The Gove is Gone Celebration Thread Watch
- 15-07-2014 19:38
- 15-07-2014 19:50
Personally whilst I don't support everything Gove has done I do believe we needed someone happy to make radical changes. We have kids leaving primary school unable to read or write properly, brighter kids not being stretched enough, so many of these 'equivalent GCSE' qualifications pushing up school league tables which in my mind demeaned the achievement of those who tried to do harder subjects, lack of discipline in schools, lack of awareness about apprenticeships, lack of compulsory language teaching and a stupid target of getting 50% of sixth formers to university = even more grads competing for a job. I also agree with putting British History on the map again, yes it wasn't always the most glorious but as we are in England/Wales we should be learning it.
I also don't understand the fuss about the Ebac, you can take all the right subjects and still do one or two creative subjects.
- 15-07-2014 19:57
Michael Gove seemed very determined to do things his way & ignore any advice given to him which I think is why he was hated so much. I am glad he's gone but do not hold much hope for his successor. She seems to vote based on old-fashioned Christian ways of thinking which I think will hold back progress.
- 15-07-2014 20:29
Glad I'm done with GCSE and A-levels. January exams would've been nice but I worked twice as hard without them and still remember quite a lot of what I learnt (granted, one of my subjects was a foreign language and abother is the subject I'll be studying at uni).
I feel sorry for next year's lot but oh well.
Posted from TSR Mobile
- 15-07-2014 21:08
Grade inflation and a hike in the number of people going to university, resulting in more graduates than graduate jobs and an overqualified workforce and a dearth of competent tradesmen. That's the legacy of the previous Labour government.
I wouldn't trust them with education, immigration and I would certainly not trust them with the economy.
- 15-07-2014 21:17
nowhere in the world do you see students being able to sit for major exams like twice a year.
Let alone having to sit in January.
It diminishes the value of sitting for exams.
he was trying to reshape UK's system of exams and exam curriculum into a better & productive one.
but i guess he did too much at a fast pace so he was shown the door?
If you've studied consistently and constantly during the academic year, the results will be good.
Also you have to bear in mind that none of you have actually paid up for your exams since they're all free.
You won't feel the pinch so studying smart may not come naturally to you until you've failed the exams repeatedly and then you finally decide to buck up.
hope my post doesn't offend anyone.
- 15-07-2014 21:50
- 15-07-2014 21:53
Lmao at this thread, most of it is just people going along with the crowd without even knowing why they're bashing him.
You can't deny that he was passionate about education and wanted to make a difference, admittedly the methods he used to make some of those changes were a bit weird, but last time I checked Britain's educational system was still pretty high in the world rankings.
Posted from TSR Mobile
- 16-07-2014 00:16
At least the Tories prioritised STEM and made some changes, improving the UK's competitiveness.
(Original post by jelly1000)
- 16-07-2014 00:38
It's working well at my Mum's school- it means only teachers who are doing well can improve. So many mediocre teachers automatically got a pay rise before and could carry on being mediocre. They shouldn't be treated any different to any other workers.
Disgusting, cruel and incredibly unfair policy.
- 16-07-2014 01:14
Gove is gone, yes. I have followed the education reforms very closely in the past few years. There is absolutely no doubt that the system has been in need of some sort of reform. Regardless of who was in charge of this, they would always be very unpopular. Regardless, Gove didn't seem very good at sugar coating the policies and regularly used rhetoric that undermined the teaching profession, as if talking to naughty schoolboys who weren't in line. This hasn't always been the case and I am convinced that he really does care.
The reforms have been pushed through extremely fast and without much discussion or debate. This makes sense given that they barely got into power at the last election and SHOULD have been unlikely to win at the next after all of the cuts. He needed to get the reforms through ASAP to ensure they didn't get undone before they had an impact. This has caused a lot of problems and makes it seem like he is arrogant and doesn't listen. Of course, most of the policies have been met with vitriol from some areas (some policies more than others) and he has been known to ignore his own expert committees. That's the nature of a minister who has an ideology.
The first thing that I am totally against is the massive movement away from university-based teacher training. The idea is that teachers should train on the job through a scheme similar to the old GTP. This model is used by virtually all big companies and Gove's rhetoric was that it would bring education into the modern era. The only problem is that learning on the job whilst teaching maybe 5 or 6 classes of 30 teenagers is extremely difficult, stressful and doesn't allow the natural period of self-reflection and discussion of ideas provided by university-based training. Moreover, would you rather have a teacher as your mentor who will have their own stresses to deal with and will probably prioritise their classes over you (rightfully), or somebody whose whole job is to teach you pedagogy? I'm not sure if Gove really believed this model would work better (if so, he clearly misunderstands the current situation in schools), whether it's about saving money, or whether (as some say) he just hates those lefty-liberal-lecturers.
The second thing that really bothers me is the performance pay. As already mentioned, the DfE explain that this allows schools to pay more to those who perform best. What a great sentiment. Except unfortunately schools have a budget and will look to save money wherever possible so that they can pump it into places that will help boost their in-take or results. In order to get a pay rise, you need to provide evidence. I recently had a talk about the way my school will introduce this and what they will be doing is have two lesson observations (a senior member of staff comes to look at those lessons and judge them) and rates your lesson, reaction to events, etc, and those comments and notes will provide the backbone of the evidence. So two randomly bad lessons (let's say a wasp flies into the classroom or it starts snowing) and you'll be waiting for another year. Rather than empowering the best teachers, you're weighing them down in bureaucracy. The way it really works, has always worked, and will continue to work is that you keep your best teachers by giving them a post-holder role (KS3 manager, numeracy co-ordinator, assistant head of department, etc.) which gives them a second pay ladder alongside the incremental other one.
