Schools

This morning, the Education Secretary went on the Today programme to explain his plans to make it easier to sack teachers. Here’s the full transcript: James Naughtie: From the start of the next school year in England, head teachers will find it easier to remove teachers that are considered to be under-performers.  The Education Secretary, Michael Gove, thinks the process is too cumbersome so it is being streamlined. The National Union of Teachers, as we heard earlier, says it could become a bullies’ charter.  Well Mr Gove is with us. Good morning. Michael Gove: Good morning. JN: Bullies? MG: I don’t believe so. I think that actually if you have

Downhills Primary School in Haringey is fast becoming a political battleground. Before Christmas, David Lammy, the local MP, a bunch of union leaders, left-wing opponents of education reform and Labour councilors wrote to The Guardian complaining about Michael Gove’s plans to convert primary school with poor academic records into academies. In the New Year, Michael Gove responded with a speech in which he attacked those opposing to dealing with these sub-standards schools. He accused them of being subscribers to the “bigoted backward bankrupt ideology of a left wing establishment that perpetuates division and denies opportunity.” (Pete blogged about the significance of the speech at the time.) The power of Gove’s

Michael Gove has never been timid in confronting the education bureaucracy, but his attack on them today is particularly — and noteworthily — unforgiving. Referring to those truculent local authorities that are blocking his schools reforms, he will say in a speech that starts in about ten minutes: ‘The same ideologues who are happy with failure — the enemies of promise — also say you can’t get the same results in the inner cities as the leafy suburbs, so it’s wrong to stigmatise these schools. Let’s be clear what these people mean. Let’s hold their prejudices up to the light. What are they saying? “If you’re poor, if you’re Turkish,

Could it be an accident of timing that the government, in the shape of Sarah Teather, is announcing an expansion of the pupil premium today? Or is it part of a careful response to David Cameron’s adventures in Euroland? In any case, the Lib Dem-devised scheme to help the poorest pupils will be extended in 2012-13, so that both the amount given to each pupil and the number of pupils eligible are increased. What’s not clear yet is whether this was planned all along, or whether it’s because of some previously unforeseen slack in the existing £1.25 billion budget for next year. The pupil premium has, for instance, already been

A change of pace, that’s what David Cameron offers in an article on schools reform for the Daily Telegraph this morning. A change of pace not just from the furious momentum of the eurozone crisis, but also in his government’s education policy. From now on, he suggests, reform will go quicker and further. Instead of just focussing on those schools that are failing outright, the coalition will extend its ire to those schools that ‘drift along tolerating second best’. Rather than just singling out inner city schools, Cameron will also cast his disapproval at ‘teachers in shire counties… satisfied with half of children getting five good GCSEs’. And rightly so,

The Tory conference was so forgettable that it’s hard now to remember it took place earlier in the week. But, for what it’s worth, here are my conclusions from the whole conference season: 1. The search for Osborne’s growth strategy has been called off. This ‘leadership’ theme was short for ‘leadership in the crisis, which we’ve now decided is inevitable’. Printing £75 billion will be  prelude to printing £400 billion, the inflation tax is back. Osborne perhaps thinks this new magic gold will bring economic recovery. So did the Emperor in Faust, when the devil suggested that printing money would avert fiscal crisis. This scheme ended in tears in Goethe’s

When Michael Howard offered David Cameron the pick of the jobs in the shadow Cabinet after the 2005 election, Cameron chose education. Howard was disappointed that Cameron hadn’t opted to shadow Gordon Brown but Cameron argued that education was the most important portfolio. A sense of that commitment was on display today in his speech on education, delivered at one of the new free schools that have opened this term. His defence of the coalition’s plans to make it easier to sack bad teachers summed up its refreshing radicalism. He simply said, “If it’s a choice between making sure our children get the highest quality teaching or some teachers changing

Nick Clegg’s speech today on education has certainly garnered him some headlines. But it has also ruffled feathers in Whitehall. A senior Department for Education source told me earlier: “Clegg doesn’t understand that the 2010 Act means that Academies are the default mode for new schools, whether Local Authorities like them or not. His speech doesn’t change Free School policy or Academy policy generally. It was stupid of Richard Reeves to turn what should have been rare good news for the Government into a splits story, and it won’t help reverse public perceptions of Clegg as dishonest.” The striking thing about the Deputy Prime Minister’s speech today is the emphasis

As the Lib Dem conference approaches, we can expect some briefing from their spin doctors claiming to have “wrecked” all manner of Tory policies. It’s a petty and ugly phase of the coalition. Last year: nuptial bliss. This year: one partner throwing china at the other. The next phase is divorce, which is why I’m surprised to see the Lib Dems accelerating the process by today’s divisive briefings. Especially on something as self-defeating as school reform. We are told that “Nick Clegg defeats bid by Michael Gove to let free schools make profits”. This is nonsense. As I write in this week’s Spectator, Gove is not pushing for profit-seeking schools,

Harris Academies, one of the best-known new chains of state secondaries, have today posted an  extraordinary set of results. It’s worth studying because it shows how a change of management can transform education for pupils in deprived areas. Pour in money if you like, but the way a school is run is the key determinant. This is the idea behind City Academies, perhaps Labour’s single best (and most rapidly-vindicated) policy. The notion is rejected by teaching unions, who loathe the idea that some teachers are better than others. Bad schools are kept bad by the idea that their performance is due to deeply-ingrained social problems, etc. Harris has produced a table showing