Teachers should remain impartial on matters of lawbreaking by politicians, says Zahawi

[noblegiraffe]

Nadhim Zahawi, Secretary of State for Education is enraged that a primary school had a writing exercise where Y6s wrote to their MP complaining about the law-breaking by our Prime Minister and other government employees.

He is setting new guidance which requires teachers to provide a balanced representation of opposing opinions on political issues.

But breaking the law isn't a political issue is it? Presenting opposing views on whether the Prime Minister should be allowed to break the law is in direct conflict with our requirement to promote British Values, including respect for the rule of law.

What would he have teachers say? Should teachers shut down discussion on any topic potentially embarrassing to those currently in power?

@noblegiraffe

Nadhim Zahawi, Secretary of State for Education is enraged that a primary school had a writing exercise where Y6s wrote to their MP complaining about the law-breaking by our Prime Minister and other government employees.

He is setting new guidance which requires teachers to provide a balanced representation of opposing opinions on political issues.

But breaking the law isn't a political issue is it? Presenting opposing views on whether the Prime Minister should be allowed to break the law is in direct conflict with our requirement to promote British Values, including respect for the rule of law.

What would he have teachers say? Should teachers shut down discussion on any topic potentially embarrassing to those currently in power?

Balanced representation of opposing opinions is one thing. Breaking the law is another.

[quote balalake]@AlexaShutUp in my opinion Ben Wallace (having doubts) and Michael Gove (rudest man in politics but does detail and has a plan, even though I don't like the plan).[/quote]
Hmm, interesting.

Not convinced about Ben Wallace though I did think he seemed more decent than most when he got a bit tearful over the failure to evacuate people from Afghanistan. At least he seemed to care. Unlike the PM who was apparently more interested in rescuing cats and dogs.

I cannot bear Gove and thought he was awful as education secretary. It's hard for me to look beyond that. However, I know the CEO of an environmental charity, and although she can't bear the Tories, she did rate the work that he had done on environmental issues. So you might be onto something.

The teacher should invite him into their classroom to give the other side of the "balanced view" on a prime minister breaking the law.

Schools have to promote British values and one of those is upholding the law. A pp has posted the government guidance on this which schools should follow. It has nothing to do with taking a political side.

Well I guess the Y6s who wrote those letters have got a pretty comprehensive government response ‘you were brainwashed by your teacher and they shouldn’t have made you write them’.

@noblegiraffe @AlexaShutUp - You are both absolutely right. I was not suggesting that following rules or law is something that should not be questioned.

I was specifically commenting (obviously not very well or clearly!) on this recent story which involved primary school pupils. As a parent I would be more than happy for older students to discuss this once they are of an age to understand more about politics, allegiances, nuance, press coverage, potential bias, etc but think that covering this at such a young age is misguided and I would not have been happy for any of mine to be encouraged to write letters of complaint at that age

I bet there would not be an issue if there were letters of praise instead.

@Averydifferentwoman

Hmm. To be honest, I am not totally sure where I stand on this.

Yes, the law is the law, but asking children to write a letter of complaint is rather presupposing that there is something to complain about.

I have seen this a lot in schools, and children are encouraged to see the only rational, logical position possible is a centre-left one and that divergence from that position makes one ipso facto a vicious knuckle-dragging thicko bigot.

I realise I’ve diverted from the point there but I do feel it isn’t so much a complaint about Johnson as the Tory government more generally. I mean to say that there won’t be letters of complaint about the recent Labour MPs racist abuse or Angela Rayner’s ‘scum.’ That’s where it is problematic for me. It is undoubtedly trying to encourage children to think in a very specific way.

According to the school, pupils watched an edition of children’s Newsround covering the Partygate affair, and were then asked to present their opinion in letter form -- so weren't "asked to complain".

Isn’t writing to a political representative fairly standard in primary schools? The excitement of a response on parliament notepaper etc?

Should that be binned? No suggestion of engagement with elected politicians?

According to the school, pupils watched an edition of children’s Newsround covering the Partygate affair, and were then asked to present their opinion in letter form -- so weren't "asked to complain".

And that's the whole point, really, isn't it? Even young kids are more than capable of understanding this story without any specific interpretation being provided by the teacher. Most children of school age are capable of understanding the concept of rules applying equally to everyone. It's just a shame that our PM hasn't yet grasped this.

@noblegiraffe

Isn’t writing to a political representative fairly standard in primary schools? The excitement of a response on parliament notepaper etc?

