Tag: 2010

  • Sarah Teather – 2010 Speech to the Family and Parenting Institute’s Conference

    Sarah Teather – 2010 Speech to the Family and Parenting Institute’s Conference

    The speech made by Sarah Teather, the then Children’s Minister, on 13 July 2010.

    Thanks Mark for that introduction and thanks to the FPI for inviting me along this morning.

    And thanks Mark for reminding us that families come in all shapes and sizes and Government absolutely has to take account of that.

    And it’s wonderful to see this event so full, with so many people from across the sector.

    I’d also like to say, that it was a pleasure to meet Dr Katherine [Rake] recently. While in opposition, I had great admiration for her in her time at the Fawcett Society, and she has brought the same energy to families.

    And I’d also like to pay tribute to the Family and Parenting Institute. For ten years now, by spreading effective practice and through managing the Parenting Fund, you’ve supported hundreds of voluntary sector organisations and tens of thousands of practitioners. And you’ve enabled them to deliver help that’s made a real difference to parents and families across the country.

    And of course, to all those other organisations here today – who provide vital support to our parents, grandparents, and children – to our babies, toddlers and teenagers – and to the most vulnerable in our society.

    I am truly honoured to be able to work alongside all of you. And I hope that in the months and years ahead, we can make a positive difference for some of the great challenges this country faces.

    And let me assure you, from the outset, that the renaming of our Department does not represent a shift in priority away from working with you and away from our children or families – in fact, in many ways, family policy has taken on greater priority in Government because of the Prime Minister’s Task Force, which I’ll speak more about later.

    And it’s so important because we all know the scale of the challenge we face. Despite the best intentions of the previous Government, and despite all the hard work that you, and frontline staff up and down the country do every day, our society is still deeply unfair.

    A fairer society

    In this country, over two million children live in poor housing, in crowded rooms and squalid conditions.

    Out of every five children, one is living in poverty.

    Just 21 per cent of children in care achieve 5 or more A to C grades at GCSE – compared to an average of 70 per cent.

    And, young people from poorer backgrounds are less than twice as likely to go to university than those from richer backgrounds.

    I see it for myself in my own constituency, just a few tube stops away in North London, where the consequences of that inequality, with wealthy and poor families living in the same area.

    I’ve seen how some families have struggled to cope with the recession, and the rising anxieties about young people and their future.

    And it is absolutely unacceptable that a child from Harlesden, in my constituency, is expected to die more than ten years before one born in nearby Kensington.

    Now these are shocking facts and statistics. And we have a moral duty to do our utmost to change this situation, to narrow the gaps between rich and poor and to work as hard as we can to make our society fairer.

    But sadly, today we also have another moral duty, which has to be a priority for this Government.

    We have a responsibility to all our families to deal with the deficit now, and not let our children shoulder the burden for past mistakes. So we need to reduce the deficit and return this country to a sound financial position.

    But it makes no sense – economically, socially or morally – to abandon poorer children along the way. To abandon families in need. To abandon hope for a better future.

    So as a government, we are committed to working with you to bring about sustained improvement and to make this country fairer.

    That’s why we’ll be refocusing Sure Start, ring-fencing its budget for this year and introducing extra health visitors, dedicated to helping the most disadvantaged families.

    That’s why we are introducing the Pupil Premium – money targeted specifically to disadvantaged school pupils, to offer them that little bit of extra help for them to fulfil their academic potential.

    And that’s why we’ll be extending free child care for three- and four-year-olds to 15 hours a week and we’ll fund early learning for more than 20,000 of the most disadvantaged two-year-olds.

    So we remain committed to improving the lot of those in need in our society and dedicated to a vision of a country that is fair, free from debt and family friendly.

    Removing barriers for families

    And we are doing this because we understand just how important families are. They are the bedrock of our society.

    Evidence shows that the family setting has the biggest impact on children and their outcomes.

    And we believe that families need the freedom to live their lives as they see fit. They don’t need Government to burden them with regulation after regulation, and restriction after restriction.

    Government’s role, we believe, is to help foster the right environment in which families can thrive – to empower them and help reduce the pressures and stresses they may face.

    And we know that families consistently say, that friends and neighbours are the essential support. We know that informal support, and informal networks are just as vital – and Mark, you mentioned intergenerational support, which is absolutely vital too.

    And that’s why the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister have set up a Childhood and Families Task Force. To tackle the barriers that prevent a happy childhood and a successful family life.

    The Task Force will be meeting for the first time, this week, to agree its programme of work so I don’t want to pre-empt that. But to give you a flavour, the Deputy Prime Minister identified the sort of issues it could look at when he announced the Task Force a few weeks ago.

    For example, parents often say that they don’t have enough time to spend together as a family. Many feel they still don’t have their preferred working arrangements, and some are concerned that asking to work flexibly may have an adverse impact on their career.

    We’re already committed to looking at a system of shared parental leave and extending the right to flexible working to all.

    We have work to do in terms of relationship support – helping families going through breakdown and supporting them in times of need. And also to support families with a disabled child. I know that the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister have a strong commitment to look hard into these challenges.

    So from the very top of Government, we are committed to tackling those barriers and restoring the culture of community and responsibility that is so crucial to the safety and success of our children and families.

    Working with you

    But of course, we know that Government alone cannot solve all of society’s ills.

    And the Report Card published today, shows that clearly.

    It shows the importance of the neighbourhood and of the experience families have in their area, and is an example of just how important voluntary sector organisations are in boosting family relationships in the community.

    Because we cannot tell families how to lead their lives.

    And in this time of financial strain, we need to find creative methods to achieve our ambitions.

    So, we need to work even closer with our partners. We need to learn from your experience, your ideas and your expertise.

    We need to make it easier for those local experts and voluntary organisations which already do such great work, to play a bigger role, to work together with statutory agencies and make even more of a difference to families around the country.

    Because you here represent the very best of our vision for a Big Society – a society in which more people play their part and take responsibility for each other.

    So we recognise the need to work with you and to really, honestly, listen to your experience and your ideas.

    Conclusion

    So I very much look forward to working with all of you in the months and years ahead, and I particularly look forward to reading the report FPI will produce as a result of this conference, and which they have promised to forward to me soon.

    I hope that together, we can see some real change for the better and create a fairer, stronger, safer society. Where those gaps we all talk about are narrowing, not widening. And where our families can prosper, even in difficult times.

    So in closing, let me say thank you for having me here today. Thank you once again for all the good work that you do for children and families in this country. And thank you for listening.

  • Michael Gove – 2010 Speech to the Local Government Association

    Michael Gove – 2010 Speech to the Local Government Association

    The speech made by Michael Gove, the then Secretary of State for Education, in Bournemouth on 25 November 2010.

    Thank you Councillor David for that kind introduction.

    And thank you – not just for staying right until the very end of your conference for which I do owe you a special debt of gratitude, but also for the invaluable public service that you provide to your communities and the contribution that you make, in turn, to our country.

    So many of the services on which our citizens rely depend on the vision, leadership and sheer hard work of people in local government. And yet far too often local councillors and officials aren’t recognised, thanked and applauded for their commitment to public service.

    No one becomes a councillor for the money, and no one works in local government for the glamour but without you our country would be less safe, less just and less civilised. So thank you all.

    Let me also thank the LGA for the leadership that it provides on your behalf.

    Under the chairmanship of Dame Margaret Eaton and in particular through the Children and Young People’s Board led by Baroness Ritchie, the LGA has consistently campaigned for Whitehall to provide more support to councils to improve children’s services, and also to relinquish more control to councils over education issues.

    The latest example is the excellent report, ‘Local freedom or central control’, which the LGA published on Tuesday. The examples of good practice it cites, and the evidence of great leadership you provide underline the crucial role you have to play in helping us all make opportunity more equal in our society.

    A commitment to extending opportunity, and greater social justice, is at the heart of what our new Coalition Government wants to achieve.

    And let me say that the confidence I have that our coalition can work successfully in the national interest stems from the proven success of the coalitions we have delivering for people in local Government. Whether in Birmingham or Leeds, coalitions – built on the principle of honest partnership – can bring real benefits. Policies can be explored and discussed more rigorously and a consensual style in town halls can generate a fruitful partnership beyond and across communities.

    And because this coalition Government has partnership at its heart I want to ensure the partnership between central and local Government is stronger than ever. We need to listen, and learn, from your experience. We need to consult with you as the people who deliver and champion you as the generators of success. That is why my department will set up new, robust, arrangements to allow local authority leaders – elected members and officials – a central role in helping to shape the future.

    And in that spirit of honest partnership, can I apologise to you as I apologised to the House of Commons yesterday for the confusion that arose following my statement about Building Schools for the Future on Monday?

