Category: Speeches

Below is the text of the speech made by Michael Gove, the then Secretary of State for Education, at Haberdashers’ Aske’s Hatcham College, London on 4 January 2012.

Last month, a headline appeared in the Hornsey Journal – a headline that would have been funny had its subtext not been so dispiriting. Stamped across the top of the page in stark, Nimrod Bold lettering were the words: ‘Campaigners: Hands off our failing school.’

Just think about that for a moment…

Futures are being blighted. Horizons are being limited. Generations of children are being let down. And yet the response of those ‘campaigners’ to an attempt to rescue the situation is ‘hands off.’

‘Hands off’ the unacceptable waste of talent.

‘Hands off’ the chronic, ingrained educational failure.

‘Hands off’ our failing school.

We’ve faced a good deal of opposition in the last year and a half. And I am certain 2012 will be no different. Because one thing I’ve come to realise during my time as Education Secretary is that the opposition we face is of a very particular kind…

It’s ironic, if you think about it. The popular critique of our reform programme has most often been of its underpinning motives. The talk was of an ‘ideologically-driven Academies programme’ and ‘ideologically-motivated school reforms.’ We’re supposed to be the ideologues. And yet…

And yet the truth is rather different. The Academies programme is not about ideology. It’s an evidence-based, practical solution built on by successive governments – both Labour and Conservative. The new ideologues are the enemies of reform, the ones who put doctrine ahead of pupils’ interests. Every step of the way, they have sought to discredit our policies, calling them divisive, destructive, ineffective, unpopular, unworkable – even ‘a crime against humanity.’

But the facts on the ground tell a very different story.

They said the reforms were untested…

A common attack is that our reforms – those that focus on school autonomy in particular – are experimental, untested and untried.

But the seeds of our reforms go back decades. The first City Technology Colleges were set up in 1988 – and indeed we are standing in one of the very first. These all-ability comprehensives enjoyed much more autonomy than other schools, and headteachers exercised their new-found freedom to extraordinary effect. Despite being overwhelmingly located in poorer areas, the CTCs achieved – and continue to achieve – great results: the proportion of pupils eligible for free school meals in CTCs who earned five or more good GCSEs at grades A* to C is more than twice as high in CTCs as it is for all maintained mainstream schools.

Some of the autonomy enjoyed by schools like the CTCs, and indeed grant-maintained schools, was eroded after 1997. But the best minds in the last Government knew that was a mistake. And when they were given the chance to shape policy we saw autonomy return and school leaders back in charge. Andrew Adonis knew it was headteachers, not councillors, not ombudsmen, not advisers or consultants, who made schools succeed. So he cut through the red tape and – as well as establishing the London Challenge, Black Country Challenge and Manchester Challenge – created the Academies programme.

In his memoirs, Tony Blair describes why academies proved so effective:

“An academy belongs not to some remote bureaucracy, not to the rulers of government, local or national, but to itself, for itself. The school is in charge of its own destiny. This gives it pride and purpose. And most of all, freed from the extraordinarily debilitating and often, in the worst sense, politically correct interference from state or municipality, academies have just one thing in mind, something shaped not by political prejudice but by common sense: what will make the school excellent”.

Labour’s Academies programme proved genuinely transformative and provided a solid basis for our reforms. But we had more than just the evidence of history to lean on. The principle of autonomy-driven improvement is solidly backed by rigorous international evidence. The best academic studies clearly demonstrate the effect of empowering the frontline. Trust professionals and they will exceed your expectations.

Research from the OECD and others has shown that more autonomy for individual schools helps raise standards. In its most recent international survey of education, the OECD found that ‘in countries where schools have greater autonomy over what is taught and how students are assessed, students tend to perform better.’ Two of the most successful countries in PISA international education league tables – Hong Kong and Singapore – are amongst those with the highest levels of school competition. And from autonomous schools in Alberta, to Sweden’s Free Schools, to the Charter Schools of New York and Chicago, freedom is proving an unstoppable driver of excellence.

Last November, Eric Hanushek and Ludger Woessmann – of the universities of Stanford and Munich respectively – submitted a report to the European Commission under the auspices of the European Expert Network on Economics of Education . While the primary focus was on the relationship between educational attainment and economic growth, Hanushek and Woessmann’s research also highlighted the critical role of autonomy as a driver of high educational standards.

They found that:

Across countries, students tend to perform better in schools that have autonomy in personnel and day-to-day decisions, in particular when there is accountability.

They say that:

Critics of choice-based policies often argue that a greater reliance on choice and private competition can lead to greater segregation of students. On the other hand, in particular the additional choice created by public funding for privately operated schools may particularly benefit disadvantaged students whose choices are otherwise most constrained, and thus boost equity in the school system. In fact, the cross-country patterns suggest that a larger share of privately operated schools is not only related to a higher performance level, but also to a substantially lower dependence of student achievement on socioeconomic status – as long as all schools are publicly financed…In such a setting, allowing choice among schools can even lead to reduced segregation because access to good schools is no longer tied to being able to afford to live in an expensive neighbourhood.

So we’ve been working hard to increase autonomy for all our schools. Part of this has been about reducing central and local government prescription for all schools to give heads and teachers the space to focus on what really matters.

– The hundreds of pages of FMSIS forms: gone.

– The mammoth Ofsted Self-Evaluation Form: gone.

– The fortnightly departmental emails: gone.

– The Performance Management guidance: slashed by three quarters.

– The capability procedures: radically simplified.

– The Ofsted framework: slimmed down and focused.

– The behaviour and bullying guidance: cut from 600 pages to just 50.

– There’s more to come. In total, departmental guidance will be more than halved.

But beyond these changes – which we’ve implemented for the benefit of all schools – we’ve gone further: every school now has the opportunity to take complete control of its budget, curriculum and staffing by applying to be an academy.

They said schools wouldn’t be interested in becoming academies…
Now the critics said that schools wouldn’t be interested. They told us that there would be fierce opposition from teachers, heads and parents. That we wouldn’t see the kind of numbers we were anticipating.

Well…

As of today, there are 1529 academies open in England. 1194 are converters and 335 are sponsored.

45 per cent of all maintained secondary schools are either open or in the pipeline to become academies.

There are 37 local authority areas where over half of secondary schools are already academies, and 64 LAs where more than half of secondaries are either open academies or in the process of becoming academies. Over 90 per cent in North East Lincolnshire; over 88 per cent in Bromley; over 82 per cent in Swindon; over 80 per cent in Thurrock.

Three in five outstanding secondaries – and nearly one in 10 outstanding primaries – has applied to convert to an academy.

Over 1,250,000 pupils now attend academies. This means around one in seven pupils in state schools now attends an academy – one in three pupils in state secondaries.

In an average week, the Department for Education processes 20 applications from schools to convert to academy status, brokers another five schools to become sponsored academies.

