Carpet Bagger.
My suggestion that the DfE's academy team works by a combination of bullying and bribery came to the attention of Andrew Kimmel of the Academies Group. He has replied but, interestingly, not for Mr Kimmel the usual page of DfE justification. Instead he replies that the contents of the article has (sic) been noted.
So, what are we to make of this? As we have seen, the DfE is always anxious to address negative publicity by offering up a page or so of well-reasoned reply. In this case... the content has been noted. So, er, nothing to say then? Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that the Education Monkey must be right.
So, it is true. You WILL become an academy then, either by assuming the required position for receiving the jackboot, or holding out your hand for the blood money. I have stopped believing in the justification that Gove seriously wants to improve the education system; instead I believe this is about neo-conservative privatisation, putting schools in the hands of businessmen and privatising the support services that schools need. This is a market economy, nothing more.
Having read this, Read Michael Rosen's open letter to Mr Gove and follow it by reading George Monblot's Guardian article.
And, just to see how this Whitehall godfather and his mafia operate, read the story of the "consultation" about Roke Primary, which the DfE is forcing to become a Harris Academy - no choice of becoming an academy and, importantly, no choice of sponsor.
Scary, isn't it?
However, for those of us in education, it is the DfE tactics in respect of schools that are the most concerning. The manipulation of data, the massaging of statistics, the lack of consultation are more suited to an extremist regime than one that allegedly espouses democracy. And, most worryingly of all, the voice of the protesters is stilled time and time again. Just look at any forced academy. If in any doubt, watch the film The Parents, The Politician and the Carpet Bagger.
My suggestion that the DfE's academy team works by a combination of bullying and bribery came to the attention of Andrew Kimmel of the Academies Group. He has replied but, interestingly, not for Mr Kimmel the usual page of DfE justification. Instead he replies that the contents of the article has (sic) been noted.
So, what are we to make of this? As we have seen, the DfE is always anxious to address negative publicity by offering up a page or so of well-reasoned reply. In this case... the content has been noted. So, er, nothing to say then? Which leads to the inevitable conclusion that the Education Monkey must be right.
So, it is true. You WILL become an academy then, either by assuming the required position for receiving the jackboot, or holding out your hand for the blood money. I have stopped believing in the justification that Gove seriously wants to improve the education system; instead I believe this is about neo-conservative privatisation, putting schools in the hands of businessmen and privatising the support services that schools need. This is a market economy, nothing more.
Having read this, Read Michael Rosen's open letter to Mr Gove and follow it by reading George Monblot's Guardian article.
And, just to see how this Whitehall godfather and his mafia operate, read the story of the "consultation" about Roke Primary, which the DfE is forcing to become a Harris Academy - no choice of becoming an academy and, importantly, no choice of sponsor.
Scary, isn't it?
Monday 4 March 2013
Teacher Training and EBAC - the DfE responds
As regular readers of this blog will know, I occasionally get a response from the DfE and, when I do, I publish it here. I thought things had gone quiet when suddenly I received this, which answers points made about teacher training and the Ebac. This comes from Pamela Kearns of the Ministerial and Public Communications Division. Although it is one of those generic replies you tend to get from government, Ms Kearns has at least got a sympathetic turn of phrase. She says...
I acknowledge and empathise with the two example cases that you have highlighted in your letter and I can appreciate how disheartening it must be for both these individuals not to be able to teach their chosen subjects and pursue their chosen career.
Initial Teacher Training continues to be a popular choice for the best graduates and experienced career changers. We expect to attract 35,000 new trainees to teaching each year from the brightest graduates and the most experienced career changers, of these places around 10,000 will come through our new school routes to teacher training. However the number of applications we receive always exceeds the number of places available. This year we expect competition to be very stringent for teacher training places with around twice the number of people applying than there are places available to train.
Well, ITT has always been competitive, ask anyone who's tried to get onto the GTP!
The Government wants to move increasingly towards a school led system of teacher training. This year the Teaching Agency has received strong demand for its School Direct places and allocated 9,500 places to just under 900 lead schools working with a partnership of schools. This shows a significant demand from schools that have the desire and capacity to take a head in the recruitment and training of their own trainee teachers. Around 400 additional schools have also registered an interest in future School Direct opportunities. But, as we have seen, it is this very fragmentation of ITT that is the difficulty; where you have fragmentation you have variation and some trainees will be well trained, others will not. This is why the system was centralised in the first place. Still, what goes around comes around...
