Should Gove be head of Education?
Poll
Should Gove be minister of Education?
Yes or No?
My thoughts are undoubtedly no. He is a fool and an embarrassment. What's more is that he is an elitist prick who does not know a thing about teaching, or have any real experience in Education. For goodness sake he is so naïve he thinks WW1 was a just war!
What are the community's thoughts?
My thoughts are undoubtedly no. He is a fool and an embarrassment. What's more is that he is an elitist prick who does not know a thing about teaching, or have any real experience in Education. For goodness sake he is so naïve he thinks WW1 was a just war!
What are the community's thoughts?
(edited 10 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
Yes. I quite like the man. He's in a role where whatever he does is going to upset people. People cry out for changes, he makes them. People then cry out that the changes are crap. He can't win.
Shouldn't be head of anything.
Oh lord no.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
At the end of the day, he's unfit for purpose - he's in a similar position to Owen Paterson over at environment. So you don't know every minute detail of what you oversee - fair enough, Britain's a big country and you're a career politician with a degree from Oxbridge, there's no reasonable expectation for you to know everything.
But that's why you have staffers, that's why you have advisors and reports and findings and all the other things along with it from people who are experts in their field - to allow you to make an informed decision.
The best example for me is when Gove commissioned, along with several others, Niall Ferguson (a history professor at Harvard) to advise on the development of a new history syllabus. Ferguson said the draft was "too prescriptive", another historian said "Our proposal was ignored; Mr Gove has apparently shut his ears to anyone’s advice but his own.”
Bear in mind here that these are experts of Gove's choosing, they are not being dismissed because they are proposing a syllabus which focuses on the joys of communism; they are just being ignored because Gove is an egomaniac.
I'm sorry, but I can't forgive that. Self-serving attitudes, egomania and out of touch with reality are claims often fired at career politicians but for Gove it truly fits. He doesn't have the respect or the trust of those in his ministerial field, he sees his own opinion as having more merit than the most well respected academic voices and he has rolled out u-turn after u-turn.
I'm a liberal, I'm not a fan of this coalition but I am also slightly more jaded and realistic than a few of the idealistic 16-18 year olds on this site. I will happily admit credit where it is due - and this coalition have done some very good things as far as I'm concerned, but it is truly baffling to me that Gove (and to a lesser extent Paterson) still hold cabinet roles despite being demonstrably out of depth and ill informed for the position they hold. This will be one of the most damaging legacies the coalition will give us.
EDIT: If there is one positive thing that can be said about him, it is that he is not as bad as the clowns at the Welsh Assembly who, despite the complete and utter failure of the 'Welsh Bacc' are now persisting with sweeping reform of qualifications boards in Wales in the same year that they are stripping a combined £65million from the FE and HE budget. Gove's bad, but I suppose he's not that inept. Still, that's like arguing the case for crabs as it's not as bad as HIV.
But that's why you have staffers, that's why you have advisors and reports and findings and all the other things along with it from people who are experts in their field - to allow you to make an informed decision.
The best example for me is when Gove commissioned, along with several others, Niall Ferguson (a history professor at Harvard) to advise on the development of a new history syllabus. Ferguson said the draft was "too prescriptive", another historian said "Our proposal was ignored; Mr Gove has apparently shut his ears to anyone’s advice but his own.”
Bear in mind here that these are experts of Gove's choosing, they are not being dismissed because they are proposing a syllabus which focuses on the joys of communism; they are just being ignored because Gove is an egomaniac.
I'm sorry, but I can't forgive that. Self-serving attitudes, egomania and out of touch with reality are claims often fired at career politicians but for Gove it truly fits. He doesn't have the respect or the trust of those in his ministerial field, he sees his own opinion as having more merit than the most well respected academic voices and he has rolled out u-turn after u-turn.
I'm a liberal, I'm not a fan of this coalition but I am also slightly more jaded and realistic than a few of the idealistic 16-18 year olds on this site. I will happily admit credit where it is due - and this coalition have done some very good things as far as I'm concerned, but it is truly baffling to me that Gove (and to a lesser extent Paterson) still hold cabinet roles despite being demonstrably out of depth and ill informed for the position they hold. This will be one of the most damaging legacies the coalition will give us.
EDIT: If there is one positive thing that can be said about him, it is that he is not as bad as the clowns at the Welsh Assembly who, despite the complete and utter failure of the 'Welsh Bacc' are now persisting with sweeping reform of qualifications boards in Wales in the same year that they are stripping a combined £65million from the FE and HE budget. Gove's bad, but I suppose he's not that inept. Still, that's like arguing the case for crabs as it's not as bad as HIV.