One can hardly say there’s been a lack of interest…

The last Government saw academies as a secondary-only programme. One of the first things we did was extend academy freedoms to primaries. This is a vitally important part of our reforms.

If pupils leave primary school without the basics – if they fail to get a Level 4 at KS2 – then they start secondary school at an extreme disadvantage. Pupils can’t read to learn if they haven’t learned to read. They can’t begin to deal with more advanced mathematical concepts – or physics, or chemistry, or any number of other subjects – if they haven’t grasped the fundamentals of numeracy. And however good a secondary school is, there’s a limit to the extent to which they can pick up the pieces.

There are more than 1000 primaries where fewer than 40 per cent of pupils reach Level 4 in reading, writing and mathematics. These schools are leaving children to face a life of drastically narrowed choices in this world.

Insisting that schools educate their pupils to Level 4 standard isn’t that big an ask. Level 4 is just the basics. To achieve a Level 4 in reading pupils need to be able to interpret and understand the meaning behind a simple story. And in maths, all that is required is to be able to understand simple fractions and add, subtract, multiply and divide without the help of a calculator. It’s unacceptable that so many children are being let down.

So we must act urgently to tackle underperformance in primary schools. Part of the strategy is encouraging more primary academies.

More than 700 maintained primary schools are either open or in the pipeline to become academies. These range from small rural primaries – like Kings Caple in Herefordshire with 32 pupils – to large urban primaries like 843-pupil Durand.

There are 16 local authorities, such as Darlington and Cornwall, where more than 10 per cent of primary schools have opened or are in the pipeline to become academies.

We’re encouraged by the enthusiasm primary schools have shown so far. In the most recent months, there have even been more primary applications than secondary. But there’s more to be done.

We have identified more than two hundred primaries with the worst records and we have identified ten local authorities with unacceptable high numbers of under-performing primaries. We are working now to transform them into academies.

Most local authorities are being cooperative and constructive. They recognise the benefits academies bring.

Some, however, are being obstructive. They are putting the ideology of central control ahead of the interests of children. They are more concerned with protecting old ways of working than helping the most disadvantaged children succeed in the future. Anyone who cares about social justice must want us to defeat these ideologues and liberate the next generation from a history of failure.

They said academies would hurt other schools…
And becoming an academy is a liberation. It gives heads real freedom to make a difference. Longer school days; better paid teachers; remedial classes; more personalised learning; improved discipline; innovative curricula – these are just a few of the things that academy heads are doing to give the children in their care the best possible education.

Even more impressive than what individual academies are doing by themselves is what they’re achieving through cooperation. And this is a critical point. Because the critics warned these new schools would be soulless, selfish islands of elitism. Fragmented. Isolated. Even aggressive. In fact, this cynical prediction couldn’t be further from the truth. Heads, teachers, governing bodies, showed more commitment, more devotion, and a greater sense of moral purpose than the critics gave them credit for. Academies are not islands unto themselves; instead, what we’ve witnessed is an outpouring of desire to help others.

The critics said we concentrated too much on extending autonomy to the powerful. Well, like Abraham Lincoln I don’t think you help the weak by punishing the strong. If you get it right, then by emancipating the strong you can support the weak. That is why I have been so delighted that so many outstanding schools have stepped forward to sponsor other schools. Like Sir Joseph Williamson’s Mathematical School, Altrincham Girls’ and Tollbar Academy in Grimsby. Already, 18 converter academies are sponsoring another academy.

Schools are continually finding new ways to work together and support each other. There are 403 converter academies in approximately 138 chains. These chains range from multi-academy trusts with shared governance and leadership to looser collaborative partnerships.

Like Kemnal Technology College – an ‘outstanding’ school in Kent – which became an academy in September 2010. It formed the Kemnal Academies Trust, a multi-academy trust that currently includes eight secondary schools and three primary schools, from Bromley, Bexley, Kent, Essex and West Sussex, with another school from Hampshire (Havant Academy) joining this month [January 2012]. A further five schools are expected to join by April. The academies in the Trust work collaboratively, sharing training and development of staff, working together on curriculum design, and using shared administrative and financial management services. And the schools are seeing the benefits, with results rising and vast improvements being made. Two of the schools in the Trust, Debden Park and Welling, were amongst the most improved in the country last year.

And chains offer the answer to many small primary schools thinking about how best to benefit from academy status. Take the 11 rural Devon primary schools who came together in November as the Primary Academies Trust. Church schools and community schools joining to share expertise and resources to serve the villages of north Devon with the inspiring leadership of two executive principals.

It’s clear that freedom need not be the enemy of cooperation.

They said academies wouldn’t really raise standards…
The critics also said academies wouldn’t deliver the promised academic improvements. They said our promises of rising standards were overblown, that effects would be, at best, negligible (if not – as some claimed – negative). Yet again, the facts on the ground tell a different story. In the 166 sponsored academies with results in both 2010 and 2011, the percentage point increase in pupils achieving five plus A*-C including English and maths was double that of maintained schools. Some chains are doing particularly well:

ARK results show an average 11 percentage point increase across their academy network.

The Harris Federation is recording an average improvement of 13 percentage points across its family of academies. Eight out of their 13 academies are outstanding.

ULT report a 7.1 percentage point improvement across their 17 academies – with six academies showing improvements of more than 10 percentage points.

The percentage of students at ULT’s Barnsley Academy achieving five or more A*-C grades including English and maths almost trebled in 2011. Fifty-one per cent achieved these results compared to 19 per cent in 2010. These are the academy’s best ever results and are a dramatic increase from the six per cent of students achieving these results in 2006 – the year before the academy opened.

These are not isolated cases. The Academies programme as a whole is raising standards. Recently academics at the London School of Economics published a landmark assessment of the scheme so far.

There we see three key findings. First, that ‘academy conversion generates… a significant improvement in pupil performance.’ Second, that – contrary to what the critics claimed was happening – this improvement is not the result of academies scooping up middle-class pupils from nearby schools. While it’s true that, increasingly, more middle-class parents want to send their children to the local academy, this phenomenon is a consequence of the school’s success, not the cause. And thirdly, beyond raising standards for their own pupils, academies also tend to raise pupil performance in neighbouring schools. Success is contagious.

They said the Academies programme would put SEN pupils at risk…
The critics also claimed academies would neglect their duty to some of those who need our attention most: pupils with special educational needs. They said academies would use their freedom to shirk their responsibilities.

But they were wrong. Twenty-three per cent of pupils in secondary academies have non-statemented special needs compared to 19 per cent for all secondary schools. And the percentage of pupils with statements in secondary academies is in line with the national average.

They said academies would neglect the disadvantaged…
Another group that critics claimed would be left behind by academies is disadvantaged pupils. They said autonomous schools would cream-skim the least challenging pupils and leave the rest to languish. But again, they were wrong.

