I’m still wondering how Michael Gove admitted he was wrong on two key policies and came out of it almost politically unscathed. the media coverage of his climbdown at the English baccalaureate and plans for a single examination board, you would be forgiven for thinking that the govt had discarded a number of inconsequential policy ideas or was merely postponing them to a later date.
Neither is the case. Both were cornerstones of presidency education policy and had become shorthand for everything that ministers think is inaccurate with schools – a dumbed-down curriculum and a lowering of exam standards.
The implications are removed from minor. These policies had already resulted in significant changes in secondary school staffing and curriculum and the Secretary of State has wasted schools’ time and resources and assured a continual period of uncertainty.
Whatever reasons Michael Gove gave for his change of mind, the fact is that the policies were deeply flawed and that i doubt we’ll hear much about them again.
So why so little political damage to the government
First, the education world was, overwhelmingly, against the EBC. The consequences of narrowing the curriculum, the threat to arts and creativity and the devaluing of vocational qualifications were well understood. And that i suspect that the reversal of policy was so welcome that the majority schools would rather not complain a few ministerial change of mind.
The loss of criticism from the media is rooted elsewhere. Journalists – of all political persuasions – appear to have bought into Gove’s view that things was better within the old days. They think that Michael Gove is synonymous with “rigour” and, whatever the mistakes he makes along the best way, is a typical-bearer of a brand of Conservative politics that has a future.
The policies that now seem top priorities – his proposed return to O-levels in all but name, his A-level reforms and national curriculum changes – are all headlined as bringing back rigour to education. The difficulty is, he can only understand this in terms of the kind of education he himself experienced.
It is time the word “rigour” was reclaimed. It belongs to the trendy world and the trendy curriculum just up to it does to the times of Michael Gove’s youth.
Anyone who has seen an exceptional drama or art lesson, watched worthwhile sports teams or listened to a college band, cannot fail to recognise the rigour involved. They’re perfect examples of the abilities and attitudes the govt. says it desires to promote. Nobody who sees a baby learning numbers in a set, instead of sitting in rows facing the instructor; or learning history by studying a portrait from the National Gallery instead of memorising the kings and queens of britain, can deny the rigour of that learning. Yet here’s the type of pedagogy that was undermined by the actions of the federal government.
The excellent news is that we now know that Michael Gove is someone who can change his mind. It offers hope for the long run. More worrying is the realisation that vast sections of the media – most of whom probably had an identical education to Michael Gove – also share his interpretation of what constitutes educational rigour and standards.