(edited 10 years ago)
No, he should be hanging from a lampost
Rarely has a TSR poll option summed up my feelings so accurately.
No one who works in education thinks he should be in his post, and he is both deeply incompetent and deeply unpopular. So, what I want to know is why he's still in his job, and who's got a vested interest in keeping him there...
StretfordEnd
Still, that's like arguing the case for crabs as it's not as bad as HIV.
Should the Kardishian's be sterilized?
Original post by the mezzil
He ... does not know a thing about teaching, or have any real experience in Education.
Never been a fan of this argument for why people shouldn't be doing certain things. Taken to it's logical extension, if we're using that argument then no-one could ever lead a country. After all, who has massive, in-depth experience of leadership and management of every subsection of Government, from Health to Education to the Treasury to Defence, etc etc?
Indeed, it can often be seen that people without direct experience in something are often better at running that something, they come in without preconceived notions of "things are done that way because they've always been done that way".
Original post by Drewski
Never been a fan of this argument for why people shouldn't be doing certain things. Taken to it's logical extension, if we're using that argument then no-one could ever lead a country. After all, who has massive, in-depth experience of leadership and management of every subsection of Government, from Health to Education to the Treasury to Defence, etc etc?
Indeed, it can often be seen that people without direct experience in something are often better at running that something, they come in without preconceived notions of "things are done that way because they've always been done that way".
Indeed, it can often be seen that people without direct experience in something are often better at running that something, they come in without preconceived notions of "things are done that way because they've always been done that way".
as I said (in a roundabout way) in my response, I too think it's a very poor argument; but to not have direct experience and to totally ignore the people who do have direct experience would qualify as gross negligence or even misconduct in some arenas.
It's more than simply the that the 'people in the know' are part of the problem rather than solution; it's much deeper than that. Even when canvassing for advice from experts of his own choosing he's still willfully ignoring everything from people who are in a much better position than he is - and that's to the detriment of the British public!
He could have been a reasonable success with his views on exams and free schools could have been a moderately good idea. Then he tries to rush the exam changes through, sets up free schools in areas where there is not a desperate shortage of places and allows them to have unqualified teachers, makes offensive comments to the teaching profession, forces academies where there is no desire and not always real failure, makes the Blackadder silly comment, and has advisers who allegedly have the impact of upsetting civil servants.
I wouldn't hang him from a lamppost, but he is one of the best helpers for the Labour Party's chances of a government in 2015 if he remains.
I wouldn't hang him from a lamppost, but he is one of the best helpers for the Labour Party's chances of a government in 2015 if he remains.
Original post by barnetlad
He could have been a reasonable success with his views on exams and free schools could have been a moderately good idea. Then he tries to rush the exam changes through, sets up free schools in areas where there is not a desperate shortage of places and allows them to have unqualified teachers, makes offensive comments to the teaching profession, forces academies where there is no desire and not always real failure, makes the Blackadder silly comment, and has advisers who allegedly have the impact of upsetting civil servants.
I wouldn't hang him from a lamppost, but he is one of the best helpers for the Labour Party's chances of a government in 2015 if he remains.
I wouldn't hang him from a lamppost, but he is one of the best helpers for the Labour Party's chances of a government in 2015 if he remains.
A very good test for the ability of any politician is what policies will survive under a different Secretary of State and PM from the same party.
What would a Tory Secretary of State for Education other than Gove keep?
Academies
Existing free schools will lose preferential funding and be assimilated to academies, so essentially there has to be a demand. New free schools have to have a provable demand to get off the starting blocks (which means they largely won't).
Abolition of coursework./controlled assessment from most public exams
Reforms to adoption
Anything else?
Original post by the mezzil
Yes or No?
My thoughts are undoubtedly no. He is a fool and an embarrassment. What's more is that he is an elitist prick who does not know a thing about teaching, or have any real experience in Education. For goodness sake he is so naïve he thinks WW1 was a just war!
What are the community's thoughts?
My thoughts are undoubtedly no. He is a fool and an embarrassment. What's more is that he is an elitist prick who does not know a thing about teaching, or have any real experience in Education. For goodness sake he is so naïve he thinks WW1 was a just war!
What are the community's thoughts?
Yes, he should stay.
Several of his bigger ideas like free schools and the English Bac are actually rather good and importantly he's allowed the expansion of the grammar system through the back door. He has also attempted to stop grade inflation and even wants to stop multiple resits which make the initial exams pointless.