Performance pay will also create a competitive environment where it's in your interest to out-perform colleagues because there will be limit pay rises available. It might be that some schools will relate the performance criterion to results, which will add even more pressures to teachers to force their pupils through exams. School and education should be about community and working together to ensure that the children become the best they can be. It's a vocation, not a high-paying financial company.
There a whole host of other policies that I disagree with although I think I can understand why he believed he was doing the right thing. It doesn't matter now anyway as the majority of his policies are now in the pipeline and are irreversible. Education is an area that politicians love to make their political statement to further their career and although I believe there was an element of that with Gove, I think that mostly he believed in what he was doing. Morgan might well just be changing things for the sake of justifying her job or making her statement. As someone mentioned, she's fairly new politics and very new to the ministry.
Just before I get off of my soapbox, I'll make one final rant. Why is it that every politician who becomes education minister meddles so much with the profession? Surely education needs stability and a period of grace to find out whether the changes actually took affect. Education is the most important of all of the departments because without it the world would be a very different place. Why doesn't it get treated as such? Finally, although I know it is the way of all of the departments, why is it that one man can make such a huge difference to education? It needs to be protected more, and I don't mean necessarily by having teachers run it or whatever because a body always resists change, but it needs to be watered down somehow.
(Original post by anonymouspie227)
- 16-07-2014 01:29
Hi, thanks for the quote.*
I'm not sure, there's been an increase in the number of students that take mathematics
for example, and that could potentially be due to the modular and As/A2 nature of the A Level.
From what I've read in documents published
by the Engineering professors council and MEI is that, such reforms as putting a level*
exams after 2 years could drop numbers in
subjects that are considered hard, but also,*
that in certain subjects due to the volume of content that needs to be covered modular exams are vital/ a necessity.*
Also, just because older students went through a certain system doesn't mean it's
On the issue of Cambridge this is what I
found " No official class is assigned to the overall degree issued by the University of Cambridge. Instead, each Part of a Tripos is
self-contained and you obtain separate results for each one: there is no averaging out for a final degree. You may have heard the phrase "a double first", which means that a first class was achieved in two sets of
examinations corresponding to two different Parts of Triposes"
Interpret as you wish.
(Also sorry for the awkward quoting, im on my phone)
On to the topic at hand: A Levels, particularly in STEM, were getting progressively watered down to the point where they were barely fit for purpose anymore. Successive governments kept taking the easy option to be able to proclaim 'more students are getting As/going on to university' - never mind that those As were the equivalent of a D in Asian countries, or that the plethora of shoddy uni courses accepting those with such weak prior attainment could only turn out debt-laden grads who would feel entitled to a cushy job but whose degrees were valued so little by employers that they had to pick between menial work or signing on.
Gove, for all else that he did, at least had the courage to try and arrest this slide and try to increase the standards and rigour of the curriculum. I also appreciated that he was keen to try to measure UK performance against international standards rather than remain insular - because ultimately in a globalised world the kid from Wolverhampton is going to be competing with the kid from Mumbai (he/she already does to an extent, but this will only be more the case in the future).
It's no surprise such changes were unpopular amongst teachers and students, but that change in outlook after an unbroken line of Education Ministers taking the easy way out was wholly necessary to safeguard the UK's international position 20-30 years down the line.
(Original post by Choo.choo)
- 16-07-2014 10:34
Labour will not win in 2016. Ed Miliband is not a popular leader. He will be dumped if Labour lose next year. He screwed over his brother.
10 months to go.
- Wiki Support Team
(Original post by Drewski)
- 16-07-2014 11:21
Utterly astonished you all think it'll make the least bit of difference. So the new Secretary might be less publicly objectionable... whoop-ti-do. You don't think the same Conservative policies will be continued? Still the same party in charge, you're all acting like this means it'll suddenly return to a land of happy bunnies and fluffy dreams.
Get back to reality.
Nonetheless it is true that Gove becoming Chief Whip isn't going to magically fix the country's problems.
- 16-07-2014 11:33
I may be an absolute killjoy here but so be it. Does nobody find it depressing that English exams are so much easier than ones in the Far East? In fact, an A* in England is worth a B in Singapore. Gove was only doing his job to try and make the education system in England more vigorous to attempt to reduce this grade inflation gap, and although it personally meant my exams were harder than some of those in the immediate past, to be intellectually honest, it is better to do hard exams than easier ones, because that at least will distinctly separate people with different abilities. Gove was one of the only bright members of the Cabinet in my opinion. It is a good day for people that don't want to have to work hard. It, in my opinion is a sad day for British education.
- 19-07-2014 00:44
Is he the guy who took away january exams? Screw him. I heard hes a zionist too.
(Original post by Phoebe Buffay)
- 19-07-2014 12:33
Let's celebrate yes, one of the few people in government that had the conviction to try and bring about significant change to our education system, is gone. It saddens me that people celebrate that he's gone, and then bemoan the state of our education system. I doubt his replacement will see through what he tried to do. She wont be as good.
- 19-07-2014 13:14
I work in a school, and during the last meeting on the last day of term yesterday someone mentioned Gove being "demoted" and almost everyone cheered. Personally I'm indifferent.
- 20-07-2014 00:37
(Original post by Drewski)
- 20-07-2014 01:14
Students seemed to manage for, what, 30 years with that and it is my understanding that both Oxford and Cambridge still base their degree results on the score obtained in final exams that cover 3 years worth of material. Seems to work for them being consistently based at or near the very top in world teaching.