The proportion of pupils on free school meals in academies – around 15 per cent – is comparable to the proportion for all state-funded schools. The crucial difference is that pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds tend to perform better in academies. The attainment rate for FSM pupils in academies improved by 8.3 percentage points between 2009 and 2010. This was over double the improvement rate recorded in comparable schools (4.0 percentage points) and also much higher than the national improvement rate for FSM pupils (4.6 percentage points). What’s more, the gap in attainment between FSM and non FSM pupils narrowed in academies between 2009 and 2010 (by 0.2 points). In comparable maintained schools, the attainment gap widened by 2.1 points over the same period.

They said we were creating Victorian-style exam factories…
When they can’t attack the popularity of the programme, and when they can’t attack the what’s being achieved, the critics move on to something more subtle: they attack the culture.

Some academies (so the argument runs) may get good results, but that’s only because they’re Gradgrindian exam factories. Creativity, child development, citizenship, well-being, and even fun are all being sacrificed to make way for merciless and unrelenting rote learning as part of an ideological push for retrograde Victorianism. It’s all about kings, dates, lunchtime detentions, and braid on blazers.

Well I’ve nothing against tradition. But the truth is that with more than 1500 academies, they embrace many educational traditions. Success comes from concentrating on the essentials.

Just last month, respected Harvard economist Roland Fryer published some very interesting research into the factors that drive pupil achievement. Together with his colleague Will Dobbie, Fryer identified certain startling correlations. He looked at the number of times teachers received feedback. The number of days pupils were tutored in small groups. The way data was used to drive instruction. The number of internal pupil assessments. What teachers expected of their pupils. The number of hours children actually spent at their desks. Fryer found that all these factors correlated with higher student scores:

Frequent teacher feedback, the use of data to guide instruction, high-dosage tutoring, increased instructional time, and high expectations – explains approximately 50 percent of the variation in school effectiveness.

These findings are fascinating in themselves. But there’s a particular nuance I want to highlight. Fryer and Dobbie introduced robust controls for three alternative theories of schooling: a model emphasising the provision of wrap-around services, a model focused on teacher selection and retention, and a ‘no excuses’ model of education. They concluded that, regardless of the particular education model of the school, the factors identified in their study – teacher development, data-driven instruction, a culture of achievement, and high academic expectations – produced similarly strong positive effects.

Why is this particularly important? Because it flies in the face of those critics who say that what we are advocating is a narrow, one-size-fits-all, Gradgrindian model. Critics who seek to set up false binary divides between rigour and creativity; between excellence and well-being; between an outstanding academic education and one which concentrates on character. Fryer’s work shows us that certain characteristics are related to high achievement with a variety of educational approaches. Expect excellence; offer intensive support; spend time in the classroom; use accountability intelligently; champion achievement… These are the principles that underpin great schools.

That’s why while academies come in different shapes and sizes, and while academy heads come from a variety of different educational traditions, and while the Academy programme is explicitly designed to let a thousand – or rather 1529 – flowers bloom, it’s nonetheless clear that the best academies share common characteristics. These are the characteristics clearly reflected in Fryer’s findings. These are the things we are advocating. And to say somehow this equates to demanding a return to the Victorian era is more than a lazy pastiche – it’s downright disingenuous.

I’ve spoken a good deal today about the facts on the ground. I’ve tried to show that the proof is in the proverbial pudding, and that the example set by the hundreds of existing academies is more than enough evidence to put the criticisms to bed.

But the sad truth is that, for some of these critics, the facts don’t matter much. And they’ll continue to view the spread of autonomy as an unwelcome onslaught. They’ll continue to talk about the Government ‘threatening’ schools with academy conversion.

Academy conversion is an opportunity. It’s only a threat to the complacent, to those who have been complicit in failure. It’s certainly not a threat for the children concerned; for them, it’s a liberation.

I have been asked not to challenge the leadership of the lowest performing schools in Haringey. But for years hundreds of children have grown up effectively illiterate and innumerate. In one of the most disadvantaged parts of our capital city poor children have been deprived of the skills they need to succeed.

Defenders of the status quo say these schools shouldn’t be judged in this way because they have a different approach – they are creative or inclusive. But you can’t be creative if you can’t read properly and speak fluently – you can’t be included in the world of work if you aren’t numerate.

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, if you’re Somali, then we don’t expect you to succeed. You will always be second class and it’s no surprise your schools are second class.

I utterly reject that attitude.

It’s the bigoted backward bankrupt ideology of a left wing establishment that perpetuates division and denies opportunity. And it’s an ideology that’s been proven wrong time and time again.

Look at what’s been achieved in Harlem’s Children’s Zone or in the KIPP schools in America. The poorest children going to the best colleges because their teachers expect the best of every child.

And most importantly look what’s happened here. In the Harris Academies. In ARK schools like Burlington Danes or King Solomon or Walworth Academy. In Mossbourne Academy and Manchester Academy. Children from the poorest homes going to the best universities. Exam performances better than scores of schools in the leafiest suburbs. Ofsted ratings which are consistently outstanding.

So my message to those in Haringey and to others is: stop saying ‘hands off.’ Stop saying that the arrival of the expertise that can help your schools is a threat. They called Phil Harris a threat 11 years ago; he’s transformed the lives of hundreds of thousands. They said it was a threat when people from the City became involved in sponsoring schools – tell that to the children at King Solomon. The arguments being made in Haringey are the same ones that were made about Hackney Downs in 1995. Back then 11 per cent of children got 5 A* to C with English and maths. Now at Mossbourne 82 per cent in 2010 get 5 A* to C including English and maths, and ten students got offers to study at Cambridge this year.

And for those that say this approach is untested in primary schools you only have to look at what has happened right here at Haberdashers Aske Hatcham. In 2008 Monson Primary School was in notice to improve with falling rolls. Now 76 per cent of pupils are achieving Level 4 at Key Stage 2 and two more primaries have joined the federation.

But the teachers, parents and pupils of Hatcham and Mossbourne wouldn’t wish for a return to the past. We’ve heard a lot of arguments, a lot of excuses from those who don’t believe in giving children a better education. It’s time we called them what they are: ideologues.

It’s the same old ideologues pushing the same old ideology of failure and mediocrity. Who sought to cow anyone with a desire for change by accusing them of ‘talking down’ the achievement of pupils and teachers. The same old ideologues who strove mightily to make the world fit their theories – and damaged generations in the process.

What’s new is that the evidential basis of their policies, always thin, has now disintegrated altogether. Schools like Haberdashers’ Aske’s Hatcham, which we have the privilege of being in today, and hundreds like it across the country, are proof of what can be achieved – not just for some children, but for all children.

Change is coming. And to those who want to get in the way, I have just two words: hands off.

Below is the text of the speech made by Michael Gove, the then Secretary of State for Education, in Birmingham on 11 January 2012.

Introduction

As this is the SSAT’s first conference under its new name – The Schools Network – I thought it might be apposite to say a bit about networks and learning.