    One of the reasons I wanted to change the way in which capital was allocated is because I believe the old BSF way shut out local communities, was insufficiently respectful of the expertise you have, and was wasteful of the limited resources you have at your disposal. It required you to invest in procurement costs and consultancy rather than bricks and mortar, teachers and classroom assistants. And I was aware even before we entered Government of the desire to have a system of capital allocation which placed much more power in local hands. That is what I have asked my review team to deliver.

    But in setting the direction of a new policy I believe is right and necessary I failed, and it was my failure, to provide totally accurate information on a school-by-school basis about which schools would be affected. I’m the person responsible, and accountable, for that and I do apologise. I wish in particular to apologise to people in those local authorities such as Sandwell, who are doing such a great job, where schools were wrongly informed their rebuilding would proceed under BSF when, sadly, it will not. I want to apologise to them unreservedly.

    But I also want to stress that the end of this method of allocating capital does not mean the end of new school building. My department will work with you to identify how we can allocate capital more quickly and fairly in future, I have asked an experienced local Government chief executive, Barry Quirk, to help us and our thinking will be shaped by your needs. Many schools, including in areas where BSF has been halted, will receive capital in due course for refurbishment and rebuilding. Making sure that money was in your hands more effectively has always been my aim and that is the principle which will guide our policy-making.

    Children’s services Whatever mistakes I may have made, or may make, one thing I’m certain of is that I have a great team of ministers who are all, individually and collectively, doing a great job.

    Nick Gibb in the Commons and Jonathan Hill in the Lords lead for us on schools.

    And my deputy in the Department – with explicit responsibility for Children and Families – is Sarah Teather. Many of you may know Sarah, as a former councillor, great campaigner and thoughtful, sensitive shaper of policy.

    I count myself incredibly fortunate to have her dealing with some of the most sensitive, delicate and important issues with which our department deals.

    And I am really glad that alongside her we have Tim Loughton, another MP who has benefited from time in local government, who has devoted his career in the House of Commons to children’s issues.

    Both of them appreciate that there is no more important or sensitive role in local government than exercising responsibility for children’s services.

    Sarah is deeply committed to improving our support for families and ensuring that children get off to the best start in life.

    That is why she announced on Tuesday that Clare Tickell, the Chief Executive of Action for Children, will lead a review of the Early Years Foundation Stage that will aim to free up early years professionals in nurseries, children’s centres and playgroups to work with young children.

    She has also announced that, this year, we will extend free childcare for three- and four year-olds to 15 hours a week year and announced that we will fund early learning and childcare for more than 20,000 of the most disadvantaged two-year-olds.

    And we are determined to do more to target services at the poorest families, including by expanding the number of health visitors.

    Tim is leading our work to improve transparency across children’s services and place greater trust in frontline professionals.

    We want to learn the lessons of what has gone wrong in the past so we can keep children safer in the future.

    That is why Tim has announced that Professor Eileen Munro will lead an independent review of children’s social work and frontline child protection practice. It will build on the work undertaken by the Social Work Task Force under the leadership of Moira Gibb and will look specifically at how we can strengthen frontline practice by removing the barriers and bureaucracy which prevent social workers spending valuable time with vulnerable children.

    And while the safety of vulnerable children is, of course, paramount, we must take a measured approach that allows children to be protected but does not consider every person who comes into contact with them as a risk.

    That is why we will end ContactPoint as soon as is practicable and have also halted registration for the existing Vetting and Barring Scheme. New solutions that better support practitioners and the public will be developed in their place.

    In all of these areas, local authorities are playing the leading implementation role. Many are doing an excellent job, but it is also the case that some areas have been found wanting. While there are of course issues with the inspection framework that must be addressed, this is naturally concerning.

    But I am clear that the knowledge and expertise that we need to drive further improvement can only be found in the sector itself and our job is to ensure that it can be properly harnessed, including by continuing to bear down on bureaucracy and by helping you to increase your capacity for improvement through organisations like C4EO and the National College.

    Local vision

    And just as I believe strong local government leaders are the best people to drive improvement in local government children’s services departments so I believe great leaders and teachers in our schools are the best people to lead the improvement drive we need in our education system. In the LGA report I mentioned earlier, Dame Margaret writes:

    Councils don’t run schools and haven’t done for many years. What local government does is make sure there are enough school places for all the children who need them. It makes sure the admissions process operates fairly so that every child gets a chance to go to a good local school, and oversees the distribution of funding in a cost-effective way. Councils provide support for all children with special education needs and are also the champions of children in care.

    And she is right.

    Local councils must be champions for parents and children in the local area. After all, that is the right role for any democratically elected council and it is the one that they are best placed to play.

    First, by ‘holding the ring’ on admissions and exclusions.

    We believe that promoting greater parental choice helps to improve standards for all children and this means there needs to be sufficient school places.

    As you know only too well, making sure there are enough school places for every child this year, next year and in the years ahead will be a challenge.

    You have the primary role in ensuring that schools adhere to the admissions code and we want to do all that we can to ensure that you work closely with the Office of the Schools Adjudicator to ensure that fair admissions arrangements are in place in every area.

    You are also responsible for ensuring that schools take their fair share of the hardest to place pupils and for commissioning suitable alternative provision.

    Second, by being consistent local champions for social justice.

    Our first priority must be raising the attainment of the poorest.

    That is why I am proud that at the heart of our Coalition’s programme for Government is a commitment to spending more on the education of the poorest through our pupil premium.

    Local government has the critical role in tackling disadvantage at root by advocating on behalf of children in care, supporting schools in strategies to make sure every child arrives to start the school day ready to learn, bringing together local partners and agencies to provide extra support and ensuring that the needs of pupils with special educational needs and their parents are met.

    Third, by taking ownership of school improvement across your local areas.

    The London Challenge and the Black Country Challenge drove improvement in education but some I know felt they were perhaps too prescriptively designed by the centre.

    When the National Challenge was launched, it maintained the impetus for improvement but again the feeling was that the centre was driving too much, leaving local communities out of the picture.

    I understand those concerns, although I also firmly believe that floor targets have helped to focus attention on driving improvement in the lowest achieving schools.

    I now want to see more ambitious expectations set for achievement in our education system. And those are not expectations that I will set centrally.

    You are the first in line to tackle failure where it exists. And we in the centre have a backstop power that means we will step in and take control of the worst-performing schools where there is no sign of improvement.

    But I want you to have a vision for improvement across all schools in your area, including those schools whose results seem perfectly acceptable on the surface but which are coasting.

    I would like to see Northamptonshire Challenges, or County Durham Challenges in which local communities agree the level and pace of improvement they want to see in the academic achievement of young people in their area.

    My job is to provide you with the right incentives. I am particularly attracted to the kind of approach taken by President Obama in America through the Race to the Top programme, under which states come forward with proposals for improvement that might include bringing in outside providers, stronger collaboration between schools or imaginative proposals on CPD for teachers, and rewards are offered to the best ideas.

    And we will look closely at how we can recreate this kind of competition in our country.

    Dialogue

    I know that the vision that I have set out raises questions. Questions about the powers that you need to fulfil your responsibilities. About funding. About the speed of travel, the inspection framework and how health services and other partners will support you.

    I can’t answer all of these questions today. And nor is it right that I try to. None of them have easy answers and many of them have potentially serious implications for us, for you and for people around the country.

    I would rather we work through all the issues and answer them together. And that is why I intend to ask the LGA, the ADCS and SOLACE to take part in a new ministerial advisory group on the role of local authorities.

    In the coming months and, importantly, with input from elected members and officers, it will consider what further action should be taken to ensure that local government has the powers and support it needs to fulfil its strong, strategic role. And I hope you will take the chance to shape our thinking.

    Conclusion

    I won’t deny that we have an ambitious agenda, nor that we are trying to achieve it in the most difficult and testing of circumstances. But as you know, there’s no point being in politics, fighting elections and seeking office unless you’re ambitious to make a difference.

    And I do believe that we have an opportunity to change our country, irreversibly, for the better. There is no task more urgent for government than securing the future of our country, whether that’s by restarting the economy or getting education right. And there is no doubt that the best way for us to do achieve both if through all parts of government, central and local working together, working together, in partnership.

  • Sarah Teather – 2010 Speech at the Every Disabled Child Matters Campaign

    Sarah Teather – 2010 Speech at the Every Disabled Child Matters Campaign

    The speech made by Sarah Teather, the then Children’s Minister, on 25 November 2010.

    It’s a huge honour and a privilege to be able to speak to you today.

    It’s great to see so many Parliamentary colleagues, voluntary sector partners and disabled children and their families here supporting your campaign.

    And I’m glad that I was able to hear others speak before making my response. So often, even in opposition, you’re sometimes only able to stay for a short time at these kinds of events. This is exacerbated even further when you become a minister, but it’s really important to listen to the views of parents and young people.

    What Gail said just a moment ago about the challenges facing families with disabled children encapsulates the experience of many families that I meet.

    As a constituency MP, I have met many families with disabled children. For some of these families, services are working well and meeting their needs. But for others, it can be a real battle to get the support that they need.