I disagree with the abolition of modular examinations and coursework but these are relatively minor as are the gaffes.
Getting rid of Smith and Patterson should be far bigger priorities.
Original post by Rakas21
Yes, he should stay.
Several of his bigger ideas like free schools and the English Bac are actually rather good and importantly he's allowed the expansion of the grammar system through the back door. He has also attempted to stop grade inflation and even wants to stop multiple resits which make the initial exams pointless.
I disagree with the abolition of modular examinations and coursework but these are relatively minor as are the gaffes.
Getting rid of Smith and Patterson should be far bigger priorities.
Several of his bigger ideas like free schools and the English Bac are actually rather good and importantly he's allowed the expansion of the grammar system through the back door. He has also attempted to stop grade inflation and even wants to stop multiple resits which make the initial exams pointless.
I disagree with the abolition of modular examinations and coursework but these are relatively minor as are the gaffes.
Getting rid of Smith and Patterson should be far bigger priorities.
Pretty much this. Disagreeing with some of the stuff he's done doesn't equate to me thinking it's justified to kick him out of his job before the next election. Also not sure it's really fair to hold a minister personally responsible when a sizeable chunk of what they've implemented is probably party policy that wasn't originally their idea.
I'm not sure Gove would be popular in any managerial post. He doesn't seem to be naturally good with people. How capable he is, I don't honestly know.
As for Education, maybe instead of a ministry there should something like a Royal Society (or whatever it is called) made up of people with long-standing experience who can implement changes for the long-term based on scientific evidence. On the other hand short-term changes do have advantages as well (it is easier to change direction).
As for Education, maybe instead of a ministry there should something like a Royal Society (or whatever it is called) made up of people with long-standing experience who can implement changes for the long-term based on scientific evidence. On the other hand short-term changes do have advantages as well (it is easier to change direction).
(edited 10 years ago)
It's clear as day what Gove's doing and why he's doing it, pure self-interest, the man realises he will never reach such an elevated position in society again and thus is making numerous unnecessary changes in order to gain public/media attention and create a legacy for himself.
Appointing this man as head of education in the first case really does prove everything wrong with politics in this country in the first place, little experience in the field whatsoever and the problems that genuinely need addressing, an arrogant attitude and as the above poster said a serious lack of people-skills.
Appointing this man as head of education in the first case really does prove everything wrong with politics in this country in the first place, little experience in the field whatsoever and the problems that genuinely need addressing, an arrogant attitude and as the above poster said a serious lack of people-skills.
Original post by nulli tertius
A very good test for the ability of any politician is what policies will survive under a different Secretary of State and PM from the same party.
Whilst I agree in principle that this could be a good test, you do have to be careful of policies that are crap but so difficult to reverse that it may not be possible to get rid of them, and that some flagship policies may not be reversible without severe embarrassment to the government
NHS reforms are so large that even Labour will struggle to undo them, and free schools cant very well be shut down en masse either
Posted from TSR Mobile
No he's only there for his interest
Original post by Origami Bullets
Whilst I agree in principle that this could be a good test, you do have to be careful of policies that are crap but so difficult to reverse that it may not be possible to get rid of them, and that some flagship policies may not be reversible without severe embarrassment to the government
NHS reforms are so large that even Labour will struggle to undo them, and free schools cant very well be shut down en masse either
Posted from TSR Mobile
NHS reforms are so large that even Labour will struggle to undo them, and free schools cant very well be shut down en masse either
Posted from TSR Mobile
Labour have already said they Won't repeal the health and social care act, just one part of it. A good example of your point.
I'm happy with his performance though this isn't really an area I actively take an interest in.
One thing for sure some difficult decisions do need to be made and he is making them rather than shirking it aside. I can understand it that it isn't easy to be a minister at this moment in time when budgets are being slashed or at bare minimum frozen, reforms generally require money and at this moment in time UK's education is in an appalling state of mess, one of the highest spending per student, one of the longest contact hours, the longest amount of schooling years and it can't even be ahead of Germany.
One thing about education, anything you do to it will require years for its effects to be seen and the reason for the mess is legacy of the junks from the previous Liebour and Major's government.
One thing for sure some difficult decisions do need to be made and he is making them rather than shirking it aside. I can understand it that it isn't easy to be a minister at this moment in time when budgets are being slashed or at bare minimum frozen, reforms generally require money and at this moment in time UK's education is in an appalling state of mess, one of the highest spending per student, one of the longest contact hours, the longest amount of schooling years and it can't even be ahead of Germany.