Life in the 21st century – and education in the 21st century – relies on us having systems that are flexible and adaptable. So I want to talk to you today about two of the flexible, adaptable networks we’re working on.

First, a flexible, adaptable education system, where schools have the freedom to innovate and collaborate in order to drive improvement.

And second, flexible, adaptable learning within schools, taking advantage of the way technology is transforming education.

A Schools Network

Underpinning our reforms is the principle – backed by the best international evidence – that autonomy drives improvement. In addition to having rigorous accountability mechanisms and a commitment to creating an outstanding teaching workforce, the highest-performing education systems are those where government knows when to take a step back. Rigorous research from the OECD and others has shown that more autonomy for individual schools helps raise standards. In its most recent international survey of education, the OECD found that ‘in countries where schools have greater autonomy over what is taught and how students are assessed, students tend to perform better.’ As the OECD points out, two of the most successful countries in PISA – Hong Kong and Singapore – are amongst those with the highest levels of school competition. And from autonomous schools in Alberta, Canada, to the Charter Schools of New York and Chicago, freedom is proving an unstoppable driver of success.

So we’ve been working hard to increase freedom for all our schools.

A big part of this has involved reducing central government prescription for all schools to make heads’ and teachers’ lives easier and give them the space to focus on what really matters.

The reams of FMSIS forms: gone.

The vast Ofsted Self-Evaluation Form: gone.

Fortnightly departmental emails: gone.

Performance Management guidance: cut by three quarters.

Capability procedures: simplified.

Ofsted framework: slimmed down.

Behaviour and bullying guidance: cut from 600 pages to 50.

There’s more to come. In total, departmental guidance will be more than halved. And our Curriculum Review will result in a clearer, slimmer core entitlement, which will free teachers up to get on with teaching.

Beyond these changes – which we’ve implemented for the benefit of all schools – we’ve gone further: we’ve given every school the opportunity to take complete control of its budget, curriculum and staffing by applying to be an academy.

There are now 1463 academies across England. More than 40 per cent of all secondary schools are now either academies already, or in the process of becoming academies. 1144 primary and secondary schools have converted since the general election. 319 are sponsored academies, of which 116 have opened since May 2010. 44 more sponsored academies are expected to open later this academic year.

Over 1.2 million pupils now attend academies – this means around one in seven pupils in maintained state schools are now attending academies and one in three pupils in secondary schools.

This million-strong group will benefit from the changes academy freedom can bring, like longer school days; better paid teachers; more personalised learning; improved discipline; and higher standards all round. Individual academies are using their new freedoms in a variety of different ways.

Like Seaton Academy in Cumbria, which was one of the first to open as a converter academy and to take advantage of academy freedoms. The school has been better able to tailor the curriculum to pupils’ needs. Having previously been bound by the local authority to implement new central strategies – regardless of how suitable such strategies were for the school – Seaton is now able to be more innovative. Greater budget flexibility has allowed Seaton to run more efficiently, and these savings have been ploughed back into the school. For example, they have introduced discretionary award payments for great teaching, which has been hugely motivating for staff. The academy has also started to rebalance the school year – with shorter summer holidays and a lengthened half-term.

Seaton is just one of many schools using their new freedom to do exciting things. The best scientific evidence proves that if you empower those at the frontline, they will exceed your expectations. A few months ago, academics at the London School of Economics published a landmark assessment of the academies programme.

They found three things. First, that ‘Academy conversion generates… a significant improvement in pupil performance.’ Second, that this improvement is not the result of academies scooping up middle-class pupils from nearby schools: the fact that more middle-class parents want to send their children to their local academy is a consequence of the school’s success, not a cause. And thirdly, beyond raising standards for their own pupils, academies also tend to raise pupil performance in neighbouring schools. Like CTCs and the Challenge schemes before them, academies are showing us all what amazing things can be achieved when heads are put in the driving seat.

But even more impressive than what individual academies are doing by themselves is what they’re achieving by working together. Under our plans, networks of schools are collaborating on a scale that has never been witnessed before. The facts on the ground are plain to see: increased autonomy and greater parental choice drive up standards and help tackle ‘the soft bigotry of low expectations’ – and freedom does not need to be the enemy of cooperation.

Sponsors

Some of these networks are small – often just two schools, with one sponsoring the other. Yet while small, they’re driving real change. Tudor Grange Academy, Solihull (a converter academy) has sponsored Tudor Grange Academy, Worcester. Since becoming the sponsor, the Solihull school has provided intensive support to its Worcester partner. Improvements have been made in discipline, behaviour, attendance and attainment, with Tudor Grange, Worcester being oversubscribed on first choice applications for the first time. The benefits haven’t all been one-way. Tudor Grange, Solihull has been able to increase staffing and improve the pupil-teacher ratio. School leaders have reported feeling a greater sense of responsibility and accountability to the communities that they serve.

Partners

Other networks are slightly larger, with one academy partnering with several other local schools. Altrincham Grammar School for Boys in Trafford became an academy in February 2011 and is now working with three underperforming schools in the area. The school has been working particularly closely with Broomwood Primary, with specialist French and Spanish teachers from the secondary school helping teach primary pupils. This has helped Broomwood set up its own provision for language lessons. Similarly, having achieved a science specialism, Altrincham Grammar shared its expertise by giving its partners access to its labs; assisting partner schools in rewriting the science schemes of work for Years 5 and 6; and supporting teachers in delivering these schemes. Gifted and Talented students from Broomwood and other local schools are also offered the opportunity to attend after-school science sessions at Altrincham Grammar.

Chains

Many academies are also forming chains – formal networks of schools federated together, usually as part of the same Trust. There are 111 chains of converter academies with a total of 337 schools. The Coopers’ Company, a good with outstanding features school, chose to convert in a chain with a local school at the other side of the borough, The Brittons Academy, rated satisfactory. Prior to conversion, the heads developed an action plan of how they would support each other in future. Both schools converted on 1st April 2011. Coopers are working closely with Brittons on combined CPD days and have arranged paired support of weaker departments. They have also set up a management link between the two senior leadership teams, and the head teacher from Coopers has become the School Improvement Partner for Brittons.

All these changes have been possible because we have been resolute in our commitment to spreading autonomy – from the introduction of the Academies Bill within our first few days in office, to the way we’re continually reducing constraints and burdens on schools. We’re doing all this because we believe – and the evidence confirms – that the best way to create a school system capable of adapting and responding to the challenges of the 21st century is by giving great teachers and heads real power.

That principle extends to the way we’re going about securing the next generation of teachers and school leaders. We’re putting our best schools in charge of training and professional development. We’re expanding programmes like Teach First and Future Leaders, so that the most promising are trained by the most inspirational. And we’re working with the National College on programmes like the SLE and NLE, to ensure that the school leaders of the future are mentored by the best leaders of today.

Overall, our vision for the future is of a self-improving network of schools, innovating and engaging, competing and collaborating, teaching and training, for the benefit of all our children.