    And in my own constituency I have supported a number of campaigns locally on behalf of disabled children and their families.

    I’ve got two key messages for you this afternoon.

    The first is this: disabled children are right at the heart of what this Government is doing. This is shown by the Childhood and Family Task Force which has recently been announced.

    Both the Deputy Prime Minister and the Prime Minister will be taking part in that Task Force, so you can see that there is buy-in at the very highest levels of this Government to support disabled children and their families. And I’m also pleased that I will be attending this Task Force to make sure that the voices of disabled children and their families are heard.

    The Task Force will look at the challenges that face disabled children and their families. Challenges like poverty and relationship breakdown.

    And I’m glad that Gail also talked about the importance of participation.

    That’s because I’m pleased to announce to you today that I will be launching a Green Paper in the autumn that will look at a wide range of special educational needs and disability issues.

    Over the summer I want to work with the voluntary sector, experts on special educational needs and disability, and parents, to make sure that we get the questions to address right.

    Participation will be central to the success of this Green Paper.

    We’ll be looking at things like parental choice. This will mean looking at ending the bias towards mainstreaming, but that does not mean limiting mainstream provision for children with SEN and disabilities. It’s about recognizing that each child is different and individual.

    We will also need to look at educational attainment – how to support children and young people with a broad range of needs to raise their levels of achievement.

    There is also the area of transition for young people, where there has been too little work. We need to consider how to support better opportunities for young people in this stage of their life.

    Finally, we also need to look at assessment of disabled children and address the bureaucratic mess that families face to get their child assessed.

    But I’d also like to respond to Lord Rix by reassuring you that we won’t be dismantling everything in this area.

    So we will be moving forward with the Short Breaks duty that you mentioned. And I know that the Short Breaks duty is very much due to the hard work that you have been involved with over the last few years.

    Aiming High for Disabled Children is making a huge difference to disabled children and their families.

    As Lord Rix mentioned, we are also pleased to be investing more in Short Breaks from next year.

    I want to leave you with one final message.

    You will all be aware that these are difficult economic times – but I want to assure you that the needs of disabled children will be at the heart of this Government. We are committed to improving choice and experience of families with disabled children.

    I know that you will lobby hard and hold us in Government to account for improving the support to disabled children and their families. This is a crucial way in which many of the improvements that have been achieved so far have been realised.

    I hope, trust and expect that this will be the start of our conversations as you play a key role in helping to shape the Green Paper over the coming months.

  • Nick Gibb – 2010 Speech to Reform

    Nick Gibb – 2010 Speech to Reform

    The speech made by Nick Gibb, the then Education Minister, on 25 November 2010.

    Thank you Andrew for your introduction and for giving me the opportunity to speak today. I greatly admire the work you and your colleagues do and, in the difficult economic times that this government has inherited, Reform is, I believe, very well placed to have a real and lasting influence.

    Over the last decade Reform has developed a deep understanding of the problems facing Britain’s public services and has brought together people of real experience from across the world to develop a practical agenda for their change.

    While you have recognised that investment can be part of the solution, you have argued that reform of the way money is spent can be just as or, sometimes even more, significant. This insight – always important – will be crucial in the years ahead.

    And you have taken a serious and independent approach. Reform’s publications are based on firm research, and you’ve worked with reform-minded politicians from across the political spectrum.

    In education you have, I believe rightly, argued for the extension of choice as a driver of improved standards but have also recognised the role government has to play to ensure greater concentration on academic rigour and the passing on of core knowledge.

    So as I start work as the minister responsible for driving through significant changes to help raise standards in schools, I know that Reform will be a friend but, like the best friends, will never be afraid to tell us when you think we have got things wrong or could do better.

    The government’s aims

    Like everything in the agreement that unites this coalition government, our education policies are guided by the three principles of freedom, responsibility and fairness. We’re going to give schools greater freedom and parents more opportunity to choose good schools.

    We’re going to place greater trust in professionals to give teachers more freedom to decide how to teach.

    And we’re going to reduce bureaucracy so that schools can get on with their core business. In just one year, under the last government, the department produced over 6,000 pages of guidance for schools – more than twice the length of the complete works of Shakespeare but much less illuminating, and certainly less readable. We want to put an end to the reams of paperwork and bureaucratic burdens piled on to teachers and schools: not just the jargon-heavy instructions telling people how to do their jobs but the posters and DVDs that gather dust in supply cupboards.

    Outstanding schools will be freed from inspection to refocus Ofsted’s resources on those schools that are coasting or struggling and which are failing to deliver the best quality education to their students.

    We agree with Reform that extending choice will drive up quality.

    Academies, introduced by the last government, have been very successful in raising standards and so we want to see many more. The Academies Bill, now going through the House of Lords, will allow more schools to benefit from the freedoms of academy status – including, for the first time, primary schools and special schools.

    Academies are free from local authority control, can deploy resources as they deem best, and have the ability to set their own pay and conditions for staff. They have greater freedom over the curriculum and the length of terms and school days. Yet they operate within a broad framework of accountability which is designed to ensure that standards remain high, and consistent.

    In just one week, 1,100 schools expressed an interest in becoming an Academy, and those schools which have been rated outstanding by Ofsted will have their applications fast tracked so that some can be open this September.

    We are also making it much easier for parents, teachers and education providers to set up new schools, so that there is real choice in every area.

    The second coalition principle I mentioned is responsibility, and everyone must take their share in the education system.

    Government has a responsibility to ensure high standards; schools have a responsibility to promote an ethos of excellence and aspiration with opportunities for extra-curricula activities and sport. But it is the responsibility of pupils and their parents to ensure that their behaviour at school is of a standard that delivers a safe and happy environment in which children can concentrate and learn.

    We will support that by giving teachers and head teachers the powers they need to deal effectively with poor behaviour. And we are working to ensure that teachers are protected from the professional and social humiliation of false accusations.

    But the coalition principle I want to concentrate on this morning is fairness. Britain’s school system today is, frankly, unfair. Too often, opportunity is denied in a lottery of education provision where geography or parental income determines outcomes rather than academic ability.

    Scale of the problem

    The figures are familiar but nonetheless shocking for all their repetition:

    • The chances of a child who is eligible for free school meals getting 5 good GCSEs including English and maths are less than one third of those for children from better-off families.
    • 42% of pupils eligible for free school meals did not achieve a single GCSE above a Grade D in 2008.
    • In the last year for which we have data more pupils from Eton went to Oxford or Cambridge than from the entire cohort of the 80,000 students eligible for free school meals.

    This is simply unacceptable.

    I do not believe that less able children or those from disadvantaged backgrounds are not capable of having an academic education, or indeed that their parents necessarily hold lower ambitions for their children. I absolutely agree with Alan Milburn in his speech to the National Education Trust in March when he said:

    It is sometimes argued that parents in the most disadvantaged areas are less aspirational for their children than those in better off areas. The figures on school appeals repudiate such assumptions, with a large number of parents in disadvantaged parts of the country using the appeals system to try to get their children out of poorly performing schools and into better ones.

    It is a natural instinct for parents to want the best for their children, and better opportunities than they had themselves. Britain’s educational problems are not primarily the result of a lack of private aspiration, rather the state’s failure to provide enough good schools.

    It is socially unfair, and economically damaging.

    As Reform has highlighted, England’s performance in international educational league tables is now ‘amongst the worst of large developed economies’.

    The Progress in International Reading Literacy Study of 10 year olds marks England’s fall from 3rd out of 35 countries in 2001, to 15th out of 40 countries in 2006. And a PISA study shows that only 2 countries out of 57 have a wider gap in attainment between the lowest and highest achievers compared to England.

    I don’t cite these figures in order to attack the last government or to criticise the fantastic work that is done in our schools by teachers and pupils alike. Rather, this issue highlights a fundamental ideological debate about education which runs much deeper than the decisions of ministers in the last few years.

    Indeed, I pay tribute to the work done by Andrew Adonis and Jim Knight, and to previous Conservative Secretaries of State such as Ken Baker and John Patten, who tried to tackle some of the underlying causes of the problems we face.

    On one side of the ideological debate are those who believe that children should learn when they are ready, through child-initiated activities and self-discovery – what Plowden called ‘Finding Out’. It is an ideology that puts the emphasis on the processes of learning rather than on the content of knowledge that needs to be learnt.

    The American education academic, E.D. Hirsch, traces this ideology back to the 1920s, to the Teachers College Columbia in New York and the influence of the educationalists, John Dewey and William Heard Kilpatrick.

    Added to that ideology is the notion that there is so much knowledge in the world that it is impossible to teach it all – and very difficult to discern what should be selected to be taught in schools. So, instead, children should be taught how to learn.

    The importance of knowledge

    I believe very strongly that education is about the transfer of knowledge from one generation to the next.