In respect of your comments on the English Baccalueate (EBacc), it was introduced as a measure in 2011 to encourage schools to offer more pupils the opportunity to study towards GCSEs in a suite of core academic subjects (English, mathematics, the sciences, geography or history and a foreign language). It is designed to leave 20-30 per cent of time for the study of other subjects as part of a broad and balanced curriculum. However the EBacc was and is not a compulsory requirement on all pupils; there are no targets associated with the measure and schools remain free to offer the range of subjects they feel best suits their pupils.Yes, do note the last sentence - this is the new position forced on the Secretary of State by the Select Committee.
On 7 February the Secretary of State made a statement on the future of qualifications, school league tables and the national curriculum. The announced proposals for qualifications at the end of Key Stage 4 follow on from the consultation held last year and set out plans for a comprehensive reform of GCSEs across the full range of subjects.
The Secretary of State also announced consultations on the National Curriculum (which runs until 16 April 2013) and separately on a new accountability framework for secondary schools (running until 1 May). The latter proposes that we judge schools against a threshold attainment in English and maths, and on progress based on pupils’ average scores in a range of both EBacc and non-EBacc subjects. This approach will provide a strong incentive for schools to offer a broad and balanced curriculum to all their pupils, including the academic core of the EBacc as appropriate, and to ensure high standards of teaching in a wide range of subjects
We wait and see. It's the fragmentation problem again - Academies and Free Schools can be national curriculum free zones
So, there you have it. However, I have also had a reply to Jackboot and Bribery and its very brevity smells of an uncomfortable truth. More in a week.
I acknowledge and empathise with the two example cases that you have highlighted in your letter and I can appreciate how disheartening it must be for both these individuals not to be able to teach their chosen subjects and pursue their chosen career.
Initial Teacher Training continues to be a popular choice for the best graduates and experienced career changers. We expect to attract 35,000 new trainees to teaching each year from the brightest graduates and the most experienced career changers, of these places around 10,000 will come through our new school routes to teacher training. However the number of applications we receive always exceeds the number of places available. This year we expect competition to be very stringent for teacher training places with around twice the number of people applying than there are places available to train.
Well, ITT has always been competitive, ask anyone who's tried to get onto the GTP!
The Government wants to move increasingly towards a school led system of teacher training. This year the Teaching Agency has received strong demand for its School Direct places and allocated 9,500 places to just under 900 lead schools working with a partnership of schools. This shows a significant demand from schools that have the desire and capacity to take a head in the recruitment and training of their own trainee teachers. Around 400 additional schools have also registered an interest in future School Direct opportunities. But, as we have seen, it is this very fragmentation of ITT that is the difficulty; where you have fragmentation you have variation and some trainees will be well trained, others will not. This is why the system was centralised in the first place. Still, what goes around comes around...
In respect of your comments on the English Baccalueate (EBacc), it was introduced as a measure in 2011 to encourage schools to offer more pupils the opportunity to study towards GCSEs in a suite of core academic subjects (English, mathematics, the sciences, geography or history and a foreign language). It is designed to leave 20-30 per cent of time for the study of other subjects as part of a broad and balanced curriculum. However the EBacc was and is not a compulsory requirement on all pupils; there are no targets associated with the measure and schools remain free to offer the range of subjects they feel best suits their pupils.Yes, do note the last sentence - this is the new position forced on the Secretary of State by the Select Committee.
On 7 February the Secretary of State made a statement on the future of qualifications, school league tables and the national curriculum. The announced proposals for qualifications at the end of Key Stage 4 follow on from the consultation held last year and set out plans for a comprehensive reform of GCSEs across the full range of subjects.
The Secretary of State also announced consultations on the National Curriculum (which runs until 16 April 2013) and separately on a new accountability framework for secondary schools (running until 1 May). The latter proposes that we judge schools against a threshold attainment in English and maths, and on progress based on pupils’ average scores in a range of both EBacc and non-EBacc subjects. This approach will provide a strong incentive for schools to offer a broad and balanced curriculum to all their pupils, including the academic core of the EBacc as appropriate, and to ensure high standards of teaching in a wide range of subjects
We wait and see. It's the fragmentation problem again - Academies and Free Schools can be national curriculum free zones
So, there you have it. However, I have also had a reply to Jackboot and Bribery and its very brevity smells of an uncomfortable truth. More in a week.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)