Digital networks

I want to turn now from networks between schools to an altogether different sort of network: networks of the digital kind.

It’s an understatement to say our world has been transformed by technology. There was a particularly poignant and wonderful illustration of this in a recent New Scientist editorial, written to mark Steve Jobs’ death. “Nothing dates the 1987 movie Wall Street”, the piece argues, “like the $4000 cellphone clutched by financier Gordon Gekko. It was the size of a brick and he could only talk for 30 minutes before having to recharge it.” In the 1980s, the capabilities of today’s smartphones would have been unfathomable to consumers and engineers alike. They’d have thought it impossible that so much powerful technology could be packed into such a tiny case. If you were trying to build an iPhone using equivalent components from the 1980s, asks the author, just how big would that phone be? Running through all the parts – from the antennas to the batteries to the GPS to the gyroscope to the accelerometer to the cameras to the mobile computing capability and more – New Scientist concludes you would need a truck to haul around an iPhone built of 1985 parts. We’ve gone from an 18-wheeler to a pocket in just 26 years.

It’s not just the hardware. Entire sectors employing millions of people didn’t even exist a quarter century ago. And many of those that were around in the ’80s operate today in ways that are unrecognisable to those of the past. Given the extent of the transformation – and the pace at which it’s happening – it is imperative we have a school system capable of adapting to and preparing for the challenges ahead. If we don’t, we will betray a generation.

And yet there is a perception by some that my department isn’t especially concerned about such things. That we care more about Tennyson than technology. That our interest is in Ibsen, not iTunes. That we’re more Kubla Khan than Khan Academy.

This couldn’t be further from the truth. I am absolutely committed to ensuring that our school system not only prepares pupils for this changing world, but also embraces the technological advances which are transforming education. My department is thinking hard about this and we’ll be saying more in the new year. But I’d like to talk briefly today about some of the critical developments that have been shaping our thinking.

One of the greatest changes can be seen in the lives of children and young people, who are at ease with the world of technology and who communicate, socialise and participate online effortlessly. Two-thirds of five- to seven-year-olds use the internet at home, rising to 82 per cent for 8- to 11-year-olds and 90 per cent for 12- to 15-year-olds. Over a third of 12- to 15-year-olds own a smartphone, and typically use the internet for 15.6 hours every week. Children are increasingly embracing technology at a younger age: for example, 23 per cent of five- to seven-year-olds now use social networking sites.

Yet the classrooms of today don’t reflect these changes. Indeed, many of our classrooms would be very recognisable to someone from a century ago. While there has been significant investment in technology in education, it has certainly not transformed the way that education is delivered.

Part of the problem has been that investment has focused on hardware. My fear is that, in the past, too much emphasis has been placed on machines that quickly become obsolete, rather than on training individuals to be technologically as literate and adept as they need to be. What’s more, fixating on expensive, soon-to-be out-of-date kit represents a failure to understand the fundamental changes taking place.

One major change concerns content. Technology is having a huge impact on the way educational material can be delivered. iTunesU now gives everybody access to the world’s best lectures. The Khan Academy provides 2700 high-quality micro tutorials on the web, so that anyone, anywhere can access them for free. Brilliant scientific publications like Science are building their own ecosystems of educational content. And by definition, as we move to a world where we expect every child will have a tablet, the nature and range and type of content that can be delivered will be all the greater.

Educational gaming, for example, is a booming area – and ripe for even further development. Games developed by Marcus Du Sautoy, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford, are helping children engage with complex maths problems that would hitherto have been thought too advanced. And the Department for Education is currently working with the Li Ka Shing Foundation and the highly respected Stanford Research Institute on a pilot programme to use computer programmes to teach maths. We have not developed the programme – we are just helping them run a pilot. Stanford say it is one of the most successful educational projects they have seen.

These exciting advances are the sort of thing that a central government department could never hope to produce and maintain. And nor should it seek to: Whitehall must enable these innovations but not attempt to micromanage them. Such content is being created daily, and the vast majority is free to anyone with an internet connection. Our role is to help bring schools and these developments together.

To be absolutely clear: this isn’t about replacing teachers with YouTube videos – of course it isn’t. But it would be negligent of us not to look at how we can harness these developments for the benefit of all pupils. In Singapore, for example, I was lucky enough to witness how a superb lesson can be delivered through a mixture of online and teacher-led instruction. We can do it here too – and in the coming months we’ll be setting out how.

Another way in which technology is changing education is through its potential to create sharper assessment systems. Computer lab management software is now so sophisticated that an individual teacher can monitor how each student is doing simultaneously and then – without singling out that child in front of others – provide them with the direct amount of support that they need, accelerating the rate at which some children can learn and providing additional help for others. Problems can be picked up earlier. Students can be stretched when they’re ready. It’s the next step towards truly personalised learning – and it will also enable parents to have a better understanding of the level at which their children are operating.

Thirdly, technological advances can have a huge impact on teacher training. Teachers can more easily observe other teachers and learn more about the craft. Professional development content can be delivered in more accessible, engaging, and cost effective ways. Individual teachers can use the latest developments to refine their lessons to precision. As Michael Nielsen points out in his excellent new book, ‘Reinventing Discovery’, new developments allow teachers to get better feedback about how their lessons are being received. So not only does the spread of innovations like the Khan Academy mean there is more great teaching material on the web, but new tools like Google Analytics allow anyone to analyse video for attention, second-by-second, in a way that used to be very expensive and complex. All these are welcome developments.

Of course, in stressing the importance of digital content, I’m not saying we should neglect hardware altogether – far from it. But hardware means more than just the latest desktop – especially when many pupils are increasingly likely to have access to superior technology at home – or even in their pockets – than in their school’s computer lab. That’s why we need to think about how to give more children the chance to engage with truly cutting edge hardware, like 3D printers, or learn the fundamentals of programming with their own single-board computers, like the Raspberry Pi.

The challenge for us is this: how we can harness the many exciting technological leaps that are constantly being made? We will be saying much more early in the new year. Make no mistake: this is a priority for me. I believe we need to take a serious, intelligent approach to educational technology if our children are not to be left behind. As John Chubb and Terry Moe put it in their excellent book on the subject, a genuine engagement with the wondrous world of technological innovation will see children’s learning ‘liberated from the dead hand of the past.’ We owe it to pupils across the country to take this issue seriously.

Below is the text of the speech made by Michael Gove, the then Secretary of State for Education, at the BETT Show on 11 January 2016.

Thank you very much, Dominic, for that kind introduction. I’m delighted to be here at BETT today.

And I have to start by congratulating all the companies in this Hall.

British companies are world-leaders in the field of educational technology, and going from strength to strength – the members of Besa, for example, increased exports by 12% in 2010. Crick Software, which has worked in the USA, Chile and Qatar and which already supplies 90% of UK primary schools, recently secured their biggest single order ever, supplying half of all schools in Moscow with Clicker 5 literacy software, fully translated into Russian.