    Knowledge is the basic building block for a successful life. Without understanding the fundamental concepts of maths or science it is impossible properly to comprehend huge areas of modern life. With little or no knowledge of our nation’s history, understanding the present is that much harder.

    Getting to grips with the basics – of elements, of metals, of halogens, of acids; of what happens when hydrogen and oxygen come together; of photosynthesis; of cells – is difficult, but once learned you have the ability at least to comprehend some of the great advances in genetics, physics and other scientific fields that are revolutionising our lives.

    Once these concepts are grasped it opens up and develops the mind and takes you one tiny step further to understanding the complex world in which we live. Each new concept facilitates deeper understanding, and the ability to think more creatively and more independently about the way the world works, and about society.

    The facts, dates and narrative of our history in fact join us all together. The rich language of Shakespeare should be the common property of us all. The great figures of literature that still populate the conversations of all those who regard themselves as well-educated should be known to all.

    Yet to more and more people Miss Havisham is a stranger and even the most basic history and geography a mystery.

    These concepts must be taught. And they must be taught to everyone. Sadly, that is not always the case.

    Professor Derek Matthews’s practice of quizzing his first year history undergraduates over a three year period shows depressing evidence of the state of teaching knowledge in history.

    Almost twice as many students thought Nelson rather than Wellington was in charge at the Battle of Waterloo and nearly 90 per cent couldn’t name a single British Prime Minister of the 19th Century. And these were students at a university whose entry requirement is an A and two Bs at A level.

    Again, I do not intend to criticise Professor Matthews’s students or, indeed, their teachers. These were bright young people who had achieved good exam results. What is to be criticised is an education system which has relegated the importance of knowledge in favour of ill-defined learning skills.

    So I want to spend the remaining few minutes setting out the approach that the Coalition Government plans to take to put knowledge and subjects at the centre of the curriculum.

    Professor David Conway in his fascinating paper, ‘Liberal Education and the national curriculum’ quotes Matthew Arnold’s view of the purpose of education as introducing children to ‘the best that has been thought and said.’

    That must be the case for all children, not the privileged few, in an education system with fairness at its core.

    Children who come from knowledge and education rich backgrounds start school with an in-built advantage over those who do not. If the school then fails to make up the knowledge deficit, those divisions widen still further.

    Leon Feinstein’s research has shown that low-ability children from wealthy backgrounds often overtake and outperform more able children from poorer backgrounds by age 5, with the differences between children’s cognitive development related to parental social status emerging as early as 22 months.

    E.D. Hirsch, writes brilliantly about the importance of knowledge gained early on. He says, ‘Just as it takes money to make money, it takes knowledge to make knowledge.’

    He goes onto say:

    Those children who possess the intellectual capital when they first arrive at school have the mental scaffolding and Velcro to gain still more knowledge. But those children who arrive at school lacking the relevant experience and vocabulary – they see not neither do they understand.

    Which is why he believes, as I do, that: ‘It is the duty of schools to provide each child with the knowledge and skills requisite for academic progress – regardless of home background.’

    So we will introduce a Pupil Premium, which will direct resources to children from disadvantaged backgrounds, who need it most. Headteachers will then have the freedom to decide how best to use that money – whether to reduce class sizes, provide extra tuition, or recruit the best teachers.

    But we need to sharpen our focus on the core business of teaching at every level, starting with the basics. In particular, reading.

    25% of adults have literacy problems. But even after the literacy strategy in primary schools introduced in the late 1990s, we still have nearly one in five 11-year-olds leaving primary school still struggling with reading. Again, the ideologically-driven, child-centred approach to education has led to the belief that the mere exposure to books and text, and the repetition of high frequency words, will lead to a child learning to read – as if by osmosis.

    That Look and Say, or whole language approach to reading ignores the importance of teaching children the 44 sounds of the alphabetic code, and how to blend those sounds into words.

    Although phonics does play a part in the way reading is taught, as Ofsted has reported in their last annual report: ‘… weaknesses in the teaching of literacy … remain… Inspectors continue to report a lack of focus on basic literacy for low attainers…’.

    So we are determined to focus on ensuring that reading is taught effectively in primary schools and we will say more about this in the coming months.
    And it is because of that necessary focus on the basics, and our belief in giving teachers more flexibility, that we have decided not to proceed with the new primary curriculum as recommended by Sir Jim Rose.

    Instead, we want to restore the national curriculum to its intended purpose – a core national entitlement organised around subject disciplines.

    So we will slim down the national curriculum to ensure that pupils have the knowledge they need at each stage of their education, and restore parity between our curriculum and qualifications, and the best world has to offer: whether that is Massachusetts, Singapore, Finland, Hong Kong, or Alberta.

    We will reform league tables so that parents have the reassurance they need that their child is progressing.

    And we must also restore confidence in our exam system. Pupils should be entered for qualifications that are in their best interests, not with a view to boosting a school’s performance in the league tables.

    We have opened up qualifications unfairly closed off to pupils in state maintained schools – such as the iGCSE – to offer pupils greater choice, and to ensure that they are afforded the same opportunities as those who have the money to go to independent schools.

    Conclusion

    Andrew, I have set out today an overview of how we intend to tackle some of the problems in our education system and how we intend to start to close the achievement gap between those from the richest and poorest in society. As you would expect from this Coalition Government it’s based on a conservative belief in a liberal education.

    E.D. Hirsch writes that ‘… an early inequity in the distribution of intellectual capital may be the single most important source of avoidable injustice in a free society.’

    It is remedying that injustice that is the driving force behind this Government’s education reforms.

  • Nick Gibb – 2010 Speech to the Grammar Schools Heads Association

    Nick Gibb – 2010 Speech to the Grammar Schools Heads Association

    The speech made by Nick Gibb, the then Education Minister, on 24 November 2010.

    Thank you for that introduction, and thank you for inviting me to the Grammar Schools Heads Association conference. I’m very pleased to have the opportunity to talk to, and hear from, the head teachers of so many excellent schools. Although most of my secondary school education was spent in comprehensive schools, I have very happy memories of my one year at Maidstone Grammar School. It was – and I know, under the leadership of Nick Argent, still is – a fantastic school, with a strong ethos and an emphasis on academic excellence and rigour.

    Grammar schools are renowned for their focus on standards, high quality of teaching, excellent results, and a culture of achievement. Last year, over 98 per cent of grammar school pupils achieved five good GCSEs including English and mathematics. Virtually all achieved two or more passes at A Level and equivalent, with over a quarter achieving three or more A grades. And on top of these achievements, the schools represented here today offer a vast array of extra-curricula activities and sport, helping to create well-rounded, as well as well-educated, young people.

    Your achievement is a great testament to the skill, dedication and professionalism of all staff and pupils, as well as to the hard work of the governing bodies that I know play an important role in supporting and developing the ethos of individual schools.

    This Government has a radical agenda to raise standards right across the education sector, to improve outcomes for the most disadvantaged, to restore confidence in our qualifications and exams system, and to ensure that children leave school with the knowledge and the important skills they need to succeed in further and higher education and the world of work.

    But, if we are to affect real change, restore Britain’s education system, and close the achievement gap between the richest and the poorest in our society, we have to raise aspiration and attainment. And the guiding principles we will follow are those that unite the coalition partners right across this government: freedom, fairness and responsibility.

    Freedom

    At the core of our approach to education policy is trusting professionals: leaving behind the top down prescription which was the flawed – albeit well-intentioned – approach of the previous government.

    We need to give teachers the freedom to decide how to teach, and to some extent what they teach, their pupils.

    That’s why one of the first steps we took was to introduce the Academies Bill, now working its way through committee in the House of Lords before coming to the Commons next month. This Bill builds on the successful introduction of academies by the last Government, and will allow more schools to benefit from the freedoms and opportunities of academy status.

    Academies are free from local authority control, can deploy resources in the most effective way and have the ability to set their own pay and conditions for staff. They have greater freedom over the curriculum, and may also change the length of terms and school days. Yet they operate within a broad framework of accountability which is designed to ensure that standards remain high, and consistent.

    Our Academies Bill will allow more schools to benefit from these freedoms including, for the first time, primary schools and special schools. And we will enable teachers, parents and education providers to set and run new free schools.

    Schools rated outstanding by Ofsted – including grammar schools – that want to become academies will have their applications fast-tracked through the process, and ready to open this year if that is what they want to do.

    This is permissive legislation. We are not instructing schools to become academies unless their performance is a serious cause for concern. But many schools are keen to benefit from the additional freedoms that academies deliver.

    Indeed, so far, over 1770 schools have expressed interest. 870 are rated outstanding – including over half of all outstanding secondary schools in the country – so this is something that schools clearly want.

    I’m also delighted that, of the 164 grammar schools, 75 have already expressed an interest in acquiring academy status which will allow them to enjoy these additional freedoms and to partner with at least one other school to help drive improvement across the board.