Should that be binned? No suggestion of engagement with elected politicians?

I think so.

Writing letters seems to be an important part of the curriculum. “Persuasive” writing and all that.

I remember when dd was about 6 she had to write a letter to the head persuading him to let them go on a trip to the local aquarium. It was an absolute model of passive aggressive emotional blackmail!

I think a more creative lesson would be to show pupils in secondary school the actual law underlying this and then get them to see what defence they can come up with.

The more ingenious the better. It's a way to get people interested in the law. And loopholes

Zahawi comes across as really patriotic so I’m not sure why he’s taking Johnson’s side here. Especially not with the Queen funeral pictures.

Maybe they could do drama with thought bubbles over politician's heads to get the pupils to discuss what each politician is thinking.

They could get some interviews from the media and then pause each time there's a difficult question.

QueenofHiraeth these were Year 6 children - come September they will be in secondary school. Absolutely not too young to engage with the news, and persuasive writing is part of the later primary curriculum.

This government just can't take criticism.

For those of you bleating 'what about Labour', can I spell this out to you in simple terms: Labour are not in power.

I’m conflicted. On the one hand I firmly think politics should be left at the door.

But teaching children that they have the power to write to people in power is also a very important lesson in civics and citizenship.

As long as the children are not being told what to say in their letters, I don't see a problem.

Yes, it is likely that they will naturally conclude that the PM was in the wrong, but as long as that is their own conclusion on the basis of the facts available, I see no issue with that. Nobody is telling them what to think.

The fact that the PM's behaviour was so obviously wrong that even a young child can see it is not the fault of the school.

Would this have upset him?

Dear Prime Minister,

I think that you should ensure that more people use electric cars. The pollution near our school is really bad. etc.....

Or Dear Prime Minister,

I think the Monarchy is an outdated system. People should not be Head of State because of who their parents were....etc

Or Dear Prime Minister

Our class has been learning about the Monarchy. Please can you tell the Queen that I think she is fantastic and that I think we need to retain the Monarchy...

All letters to the Prime Minister expressing a point of view.

All trying to persuade him.

Which of those are unacceptable?

Or is it a case that only some points of view are acceptable?

I think it's clear that they're only unacceptable when they're calling out the PM for his own shameful behaviour.

I think he has a point.

The teacher could frame it as 'has Johnson broken the law?' in a legitimate debate. As part of that, you could ask what you could do if he had, and encourage them to do it if they wanted , but whether doing this on school times is appropriate I might be hestitant on (see below).
Where it oversteps is in saying he has broken the law and encouraging all pupils to right to the PM.
In order to be able to get all pupils to write a letter you would have to know that Johnson had broken the law - and that would require the relevant authorities to acknowledge this and take the appropriate action first.

The above is very nuanced, but important in terms of bias. It encourages critical thought (with the room to disagree with the teacher) and knowledge of the law (including the principles of innocent until proven guilty) as well as the idea that if you are upset you can complain.

The problem is how much 'leading' you are doing in terms of this and it might be difficult to prove in this particular case. I do think its hard to get right and not lead and thats a lot of the issue. This particular case is difficult because there is so much conjecture involved and despute of the facts (which are not documented in the public domain with balance of a court of law behind it - trial by media is not a good enough substitute) - and in that sense encouragment of writing letter rather than merely asking the question 'have he broken the law' might be a step too far for this case (but not necessarily for another).

Its a case of 'the devil is in the detail' and understanding law and bias.

So allowing room to explore in schools is definitely ok (and I would actually actively encourage), but also requires the understanding of the difference between public opinion and trial by media versus a fair independant internal review / court of law.

(sorry. complicated reply)

The Ed Sec looks a complete twat banging on about this.

We should be teaching critical thinking in our kids. They had months of lockdowns when it turns out those making the rules didn’t bloody bother themselves. The kids are cross and so they should be.

I think critical thinking, statistics, understanding biases are vital things to be taught in schools.

Along with echo chamber, filter bubbles

So teachers should lie to children? I suppose that's why they are teachers and not, you know, politians...

I wonder if would be a good lesson to look at the Sue Gray report as an example of formal writing.

This government changes laws to protect corrupt members of its own party.
This government breaks the laws it makes.
This government is sleazy.
The Conservative party has done massive damage to the UK and continues to do so.
Damage to those children's futures.

So it's hardly surprising that this bunch of manipulative, lying, scum are interfering to train children to overlook their crimes. Get 'em young and all that.