Promethean, which makes interactive whiteboards and educational software, signed a memorandum of collaboration with the Mexican Ministry of Education last June to work in primary and secondary education throughout Mexico.

These are just a few of the hugely impressive achievements of British companies – and there are many more all around us. I’d also like to mention particularly all those shortlisted for the BETT awards tonight. Good luck to all nominees, and congratulations, in advance, to the winners…

How technology has changed the world, and the workplace
All around us, the world has changed in previously unimaginable and impossible ways. Most of us carry more advanced technology in the smartphone in our pocket than Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin used to reach the Moon.

Every day we work in environments which are completely different to those of twenty-five or a hundred years ago.

Where once clerks scribbled on card indexes and lived by the Dewey Decimal system, now thousands of office workers roam the world from their desktop.

Where once car manufacturing plants housed lines of workers hammering and soldering and drilling, now a technician controls the delicate operations of a whole series of robots.

When I started out as a journalist in the 1980s, it was a case of typewriters and telexes in smoky newsrooms, surrounded by the distant clatter of hot metal.

Now newsrooms – and journalists – are almost unrecognisable, as are the daily tools of the trade. The telex machine became a fax, then a pager, then email. A desktop computer became a laptop computer. My pockets were filled with huge mobile phones, then smaller mobile phones, a Blackberry, and now an e-reader and iPad.

And with each new gadget, each huge leap forward, technology has expanded into new intellectual and commercial fields.

Twenty years ago, medicine was not an information technology. Now, genomes have been decoded and the technologies of biological engineering and synthetic biology are transforming medicine. The boundary between biology and IT is already blurring into whole new fields, like bio-informatics.

Twenty years ago, science journals were full of articles about the ‘AI Winter’ – the fear that post-war hopes for Artificial Intelligence had stalled. Now, detailed computer models show us more than we ever imagined about the geography of our minds. Amazing brain-computer-interfaces allow us to control our physical environment by the power of thought – truly an example of Arthur C. Clarke’s comment that any sufficiently advanced technology can seem like magic.

Twenty years ago, only a tiny number of specialists knew what the internet was and what it might shortly become. Now, billions of people and trillions of cheap sensors are connecting to each other, all over the world – and more come online every minute of every day.

Almost every field of employment now depends on technology. From radio, to television, computers and the internet, each new technological advance has changed our world and changed us too.

But there is one notable exception.

Education has barely changed

The fundamental model of school education is still a teacher talking to a group of pupils. It has barely changed over the centuries, even since Plato established the earliest “akademia” in a shady olive grove in ancient Athens.

A Victorian schoolteacher could enter a 21st century classroom and feel completely at home. Whiteboards may have eliminated chalk dust, chairs may have migrated from rows to groups, but a teacher still stands in front of the class, talking, testing and questioning.

But that model won’t be the same in twenty years’ time. It may well be extinct in ten.

Technology is already bringing about a profound transformation in education, in ways that we can see before our very eyes and in others that we haven’t even dreamt of yet.

Now, as we all know, confident predictions of the technological future have a habit of embarrassing the predictor.

As early as 1899, the director of the U.S. Patent Office, Charles H. Duell, blithely asserted that “everything that can be invented has already been invented.”

In 1943, the chairman of IBM guessed that “there is a world market for maybe five computers”. The editor of the Radio Times said in 1936, “television won’t matter in your lifetime or mine”.

Most impressively of all, Lord Kelvin, President of the Royal Society, scored a hat-trick of embarrassing predictions between 1897-9, declaring, “radio has no future”, “X-rays are clearly a hoax” and “the aeroplane is scientifically impossible”.

A new approach to technology policy

I don’t aspire to join that illustrious company by stating on record that this technology or that gadget is going to change the world. Nothing has a shorter shelf-life than the cutting edge.

But we in Britain should never forget that one of our great heroes, Alan Turing, laid the foundation stones on which all modern computing rests. His pioneering work on theoretical computation in the 1930s laid the way for Turing himself, von Neumann and others to create the computer industry as we know it.

Another generation’s pioneer, Bill Gates, warned that the need for children to understand computer programming is much more acute now than when he was growing up. Yet as the chairman of Google, Eric Schmidt, recently lamented, we in England have allowed our education system to ignore our great heritage and we are paying the price for it.

Our school system has not prepared children for this new world. Millions have left school over the past decade without even the basics they need for a decent job. And the current curriculum cannot prepare British students to work at the very forefront of technological change.

Last year’s superb Livingstone -Hope Review – for which I would like to thank both authors – said that the slump in UK’s video games development sector is partly the result of a lack of suitably-qualified graduates. The review, commissioned by Ed Vaizey who has championed the Computer Science cause in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport, found that the UK had been let down by an ICT curriculum that neglects the rigorous computer science and programming skills which high-tech industries need.

It’s clear that technology is going to bring profound changes to how and what we teach. But it’s equally clear that we have not yet managed to make the most of it.

Governments are notoriously flat-footed when it comes to anticipating and facilitating technical change. Too often, in the past, administrations have been seduced into spending huge sums on hardware which is obsolete before the ink is dry on the contract. Or invested vast amounts of time and money in drawing up new curricula, painstakingly detailing specific skills and techniques which are superseded almost immediately.

I believe that we need to take a step back.

Already, technology is helping us to understand the process of learning. Brain scans and scientific studies are now showing us how we understand the structure of language, how we remember and forget, the benefits of properly designed and delivered testing and the importance of working memory.

As science advances, our understanding of the brain will grow – and as it grows, it will teach us more about the process of education.

What can technology do for learning?

Rather than rushing pell-mell after any particular technology, filling school cupboards with today’s answer to Betamaxes and floppy discs, we need to ask ourselves a fundamental question.

What can technology do for learning?

Three points immediately:

First, technology has the potential to disseminate learning much more widely than ever before. Subjects, classes and concepts that were previously limited to a privileged few are now freely available to any child or adult with an internet connection, all over the world.
Look at 02 learn, a free online library of lesson videos developed and uploaded by teachers. It has already delivered around 25,000 hours of teaching via 1000 lessons from every type of school and college, right across the country: science lessons from The Bishop Wand Church of England Comprehensive School, music lessons from Eton. What about iTunes U, where lectures from the world’s top universities are available at the touch of a button, and where the Independent Schools Council, Teaching Leaders and some of the best Academy Chains are working to put materials and lesson videos online? Or the hugely successful Khan Academy: more than 3.5 million students watch its educational videos every month and Google has donated $2 million for its materials to be translated into 10 languages.

I’ve been lucky enough to see first hand in Singapore how brilliant lessons can be delivered through a mixture of online and teacher-led instruction. And in areas of specialist teacher shortage, specialist teaching could be provided for groups of schools online, giving more children the opportunity to learn subjects that were previously closed to them. The Further Maths Support Programme, for example, is using the internet to give poorer families access to specialist help for the STEP papers, which dominate the best universities’ selection process for Maths degree courses.