    The Admissions Code will continue to apply to all academies and to any new Free School being established by parents, teacher groups or other philanthropic organisations. So selection by ability will not be an option for those schools. But for grammar schools that opt to become academies, which already select pupils by general ability, they will be able to continue to do so.

    Freedom does not start and end with academy-status. It is also about sweeping away the reams of paper and bureaucratic burdens piled on to teachers and schools: the fortnightly delivery of lever arch files that languish unread in the supply cupboard but whose presence serves to undermine confidence. In Opposition, we added up the total number of pages sent to schools in one 12 month period. It came to 6000 pages, more than twice the length of the complete works of Shakespeare. We will ensure that, in the coming years, schools will be able to find more useful things to keep in their supply cupboards.

    And we have also announced an inspection regime for high performing schools that is very light touch. We want Ofsted’s resources to be focussed sharply on those schools that are coasting or struggling and which are failing to deliver the best quality education to their students.

    Fairness

    The second guiding principle of the Coalition is fairness.

    Our education system continues to be characterised by inequality.

    • The chances of a child who is eligible for free school meals getting five good GCSEs including English and Maths are less than one third of those for children from better-off families.
    • 42 per cent of pupils eligible for free school meals did not achieve a single GCSE above a grade D in 2008.
    • More pupils from Eton went to Oxford or Cambridge last year than from the entire cohort of the 80,000 students eligible for free schools meals.

    This is a dreadful situation which no government should be prepared to tolerate. Not only does this let down hundreds of thousands of bright children who should have the opportunity to go to excellent schools and to swim in the pool of knowledge that pupils from the better off families take for granted, it will also impair all of our economic and cultural futures.

    I believe strongly that the teaching of knowledge – the passing on from one generation to the next – is the fundamental purpose of education. Yet, over the years, too often the teaching of knowledge has been subsumed by an over focus on life skills and well-meaning additions to the curriculum designed to deal with wider social issues and problems. But it is this very drift away from core traditional subjects that is actually widening social division.

    It is a huge concern, for example that the number of pupils being entered for modern foreign languages has fallen from over 450,000 in 2003 to just under 280,000 last year. It’s a concern that 47 per cent of A* grades in GCSE French went to pupils in the independent sector despite educating just 7 per cent of pupils. And it’s a real worry that while in 2001 30.4 per cent of pupils gained five or more GCSEs including English, maths, science and a modern foreign language, last year that figure was six percentage points lower, at 24.5 per cent.

    E.D. Hirsch, the American academic writes brilliantly about the importance of knowledge. He says, ‘It is the duty of schools to provide each child with the knowledge and skills requisite for academic progress – regardless of home background’.

    He goes onto say, ‘Among advantaged children, wide knowledge nourishes an active curiosity to learn still more, and more, so that the ever-active tentacles create still more tentacles.’

    An education system with fairness at its core will ensure that all children regardless of background have access to the rich body of knowledge that is the hallmark of any culture. Knowledge is the currency of a common culture, it is a basic requirement of a civilised nation. Children from knowledge- and education-rich backgrounds start school with an in-built advantage over those from backgrounds without those features. If the school then fails to make up that knowledge deficit, those divisions widen still further.

    Which is why we know from Leon Feinstein’s research that low-ability children from wealthy backgrounds often overtake and outperform more able children from poorer backgrounds during the first years of primary school.

    In pursuing fairness in our education system, we need to sharpen our focus on the core business of teaching and learning at every level, ensuring that pupils have the opportunity to select the qualifications that best suit them, and restore confidence in our exams system.

    We will slim down the National Curriculum to ensure pupils have the knowledge they need at each stage of their education. We want a curriculum and qualifications that are comparable and on a par with the best the world has to offer: whether that is the Massachusetts of E.D. Hirsch, Singapore, Finland, Hong Kong, or Alberta.

    We will reform league tables so that parents have the reassurance they need that their child is progressing. But we must also restore confidence in our exam system. Pupils must be entered for qualifications that are in their best interests, not with a view to boosting a school’s performance in the league tables.

    And we have opened up qualifications unfairly closed off to pupils in state maintained schools – such as the iGCSE – to offer pupils greater choice, and to ensure that they are afforded the same opportunities as those who have the money to go to independent schools. I know that a number of grammar schools have wanted to offer these qualifications to their pupils and now that opportunity is there.

    Responsibility

    The third coalition principle is responsibility.

    The Government has a responsibly to ensure we have a high quality education system, but it is the responsibility of pupils and their parents to ensure that behaviour in our schools is of a standard that delivers a safe and happy environment in which children are able to concentrate and learn.

    I became an MP in 1997, bright-eyed and eager, never dreaming I’d spend the next 13 years in gruelling Opposition. But over the last five years as the Shadow Minister for Schools, I visited nearly 300 schools which has given me real insight into some of the wonderful schools we have in this country. The best schools I have seen have succeeded for many of the reasons that the grammar schools represented here succeed: strong leadership; rigorous standards; recruiting and retaining talented teachers; and, above all, good behaviour.

    I have been to schools in some of the most deprived parts of the country that have excellent behaviour. Mossbourne Community Academy in Hackney is a great example.

    But I’ve also been to schools in leafy suburbs where behaviour is challenging to say the least. We are determined to give teachers and head teachers the powers they need to ensure they can maintain a safe and secure environment for their students. And we are working to ensure that teachers are protected from the professional and social humiliation of false accusations.

    Mr Chairman, thank you for giving me the opportunity to set out the principles that underpin the coalition government’s approach to education.

    • Freedom for the teaching profession to teach rather than wade through an ever-ending process of bureaucratic initiatives.
    • Fairness for the children let down by our education system.
    • A renewed sense of responsibility – that the education of the next generation is a shared duty, between Government, the profession, parents and pupils themselves.

    Getting this right could not be more important. It will determine the kind of society we will have in twenty or thirty years’ time. Thank you.

  • Michael Gove – 2010 Speech to the National College Annual Conference

    Michael Gove – 2010 Speech to the National College Annual Conference

    The speech made by Michael Gove, the then Secretary of State for Education, on 25 November 2010.

    Thank you Tony for that kind introduction.

    And thank you all, for the work that you do.

    The service you give, the leadership you show, the example you set – they are all inspiring.

    And they are what make my work worthwhile.

    The wonderful thing about my job is the opportunity it gives me to see the very best of this country – young people achieving more than they ever thought they could, finding their special talent, taking charge of their own destinies, becoming authors of their own life stories.

    Seeing the work you do – often against the odds, in difficult circumstances, with tight resources and challenging intakes – reaffirms one of my deepest convictions – there is no way to spend your life which is more admirable than following the vocation which inspires all of you – the calling to teach.

    And there is no way I can do this job without listening to you as you explain what drives you, what your ambitions are for the children and young people in your care and what Government can do to serve you.

    Which is why I was so glad to hear what Steve had to say – because the political leadership I want to provide is all about service. It should be Government’s job to help, serve and support you – not direct, patronise and fetter you.

    I believe that heads and teachers are the best people to run schools – not politicians or bureaucrats.

    The people from whom I have learnt the most while in politics have been headteachers – people like Fiona Hammans at Banbury School, Joan McVittie at Woodside High, Mike Wilshaw at Mossbourne Community Academy, Mike Griffiths at Northampton School for Boys, Mike Spinks at Urmston Grammar, Sue John at Lampton School, Patricia Sowter at Cuckoo Hall, Sally Coates at Burlington Danes, and so many more.

    At the heart of this Government’s vision for education is a determination to give school leaders more power and control. Not just to drive improvement in their own schools – but to drive improvement across our whole education system.

    Looking back over the last 15 years there are any number of things I could criticise – but I won’t – instead I want to celebrate the gains which have been made – and one of the most important is the development and deepening of culture in which we recognise that it is professionals, not bureaucratic strategies and initiatives, which drive school improvement.

    Teachers grow as professionals by allowing their work to be observed by other professionals, and observing the very best in their field, in turn.

    Headteachers improve their schools fastest and most effectively by working with other heads who have been on that journey. And both sides gain from the collaboration. Mentoring others is often the best form of professional development.

    The whole culture of the National College under Steve has been informed by this vision of system-led leadership that taps into the profound moral purpose of the profession, which is why I am so grateful to him – and especially admiring of what has been achieved by all of you who are National Leaders of Education.

    Moral purpose

    But admiring as I am of what has been achieved I am, frankly, impatient for us all, as a nation, to do better.

    Harold Wilson once said of the Labour Party, it is a moral crusade or it is nothing. Well, whatever view one takes of the Labour Party’s history, I believe that we have to ensure there is a driving, crusading, vision at the heart of our Government’s education policy. Or we will forfeit our mandate.

    Unless we are guided by moral purpose in this coalition government then we will squander the goodwill the British people have, so generously, shown us.

    And the ethical imperative of our education policy is quite simple – we have to make opportunity more equal.