One thing about education, anything you do to it will require years for its effects to be seen and the reason for the mess is legacy of the junks from the previous Liebour and Major's government.
Original post by StretfordEnd
Rant rant rant.
The thing is though, that advisers are just that: advisers. They give advice, the minister decides whether or not he wants to follow it. Ministers have no obligation at all to follow the advice that they have solicited. I have no doubt that ministers receive lots of conflicting advice, and their job is listen and then to decide what they believe to be the best course of action.
To take one instance where he ignored an adviser (the horror) and use it to justify all your other, various criticisms of the man is not, in my opinion, a reasoned argument.
Original post by barnetlad
He could have been a reasonable success with his views on exams and free schools could have been a moderately good idea. Then he tries to rush the exam changes through, sets up free schools in areas where there is not a desperate shortage of places and allows them to have unqualified teachers, makes offensive comments to the teaching profession, forces academies where there is no desire and not always real failure, makes the Blackadder silly comment, and has advisers who allegedly have the impact of upsetting civil servants.
I wouldn't hang him from a lamppost, but he is one of the best helpers for the Labour Party's chances of a government in 2015 if he remains.
I wouldn't hang him from a lamppost, but he is one of the best helpers for the Labour Party's chances of a government in 2015 if he remains.
•
He is trying to push changes through because, obviously, he has a limited timetable to work with. Labour may well be back in power after the next election, and are outright hostile to many of his reforms. If it doesn't get it done by 2015 it may well not get done, you can hardly blame him for not hanging about.
•
The free schools programme is not simply about building new schools. It is about parents having a choice about where they send their child. This obviously requires school places to be created where there is currently no shortage. But remember that many of those school places may be in truly dreadful schools, to which no parent would to send their child. It can no longer be good enough for parents to be forced to send their children to failing schools because they have no alternative. That Labour is happy with this state of affairs is an indictment of their character.
•
The other purpose of free schools is to free them from the bureaucracy of central and local government. What does it matter if one teacher has a scrap of paper and another does not. Let headteachers use their experience to decide who the better teacher is. If parents are unhappy with this, then (as per the previous point) they do not have to send their child to a free school! Everyone is happy! Well, apart from qualified teachers who may actually have to face some competition and scrutiny for once. The horror.
•
The teaching unions have been behaving in a shockingly underhand manner throughout all this. They are offended, most of all, because Gove would end the job-for-life culture in the education sector, which they profit from nicely. Almost everything else they do and say is contrived for their self-serving ends. Gove has gone out of his way to challenge vested interests, it is hardly surprising they are angry.
•
Anecdotally, some civil servants are unhappy with Gove's reforms and have been an active hindrance to their progress. That is not their job. If being told to do their job properly upsets them, then oh well.
•
If you disagree with him on his Blackadder comments then fine. But why having an opinion on a historical event is an inappropriate thing for a minister to do is beyond me.
Original post by closeenemies
It's clear as day what Gove's doing and why he's doing it, pure self-interest, the man realises he will never reach such an elevated position in society again and thus is making numerous unnecessary changes in order to gain public/media attention and create a legacy for himself.
There are many people in the Conservative party who want Gove to be their next leader and, perhaps, Prime Minister. Gove has repeatedly stated he has no such ambitions, and outright wouldn't want the job. This is pretty irreconcilable with what is, to you, 'clear as day'.
It is a very different thing to challenge someone's motives as their prescriptions. You may not agree with the effects of his reforms, but their is no doubt that he honestly believes them to be to the benefit of children in this country.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Aqa sociology paper 1
- If you were the schools minister, what would you do?
- UK school choice
- Why is there a dinosaur in my garden?
- Online college for A-levels
- CSM BA Fashion Communication: Image and Promotion
- OCR A-level Sociology Paper 3 (H580/03) - 14th June 2023 [Exam Chat]
- Head teacher without having been a teacher?
- What counts as a professional reference- UCL postgrad
- Should I be allowed to ‘stay off’?
- Learning Specification for A Levels
- Who will be the party to build the homes we need
- Rough schools and the attainment gap
- Can my school really decline my call to be homeschooled?
- I'm 18 19 in October and idk what to do
- Catching up
- Electric only house bills
- one day exclusion in year 10 please help im going crazy
- What would you do if you are struggling with A Levels but don't like any other course
- Will A failed OCR FSMQ lower chances
Latest
Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 2 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 2 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