As online materials grow and flourish, we all need to think about how we can guide students through the wealth of information and techniques freely available and accessible online.

And, of course, I’m not just talking about opportunities for pupils to learn. The Royal Shakespeare Company is working with the University of Warwick on an online professional development learning platform to transform the teaching of Shakespeare in schools. Launching next month, the “rehearsal room” teaching resources will give teachers all over the world access to the insights and working practices of internationally-renowned actors, artists and directors, as well as specialist academics and teachers. The programme will even offer the chance to study for a Post Graduate qualification in the Teaching of Shakespeare.

The Knowledge is Power Programme, one of the most successful and widely-studied charter school chains in America, is already using ubiquitous, cheap digital technology to share lessons from its most proficient teachers. Even the best teachers can hone their skills by watching their peers in action.

Second, just as technology raises profound questions about how we learn, it also prompts us to think about how we teach.

Games and interactive software can help pupils acquire complicated skills and rigorous knowledge in an engaging and enjoyable way. Adaptive software has the ability to recognise and respond to different abilities, personalising teaching for every pupil. With the expert help of a teacher, students can progress at different rates through lessons calibrated to stretch them just the right amount.

Britain has an incredibly strong games industry, with vast potential to engage with education both in this country and all over the world. We’re already seeing these technologies being used in imaginative ways. Games developed by Marcus Du Sautoy, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford, are introducing children to advanced, complicated maths problems – and are producing great results.

Before Christmas I visited Kingsford School in Newham, where the Department for Education is working with the Li Ka Shing Foundation and the highly respected Stanford Research Institute. Their pilot scheme uses computer programmes to teach maths interactively – for example, showing a race between two people on screen and inviting pupils to plot their time and distance on a graph, then adjust it for variables.

Again, this pilot hasn’t been dictated by central government, and we haven’t developed the programme. But Stanford already says it is one of the most successful educational projects they have seen and I am looking forward to seeing the results.

Third, technology brings unprecedented opportunities for assessment. Teachers can now support pupils’ learning by assessing their progress in a much more sophisticated way, and sharing assessments with pupils and parents.

Each pupil’s strengths and weaknesses can be closely monitored without stigmatising those who are struggling or embarrassing those are streaking ahead. Teachers can adjust lesson plans to target areas where pupils are weakest, and identify gaps in knowledge quickly and reliably.

Sophisticated assessment like this is already being used in schools around the country. Brailes Primary School, for example, a small rural school on the border of Warwickshire and Oxfordshire, uses online tools enabling teachers to use pre-assembled tests, or design tests of their own. One of the teachers, Deborah Smith, has praised the system, saying, “it has enabled me to differentiate my teaching to meet the needs of different groups. The assessments are quick and simple to prepare…leaving more time for planning and teaching.”

In Chichester School for Boys, electronic voting pads provide students with instant feedback during classes. Teachers get real-time feedback on how well their material is being understood – even on a question by question basis.

These are just three ways in which technology is profoundly changing education today – and I am sure that there will be more.

We’re not going to tell you what to do

While things are changing so rapidly, while the technology is unpredictable and the future is unknowable, Government must not wade in from the centre to prescribe to schools exactly what they should be doing and how they should be doing it.

We must work with these developments as they arise: supporting, facilitating and encouraging change, rather than dictating it.

By its very nature, new technology is a disruptive force. It innovates, and invents; it flattens hierarchies, and encourages creativity and fresh thinking.

I could say the same of our whole school reform programme. In fact, I’m fairly sure I have said the same.

Just as we’ve devolved greater autonomy to schools, and put our trust in the professionalism of teachers; just as we’ve lifted the burden of central prescription, and given heads and schools power over their own destiny; just as the internet has made information more democratic, and given every single user the chance to talk to the world; so technology will bring more autonomy to each of us here in this room.

This is a huge opportunity. But it’s also a responsibility.

We want to focus on training teachers

That’s why, rather than focusing on hardware or procurement, we are investing in training individuals. We need to improve the training of teachers so that they have the skills and knowledge they need to make the most of the opportunities ahead.

It is vital that teachers can feel confident using technological tools and resources for their own and their pupils’ benefit, both within and beyond the classroom, and can adapt to new technologies as they emerge. That means ensuring that teachers receive the best possible ITT and CPD in the use of educational technology.

Working with the TDA, we will be looking at initial teacher training courses carefully in the coming year so that teachers get the skills and experience they need to use technology confidently. And we’re working with Nesta who, supported by Nominet Trust and others, are today announcing a £2m programme to fund and research innovative technology projects in schools.

We must also encourage teachers to learn from other schools which are doing this particularly well.

Some ICT teaching in schools is already excellent – as reported in the most recent Ofsted report on ICT education and last year’s Naace report, “The Importance of Technology”.

Sharing that excellence will help all schools to drive up standards. We are already working with the Open University on Vital, a programme encouraging teachers to share ICT expertise between schools. High-performing academy chains will also play a huge role in spreading existing best practice and innovation between schools.

And Teaching Schools across the country are already forming networks to help other schools develop and improve their use of technology. The Department for Education is going to provide dedicated funding to Teaching Schools to support this work.

The current, flawed ICT curriculum

The disruptive, innovative, creative force of new technology also pushes us to think about the curriculum.

And one area exemplifies, more than any other, the perils of the centre seeking to capture in leaden prose the restless spirit of technological innovation.

I refer, of course, to the current ICT curriculum.

The best degrees in computer science are among the most rigorous and respected qualifications in the world. They’re based on one of the most formidable intellectual fields – logic and set theory – and prepare students for immensely rewarding careers and world-changing innovations.

But you’d never know that from the current ICT curriculum.

Schools, teachers and industry leaders have all told us that the current curriculum is too off-putting, too demotivating, too dull.

Submissions to the National Curriculum Review Call for Evidence from organisations including the British Computer Society, Computing at School, eSkills UK, Naace and the Royal Society, all called the current National Curriculum for ICT unsatisfactory.

They’re worried that it doesn’t stretch pupils enough or allow enough opportunities for innovation and experimentation – and they’re telling me the curriculum has to change radically.

Some respondents in a 2009 research study by e-Skills said that ICT GCSE was “so harmful, boring and / or irrelevant it should simply be scrapped”. The Royal Society is so concerned that it has spent two years researching the problem with universities, employers, teachers and professional bodies – so I’m looking forward to its report, due to be published on Friday. And while ICT is so unpopular, there are grave doubts about existing Computer Science 16-18 courses.

In short, just at the time when technology is bursting with potential, teachers, professionals, employers, universities, parents and pupils are all telling us the same thing. ICT in schools is a mess.

Disapplying the Programme of Study

That’s why I am announcing today that the Department for Education is opening a consultation on withdrawing the existing National Curriculum Programme of Study for ICT from September this year.