    We have to overcome the deep, historically entrenched, factors which keep so many in poverty, which deprive so many of the chance to shape their own destiny, which have made us the sick man of Europe when it comes to social mobility.

    It is a unique sadness of our times that we have one of the most stratified and segregated school systems in the developed world.

    We know, from Leon Feinstein’s work, that low ability children from rich families overtake high ability children from poor families during primary school.

    And the gap grows as the children get older. A child eligible to free school meals is half as likely to achieve five or more GSCEs at grade A*-C, including English and maths, than a child from a wealthier background.

    By 18 the gap is vast. In the most recent year for which we have data, out of 80,000 young people eligible for free school meals, just 45 made it to Oxbridge. That’s fewer than some private schools manage by themselves.

    We are clearly, as a nation, still wasting talent on a scale which is scandalous. It is a moral failure, an affront against social justice which we have to put right.

    And that is why I am so glad that at the heart of our Coalition’s programme for Government is a commitment to spending more on the education of the poorest. The pupil premium – supported by Conservatives but championed with special passion and developed in detail by our Liberal Democrat partners – is a policy designed to address disadvantage at root. By giving resources to the people who matter most in extending opportunity – school leaders and teachers.

    And far from difficult economic times being a reason to scale down our ambitions, the economic challenges we face are only reason to accelerate our reform programme.

    Because the days are long gone – if they ever existed – when we could afford to educate a minority of our children well while hoping the rest were being schooled adequately.

    Already China and India are turning out more engineers, more computer scientists and more university graduates than the whole of Europe and America combined.

    And the success of other nations in harnessing their intellectual capital is a function of their determination to develop world-beating education systems. Across the globe other nations are outpacing us – pulling ahead in international comparisons, driving innovation, changing their systems to give professionals more freedom to grow, adapt, improve and learn from each other…

    It is no longer enough, if it ever was, to say we as a nation are doing better than we did in the past. As Matt Ridley’s wonderful new book Rational Optimism shows, in almost every field of human endeavour we are doing exponentially better than we did in the past. The real test is how are we doing compared to the rest. And in particular, how are we doing compared to the best…

    Learning from overseas

    We have to ask ourselves how our 16-year-olds are doing relative to 16-year olds in Scandinavia, Singapore, Canada and Australasia.

    Unless we learn from those nations which are innovating most imaginatively and successfully then we will be failing in our duty to the young people who are in our care while we hold office.

    And the pace of change across the globe is accelerating. Many of those nations which are now the world’s strongest performers, from Finland to South Korea, were well behind us in levels of educational achievement a generation ago. Now they put us to shame.

    Twenty years ago we were 14th in the world when nations were measured on how well they educated their teenagers. Now we are 23rd.

    In English, Maths and Science, the figures from the most respected international comparisons also show us falling behind other nations.

    For the fourth-largest economy in the world, with a much higher than average level of investment in education and some of the most talented professionals anywhere in the globe, this performance simply isn’t good enough.

    But while the comparisons are sobering, the reasons to be optimistic are plentiful. Indeed most of them are in this room.

    If you look at the most successful education systems in the world – those with the best absolute performance – and those with the highest levels of equity across classes – they all tend to have certain common features.

    They extend a high level of autonomy to individual schools.

    School leaders are empowered to innovate in their own schools

    And they are expected to lead the drive for improvement in other schools.

    The political leadership is uncompromising in the drive for higher standards.

    There is a culture of high expectations which does not allow excuses to be made for poor performance on the basis of class, ethnicity or background.

    There is a proper national framework of accountability.

    Which includes the transparent publication of academic performance on a school-by-school basis with proper, externally set and marked, testing

    And an inspection regime which is very light touch for high performing institutions so the real focus can be on under-performance.

    Teaching is a high status profession which draws its recruits from among the highest performing graduates.

    There is a strong culture of professional development which encourages teachers to improve their craft by learning from others while also deepening their academic knowledge.

    All of these features – which characterise the best education systems in the world – are present in England. But not to the degree we require to keep pace with the world’s best.

    Indeed, over the last three years I fear Government action has held our education system back from making many of the advances we needed to make to keep pace with the best.

    Ministers decreased school autonomy, tried to drive improvement through bureaucratic compliance, complicated the inspection regime and simultaneously weakened and complicated our system of accountability.

    The prospect of radical reform along the lines of the world’s best education systems, envisaged in the 2005 Education White Paper, was never fulfilled.

    And while we rowed back on reform, the pace of change in other nations accelerated.

    In America, President Obama is pressing ahead with radical school reform to close the gap between rich and poor. He has offered extra support to programmes designed to attract more great people into teaching and leadership, as well as encouraging states to provide greater accountability to parents and welcome new providers into state education.

    He has insisted – along with other Democrat reformers like Arne Duncan, Joel Klein and Michelle Rhee – that there be more great Charter schools – the equivalent of our Academies – to drive up attainment, especially among the poorest. In New York, Charter schools – like the inspirational Knowledge is Power Programme schools – have dramatically narrowed the vast performance gap between black and white children and 91 per cent of those benefiting are on free or reduced price meals.

    With a relentless focus on traditional subjects, a culture of no excuses, tough discipline, personalised pastoral care and enthusiastic staff who work free from Government bureaucracy to help every child succeed, these schools are amazing engines of social mobility that are now sending children from ghetto areas to elite universities.

    In Canada, and specifically in Alberta, schools have also been liberated, given the autonomy enjoyed by charter schools in the US. Head teachers control their own budgets, set their own ethos and shape their own environments.

    In Calgary and Edmonton, a diverse range of autonomous schools offer professionals freedom and parents choice.

    And the result?

    Alberta now has the best performing state schools of any English-speaking regions.

    In Sweden, the old bureaucratic monopoly that saw all state schools run by local government was ended and the system opened up to allow new, non-selective, state schools to be set up by a range of providers.

    It has allowed greater diversity, increased parental choice and has seen results improve – with results improving fastest of all in the areas where schools exercised the greatest degree of autonomy and parents enjoyed the widest choice.

    Finland is often deliberately contrasted with Sweden because of the supposed rigidity of its education system.

    But by placing a premium on specialism, diversity and parental choice within that framework, they too are driving up standards.

    In Singapore, again often held up as a model of regimented Prussian-style centralism, dramatic leaps in attainment have been secured by schools where principals are exercising a progressively greater degree of operational autonomy. The Government has deliberately encouraged greater diversity in the schools system and as the scope for innovation has grown, so Singapore’s competitive advantage over other nations has grown too.

    School improvement

    It is these examples – and these lessons – that explains our philosophical approach to education perhaps better than anything.

    The most important people in driving school improvement aren’t inspectors, advisers, school improvement partners or Ministers.

    It is teachers and school leaders.

    And that is why I am passionate about extending the freedoms denied to you by the last government.

    One of the first things we have done is give professionals more scope to drive improvement by inviting all schools to consider applying for academy freedoms.

    This is an addition to, rather than replacement of the existing academies programmes, We will continue to ensure that academies are used to drive faster and deeper improvements in deprived and disadvantaged areas.

    But we will now also provide you with the kind of autonomy that has served schools in America, Canada, Sweden and Finland so well and allow all schools the freedom to develop their own curriculum and fully control their own budget and staffing.

    Since I issued my invitation to schools three weeks ago, I have been overwhelmed by the response.

    More than 1772 schools have enquired about academy freedoms.

    870 outstanding schools – including 405 secondary schools and more than 400 outstanding primaries have contacted us – and will lead the way.

    That’s 70 per cent of the outstanding secondary schools in the country and a significant cohort of outstanding primaries.

    I know some have expressed concern that this offer of greater autonomy for schools will work against the collaborative model of school improvement that has grown up over the past fifteen or so years and which has done so much to tackle under-performance in those schools in the most challenging circumstances.

    Let me be clear: I would not be going down this road if I thought it would in any way set back the process of school improvement, if would in any way undermine the progress we need to make in our weakest or most challenged schools or if it would in any way fracture the culture of collaboration which has driven school improvement over the last decade.

    This policy is driven, like all our education policy, by our guiding moral purpose – the need to raise attainment for all children and close the gap between the richest and poorest.

    I believe this policy will only work if it strengthens the bonds between schools and leads to a step-change in system-led leadership.

    That is why I will expect of every school that acquires academy freedoms that it partners at least one other school to help drive improvement across the board.

    That is why I envisage a bigger role for the National College and the programme of National Leaders of Education in brokering and providing support from great schools for those who need help to improve.

    And that is why any school which acquires academy freedoms will continue to be governed by admissions rules which guarantee fair access to all, safeguards the inclusive character of comprehensive schools, ensures all schools take their fair share of pupils in need and prevents any school discriminating in any way against those pupils with special educational needs.

    Within the safeguards provided by these assurances I believe innovation can flourish. New approaches to the curriculum, to assessment, to discipline and behaviour, to pastoral care, to careers guidance, to sport, the arts and music, new ways of gathering data on pupil performance, new ways of supporting teachers to improve their practice, new ways of tackling entrenched illiteracy and the tragic culture of low expectations which blights so many white working class communities.

    And this culture of innovation, I believe, has the potential to benefit all our children.

    Earlier this month, Mike Gibbons of the Richard Rose Federation, wrote an article for the TES which encapsulated my vision.

    More autonomous schools, he wrote, had in the past been

    ‘…perceived as ‘educational lifeboats’ to allow highly capable and driven parents to leave the main system.’

    But, he argued, that the move to greater autonomy could in fact move our schools system in the opposite direction. More autonomous schools could, should, and in my view will, be ‘tugboats adding extra pull to the drive to increase universal standards, not innovations dragging much-needed resources away from the fleet.’

    He then concluded by saying that:

    If we can develop schools to become crucibles of innovation on behalf of the whole system, working for the sake of all children as well as meeting the needs of parents who are seeking different provision, then the sum continues to be greater than the parts. And so every school, regardless of its status, works for itself and for the whole system.

    Mike is himself another example of an inspirational school leader.

    He is also, of course, spot on.

    Whole system improvement, a comprehensive approach to driving up standards for every child, is what the coalition Government aims to deliver.

    Central to that drive is structural reform of the kind I’ve laid out – professionals liberated to drive improvement across the system.

    Improving teaching

    But the success of that model is not the only example of good practice here in England we want to spread more widely, it’s not the only lesson from abroad we want to implement more urgently here.

    We also want to take urgent action to attract more great teachers into the classroom. We want to further enhance the prestige and esteem of the teaching profession and further improve teacher training and continuous professional development.

    Look at the highest performing nations in any measure of educational achievement and they are always, but always, those with the most highly qualified teachers. Whether its Singapore, South Korea or Finland, as Sir Michael Barber has pointed out in his ground-breaking study for McKinsey nothing matters more in education that attracting the best people into teaching and making sure that every minute in the classroom is spent with children benefiting from the best possible instruction.

    The generation of teachers currently in our schools is the best ever, but given the pace of international improvement we must always be striving to do better.

    That is why we will expand organisations such as Teach First, Teaching Leaders and Future Leaders which have done so much to attract more highly talented people into education.

    That is why we will write off the student loan payments of science and maths graduates who go into teaching.

    That is why we will reform teacher recruitment to ensure there is a relentless focus on tempting the best into this, most rewarding, of careers.

    And that is why we will reform teacher training to shift trainee teachers out of college and into the classroom.

    We will end the arbitrary bureaucratic rule which limits how many teachers can be trained in schools, shift resources so that more heads can train teachers in their own schools, and make it easier for people to shift in mid-career into teaching.

    Teaching is a craft and it is best learnt as an apprentice observing a master craftsman or woman. Watching others, and being rigorously observed yourself as you develop, is the best route to acquiring mastery in the classroom. Which is why I also intend to abolish those rules which limit the ability of school leaders to observe teachers at work. Nothing should get in the way of making sure we have the best possible cadre of professionals ready to inspire the next generation.

    And that is why I will also reform the rules on discipline and behaviour to protect teachers from abuse, from false allegations, from disruption and violence. The biggest single barrier to good people starting, or staying, in education is poor pupil behaviour and we need a relentless focus on tackling this issue. That means getting parents to accept their responsibilities, giving teachers the discretion they need to get on with the job and sending a clear and consistent message at all times that adult authority has to be respected if every child is to have their chance.

    As well as giving teachers more control over their classrooms I want to give them more control over their careers, developing a culture of professional development which sees more teachers acquiring postgraduate qualifications like masters and doctorates, more potential school leaders acquiring management qualifications and more support in place for those who want, quickly, to climb up the career ladder. In every single one of these areas the role of the National College will be crucial and I hope we can all work ever more closely together.

    Investing in the workforce is one crucial lesson of great education systems, alongside granting your leaders greater autonomy. But there are others which we are also determined to push forward.

    More intelligent accountability

    The best school systems generate rich quantities of data which enable us all to make meaningful comparisons, learn from the best, identify techniques which work and quickly abandon ideologies which don’t. In America, President Obama, the Gates Foundation, the top charter schools and the principal education reformers all recognise the need for richer, timelier, more in-depth data about performance.

    That is why we need to keep rigorous external assessment. Improve and refine our tests, yes, but there can be no going back to the secret garden when public and professionals were in ignorance about where success had taken root and where investment had fallen on stony ground.

    Indeed I want to see more data generated by the profession to show what works, clearer information about teaching techniques that get results, more rigorous, scientifically-robust research about pedagogies which succeed and proper independent evaluations of interventions which have run their course. We need more evidence-based policy making, and for that to work we need more evidence.

    And that also means a new role for Ofsted. I want to see an inspection regime which also mirrors the approach of the world’s most successful systems. Intervention should be in inverse proportion to success. The best needed only the lightest touch to continue on a course of improvement. Those who are struggling need closer attention. That is why we will direct Ofsted’s resources to those schools which are faltering, or coasting, and insist that inspectors spend more time on classroom observation and assessing teaching and learning than having their attention diverted to other, strictly peripheral, areas.

    Curriculum and qualifications

    There is one other area where I also want us to learn from abroad, indeed to compare ourselves as we have never done before. And that is with our curriculum and qualifications.

    I want to ensure our national curriculum is a properly international curriculum – that it reflects the best collective wisdom we have about how children learn, what they should know and how quickly they can grow in knowledge.

    I want to use the evidence from those jurisdictions with the best-structured and most successful curricula – from Massachusetts to the Pacific Rim – to inform our curriculum development here.

    I want to remove everything unnecessary from a curriculum that has been bent out of shape by the weight of material dumped there for political purposes. I want to prune the curriculum of over-prescriptive notions of how to teach and how to timetable. Instead I want to arrive at a simple core, informed by the best international practice, which can act as a benchmark against which schools can measure themselves and parents ask meaningful and informed questions about progress.

    And alongside curriculum reform informed by evidence I want exam reform sustained by evidence. I want to ensure our qualifications can stand comparison with the most stretching in the world. I want to ensure that the maths tests our 11-year-olds sit are comparable with those 11-year-olds in Singapore sit and the science qualifications 16 or 18-year-olds acquire here are directly comparable with those in Taiwan or Toronto. That is why I want Ofqual to work not just to guarantee exam standards over time, but to guarantee exam standards match the best in the world.

    Conclusion

    I won’t deny for a moment this is an ambitious agenda. But I don’t think there’s any point being in politics, fighting elections, seeking office unless you’re ambitious to make a difference.

    And if there’s any audience I can confess to ambition in front of, it’s you. Every day your nurture it, encourage it, celebrate it. You’re ambitious for your schools, for the young people in your care, for the students they will become. You want them to be pushed, nudged, cajoled, encouraged, tempted and inspired to do more than they ever thought possible. And you want them to rejoice in knowing they have achieved their full potential.

    And that is what I want too. In the relentless drive to help every child achieve everything of which they are capable there can be neither rest nor tranquillity. But there can be the endless satisfaction of seeing the human spirit ennobled and fulfilled. That is the task you have been called to lead. And it is my job to serve you.

  • Michael Gove – 2010 Comments on Education Policy

    Michael Gove – 2010 Comments on Education Policy

    The comments made by Michael Gove, the then Secretary of State for Education, on 24 November 2010.

    Many other countries in the world are improving their schools faster than us and have smaller gaps between the achievements of rich and poor. The very best performing education systems have a rigorous focus on high standards, a determination to narrow attainment gaps and have stretching curricula. The countries that come out top of international studies into educational performance recognise that the most crucial factor in determining how well children do at school is the quality of their teachers.

    The best education systems draw their teachers from among the top graduates and train them rigorously, focusing on classroom practice. They recognise that it is teachers’ knowledge, intellectual depth and love of their subject which stimulates the imagination of children and allows them to flourish and succeed.

    But for too long in our country, teachers and heads have been hamstrung by bureaucracy and left without real support.

    It’s shocking that the latest figures show that only 40 of the 80,000 children in England eligible for free school meals secured places at Oxford or Cambridge. That’s a scandal.

    That’s why the coalition government plans to recruit more great people into teaching, train our existing teachers better and free them from bureaucracy and Whitehall control.

    We are putting teachers in the driving seat of school improvement and we are setting out changes that will make schools more accountable to their communities and their parents.

  • PRESS RELEASE : More academies than ever rated as outstanding

    PRESS RELEASE : More academies than ever rated as outstanding

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 23 November 2010.

    The 2010 Ofsted annual report published today shows that while generally across the schools sector the number of inspections this year resulting in an inadequate rating has doubled, academies have bucked the trend using their freedoms to raise standards across the board with more than ever being rated as outstanding.