The traditional approach would have been to keep the Programme of Study in place for the next four years while we assembled a panel of experts, wrote a new ICT curriculum, spent a fortune on new teacher training, and engaged with exam boards for new ICT GCSES that would become obsolete almost immediately.

We will not be doing that.

Technology in schools will no longer be micromanaged by Whitehall. By withdrawing the Programme of Study, we’re giving schools and teachers freedom over what and how to teach; revolutionising ICT as we know it.

Let me stress – ICT will remain compulsory at all key stages, and will still be taught at every stage of the curriculum. The existing Programme of Study will remain on the web for reference.

But no English school will be forced to follow it any more. From this September, all schools will be free to use the amazing resources that already exist on the web.

Universities, businesses and others will have the opportunity to devise new courses and exams. In particular, we want to see universities and businesses create new high quality Computer Science GCSEs, and develop curricula encouraging schools to make use of the brilliant Computer Science content available on the web.

I am pleased that OCR is pioneering work in this field, and that IBM and others are already working on a pilot. Facebook has teamed up with UK-based organisation Apps for Good to offer young people the chance to learn how to design, code and build social applications for use on social networks, via a unique new training course which they aim to make freely available online this year to potential users all over the world.

And other specialist groups have published or are about to publish detailed ICT curricula and programmes of study, including Computing At School (led by the British Computer Society and the Institute of IT), Behind the Screens (led by eSkills UK), Naace and others, with considerable support from industry leaders.

Imagine the dramatic change which could be possible in just a few years, once we remove the roadblock of the existing ICT curriculum. Instead of children bored out of their minds being taught how to use Word and Excel by bored teachers, we could have 11 year-olds able to write simple 2D computer animations using an MIT tool called Scratch. By 16, they could have an understanding of formal logic previously covered only in University courses and be writing their own Apps for smartphones.

This is not an airy promise from an MP – this is the prediction of people like Ian Livingstone who have built world-class companies from computer science.

And we’re encouraging rigorous Computer Science courses
The new Computer Science courses will reflect what you all know: that Computer Science is a rigorous, fascinating and intellectually challenging subject.

After all, the founder of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, is one of the most innovative and successful proponents of Computer Science today. But his computing skills are just as rigorous as the rest of his talents – which include Maths, Science, French, Hebrew, Latin and Ancient Greek.

Computer Science requires a thorough grounding in logic and set theory, and is merging with other scientific fields into new hybrid research subjects like computational biology.

So I am also announcing today that, if new Computer Science GCSEs are developed that meet high standards of intellectual depth and practical value, we will certainly consider including Computer Science as an option in the English Baccalaureate.

Although individual technologies change day by day, they are underpinned by foundational concepts and principles that have endured for decades. Long after today’s pupils leave school and enter the workplace – long after the technologies they used at school are obsolete – the principles learnt in Computer Science will still hold true.

An open-source curriculum

Advances in technology should also make us think about the broader school curriculum in a new way.

In an open-source world, why should we accept that a curriculum is a single, static document? A statement of priorities frozen in time; a blunt instrument landing with a thunk on teachers’ desks and updated only centrally and only infrequently?

In ICT, for example, schools are already leading the way when it comes to using educational technology in new and exciting ways – and they’re doing it in spite of the existing ICT curriculum, not because of it.

The essential requirements of the National Curriculum need to be specified in law, but perhaps we could use technology creatively to help us develop that content. And beyond the new, slimmed down National Curriculum, we need to consider how we can take a wiki, collaborative approach to developing new curriculum materials; using technological platforms to their full advantage in creating something far more sophisticated than anything previously available.

This means freedom and autonomy

Disapplying the ICT programme of study is about freedom. It will mean that, for the first time, teachers will be allowed to cover truly innovative, specialist and challenging topics.

And whether they choose a premade curriculum, or whether they design their own programme of study specifically for their school, they will have the freedom and flexibility to decide what is best for their pupils.

Teachers will now be allowed to focus more sharply on the subjects they think matter – for example, teaching exactly how computers work, studying the basics of programming and coding and encouraging pupils to have a go themselves.

Initiatives like the Raspberry Pi scheme will give children the opportunity to learn the fundamentals of programming with their own credit card sized, single-board computers. With minimal memory and no disk drives, the Raspberry Pi computer can operate basic programming languages, handle tasks like spread sheets, word-processing and games, and connect to wifi via a dongle – all for between £16 and £22. This is a great example of the cutting edge of education technology happening right here in the UK. It could bring the same excitement as the BBC Micro did in the 1980s, and I know that it’s being carefully watched by education and technology experts all over the world.

As well as choosing what to study, schools can also choose how.

Technology can be integrated and embedded across the whole curriculum.

In geography lessons, for example, pupils could access the specialised software and tools used by professional geographers, allowing them to tackle more challenging and interesting work. Molecular modelling software could bring huge advantages for science students.

The Abbey School in Reading has already been piloting 3D technologies for teaching Biology, showing 3D images of the heart pumping blood through valves, and manipulating, rotating and tilting the heart in real time. As Abbey School Biology teacher Ros Johnson said, the 3D technology “has made me realise what they weren’t understanding…what I can’t believe is how much difference it has made to the girls’ understanding”.

This isn’t a finished strategy – but it shows our ambition
The use of technology in schools is a subject that will keep growing and changing, just as technology keeps growing and changing.

But we can be confident about one thing. Demand for high-level skills will only grow in the years ahead. In work, academia and their personal lives, young people will depend upon their technological literacy and knowledge.

And this doesn’t just affect our country. Every nation in the world will be changed by the growth of technology and we in Britain must ensure that we can make the most of our incredible assets to become world-leaders in educational technology.

Today has seen the conclusion of the Education World Forum here in London. I cannot emphasise enough how important it is for me, personally, that we learn from the highest performing education systems – some of whom I am delighted to see represented here – and I am very grateful to everyone who has taken the time and trouble to come to London for this event.

I’m not here today to announce our final, inflexible, immutable technology strategy. There’s no blueprint to follow – and we don’t know what our destination will look like.

I’m setting out our direction of travel, and taking the first few steps. There is lots more to come, and we will have more to say over the course of the year.

I’d also like to welcome the online discussion launched today at schoolstech.org.uk and using the twitter hashtag #schoolstech. We need a serious, intelligent conversation about how technology will transform education – and I look forward to finding out what everyone has to say.

We want a modern education system which exploits the best that technology can offer to schools, teachers and pupils. Where schools use technology in imaginative and effective ways to build the knowledge, understanding and skills that young people need for the future. And where we can adapt to and welcome every new technological advance that comes along to change everything, all over again, in ways we never expected.

Events like the BETT show are crucial in showcasing the best and brightest of the technology industry, showing what can be done – and what is already being achieved. We will depend upon your insight and ideas, your expertise and experience, as you take these technologies into your schools and try them with your students.

Thank you again to BETT for inviting me, and I wish you all good exploring today.