    Commenting on the report, Education Secretary Michael Gove, said:

    This report shows us the real picture of our schools revealed by the new, more rigorous inspection regime. A worrying 576 schools, up from 360 last year, are either in special measures or have been given a notice to improve, with the number rated as inadequate in the last year twice as high as the year before. Even taking into account the new inspection system, this is simply unacceptable. No parent wants to send their child to a failing school and they shouldn’t have to.

    There are also concerns in safeguarding, children’s homes and fostering. Whilst the vast majority of professionals in this area do an incredible job in very difficult circumstances delivering high-quality care, there are some areas that can be improved. The Munro review will look at child protection to help professionals get the support they need so that they are able to spend more time with children and families and less time on paperwork.

    The report shows that solid leadership, high-quality teaching, freedoms over the curriculum and strong governance all add up to high standards and rapid improvements. Academy schools which have these freedoms have bucked the national trend and have seen an increase in the numbers getting the top Ofsted rating despite the new tougher inspections. That’s why our White Paper this week will outline further plans to make these freedoms a reality in as many schools as possible.

    There has been a marked improvement in children’s services inspected and the best foster homes, children’s centres and social workers are turning around the life chances of some of society’s most disadvantaged and vulnerable people. There is a lot we can learn from and I’m determined that we will free up both the education and the children’s sectors so that professionals can learn from the best, adapting delivery to their local needs rather than having to follow a set system dictated from Whitehall.

    Key points on academies in the report include:

    • Academies are bucking the trend with 26 per cent being rated outstanding compared to 13 per cent of secondary schools nationally.
    • The percentage of academies judged outstanding has increased since last year and the percentage judged inadequate has decreased despite the more demanding inspection framework. This is the opposite trend when compared with all schools.
    • Academies are continuing to achieve big year-on-year above-national-average increases in their GCSEs, including English and mathematics results, which highlights the excellent progress they are making.

    Commenting on the quality of teaching, Michael Gove said:

    The biggest factor in raising standards in schools is the quality of its teachers. The best education systems in the world consistently draw their teachers from the top tier of graduates by academic ability and select them carefully to ensure they are taking only those people who combine the right personal and intellectual qualities.

    There is consensus amongst the highest performing countries that the most important thing we can do for teachers is train them well and then throughout their professional career. Too much teacher training involves either teachers being told how to comply with government criteria, or what John Bangs called quite rightly ‘death by PowerPoint’.

    Teachers need to learn from other teachers. I have been impressed by arguments that the way to ensure we have good continual professional development is by getting teachers to observe superb practitioners of the craft and to learn from them. Today’s Ofsted report is a ringing endorsement of this, highlighting how schools with outstanding teaching frequently have senior school staff monitoring lessons which allows others to learn from the best teachers. That’s why our White Paper tomorrow will outline plans to give schools more flexibility to do this by removing restrictions on the time heads and other senior staff are allowed to monitor lessons.

    But this has to start right from the outset with initial teacher training, and the Ofsted report is also clear that teachers need more practical classroom training to back up their theoretical training. Our White Paper will also outline plans to ensure trainee teachers spend more time in hands-on learning in the classroom.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Reading at an early age the key to success

    PRESS RELEASE : Reading at an early age the key to success

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 22 November 2010.

    All children will be given a phonics-based progress check in year 1 so teachers can identify those not at the expected level in reading and in need of extra support, Education Secretary Michael Gove announced today.

    Mr Gove said too many primary school children were failing to reach the expected standard and that the short, light-touch test would be designed to assess how well year 1 pupils could read simple, decodable words. He added that the screening check would be based on systematic synthetic phonics as it was internationally proven to drive up basic reading skills from a young age.

    Mr Gove said it would be administered by pupils’ teachers and would be designed to

    • confirm whether individual pupils had grasped the basics of phonic decoding by the end of year 1
    • identify those pupils who needed extra help, so the school can provide support.

    Today the government is launching a public consultation to ask teachers, parents, professionals and the public to submit views on how the check might work. It will be piloted in summer 2011 and will take place nationally from summer 2012. To help schools select an effective synthetic phonics programme, the government has published the core criteria that define the key features of such programmes.

    Michael Gove said:

    A solid foundation in reading is crucial to a child’s success as they progress through primary school, into secondary school and then in later life.

    But, in spite of the hard work of teachers and pupils, too many children are currently not reaching the expected reading levels at age 7 and age 11.

    We are determined to raise literacy standards in our schools, especially of those not achieving the expected level – a light-touch phonics-based check will provide reassurance that children in year 1 have learned this important skill, will enable us to pinpoint those who are struggling at an early age and will give them the help they need before it is too late.

    It will be impossible to drill for and will be a true gauge of a child’s reading skills.

    Parents want to know how their children are reading and this will tell them.

    On phonics, Schools Minister Nick Gibb, speaking on a visit to Elmhurst Primary School in Newham, London, said:

    There is more to reading than phonics – but there is also a weight of evidence that systematic synthetic phonics, taught in the first years of a child’s education, gives children key building blocks they need to understand words, underpins children’s attainment of a good standard of reading and can inspire a lifetime love of reading.

    The government is determined to raise the standard of reading in the first years of primary school so that children can master the basic decoding skills of reading early and then spend the rest of primary school reading to learn.

    The fact is that alternative methods have left too many young people with poor literacy levels, especially among children of more disadvantaged families, and we are determined that every child can read to their full potential.

    Provisional figures released earlier this year showed that in 2010:

    • 15% of 7-year-olds failed to reach the expected level (level 2) in reading at key stage 1
    • 19% of 11-year-olds did not achieve the expected level (level 4) in reading at key stage 2.

    England has also slipped down the international table for reading in primary schools. The Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) of 10-year-olds saw England fall from third out of 35 countries in 2001 to 15th out of 40 countries in 2006.

    Shahed Ahmed, the Headteacher of Elmhurst Primary – one of the schools where the check will be pre-trialled, said:

    At Elmhurst Primary School we firmly believe that the best way to teach how to read in the early stages is through a rigorous, systematic, engaging phonics approach. I believe that all schools would benefit from taking this approach. It’s important that schools know for young children how good their phonics knowledge is.

    An end-of-year-1 phonics check would encourage all schools to teach early reading properly through phonics, and they would then know then the strengths and weaknesses of their pupils.

    Ruth Miskin, a leading authority on teaching children to read, said:

    Despite numerous well-meaning initiatives over recent years, we still have 20% of children who are unable to access a secondary school curriculum. However, there are many determined heads who ensure that every child learns to read by 6- or 7-years-old. There is no reason why this success cannot be replicated across the whole country.

    This reading check will help all headteachers focus their efforts upon the children who are most likely to slip through the net. If we catch these children early, they will have an equal opportunity to make the most of their education and lives.

    Ofsted will inspect the teaching of reading and phonics in schools and the impact on pupils’ results, and on 14 November 2010 it published a report showing best practice in the teaching of phonics. The information provided from this test will allow Ofsted and schools to have a better conversation about each school’s teaching of phonics.

    The government has also revised the core criteria that define the key features of an effective systematic synthetic phonics programme, to help schools in selecting a suitable programme. Publishers of products have been invited to submit new self-assessment forms for their products, assessing them against the new criteria.

    Jan Tyson, headteacher at Turnfurlong Infants School in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, said:

    Systematic synthetic phonics is key to teaching children reading and writing. It provides them with strategies to decode words, which is especially important because English is such a difficult language to learn with the many different ways to make the same sounds from different letters or combinations of letters.

    How phonics works

    Phonics focuses on sounds rather than, for example, having children try to recognise whole words.

    In analytic phonics, words are broken down into their beginning and end parts, such as ‘str-‘ and ‘eet’, with an emphasis on ‘seeing’ the words and analogy with other words.

    In synthetic phonics, children start by sequencing the individual sounds in words – for example, ‘s-t-r-ee-t’, with an emphasis on blending them together.

    Once they have learned all these, they progress to reading books.

    The ‘synthetic’ part comes from the word ‘synthesise’, meaning to assemble or blend together.

    Children who learn using synthetic phonics are able to have a go at new words working from sound alone, whereas those using analytic phonics are more dependent on having prior knowledge of families of words.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Sarah Teather responds to claims about LA funding for children’s centres

    PRESS RELEASE : Sarah Teather responds to claims about LA funding for children’s centres

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 18 November 2010.

    Responding to reports that 80 per cent of local authorities cannot guarantee they will fund their children’s centres at the same level in the next financial year as in the current year, Children’s Minister Sarah Teather said:

    We have ensured there is enough money in the system to maintain the network of Sure Start services. We have secured funding for free childcare for three- and four-year-olds as well as the most disadvantaged two-year-olds. As councils make their spending decisions in the coming months, I hope they recognise the priority the Government has placed on early education.

    We know high-quality Early Years support can have a lasting impact on children’s lives, so we will expect local authorities to channel resources at those who will benefit most from the excellent support children’s centres can offer.