Why are people so upset with Mr Gove?

[nlondondad]

An invitation to people to give an explanation as we can take it as given that people ARE upset.

Note: Two kinds of possible answers to this question.

1. Why you think other people are upset

1. Why you are upset...

Answers which do not give reasons, will be marked down.

Now to go away for a bit, I wonder what will happen while I am gone?

'The facts as you see them may not actually be the facts.'

Can you explain what the facts are then, crumbled?

Also there seems to be some idea that people just think the way I do because of "fashion" or the media.

I can't speak for everyone, but only for me. After seeing what goes on in schools I've thought this way for a long time - nothing to do with some kind of trend. It's why I was happy the Tories got in and why it was such a relief when Mr Gove voiced exactly my thoughts (and those of so many mothers I'd had this conversation with).

Ipad: you've probably heard them explained before: about how results don't reflect substantive achievement and knowledge acquired.

don't necessarily

You can't have it both ways - you said nothing improved.

Presumably, the extra 5% and 4% improvements under Gove are also 'made to look like they improved', yes?

Be consistent, now.

An education professional can see the facts extremely clearly, btw - threshold boundaries which may be cynically moved, particularly when close to an election year, against genuine improvement. I am able to look at a 1997 reading paper and a 2013 one and can accurately assess whether the questions are more or less difficult. I know how carefully performance is measured, and how hard children now work compared to 20 years ago.

All the public can do is listen to the media full of soundbites but short on fact, use anecdotal evidence from their child's experience, or listen to an Education Secretary who refuses to listen to anyone.

It is true Crumbled. Even Oxford university thinks decisions like scrapping AS exams are a retrograde step. Gove's only fans are people who assume (wrongly) that his policies will somehow raise standards and don't fully understand the implications.

For example, there is no evidence that making exams harder improves standards. It's likely to be counterproductive as more kids will simply give up plus either grade boundaries will go down to ensure results don't dip or this government will be the first to have to take responsibility for worsening exam results which is unlikely to be seen as a good thing by anybody.

'Mr Gove voiced exactly my thoughts'

What were your thoughts, crumbled? What is it that you agree so wholeheartedly with?

Well no, Feenie, because his efforts towards improvement acknowledge the problems of degrading in the past.

I'm not having it both ways - roughly speaking - I said things didn't improve - you said they did and quoted stats - I said you can't trust the stats.

Do you know what it means to say "having it both ways?" It means saying two things that contradict each other. Someone who did that would be inconsistent. That's quite a different thing but I guess you could get it mixed up either accidentally or on purpose.

You're really missing the mark with me by referring me to educational experts and educational professionals. I think you might read my posts above and you'd realise it quite quickly!

Ipad: that children were learning less, that more rigour was needed, that standards were dropping, teachers were not motivating children, schools were pandering to disadvantage and that some children were working a lot harder to learn a lot less.

Crumbled, what is your response to my post above.

Making exams harder does not improve standards.

If exams get harder there are two options:

a) grade boundaries are set lower so the same number of pupils achieve A, B, C etc

b) fewer children achieve A, B, C etc and the government is the first government to have to take responsibility for what will appear to be a FALL in standards.

If you make exams harder you have to teach children more "stuff" to help them pass the exams.

If you teach children exactly the same "stuff" and make the exams harder then grades will fall. The education of the children won't be any different. They will still know the same amount of "stuff". I don't think it's a good idea to elide the importance of grades and the importance of the "stuff" learned.

You say:

b) fewer children achieve A, B, C etc and the government is the first government to have to take responsibility for what will appear to be a FALL in standards.

Standards would be the same, as you acknowledge. So unless the curriculum is changed, or teachers change, there would be a fall in grades. But not a fall in standards. But Mr Gove also wants to change the curriculum, improve the rigour and widen the "stuff".

The point of making exams harder is to improve the preparation of the children for the exams, that is, teach them more "stuff". Grades aren't an end in themselves. It would be a mistake to think that; unfortunately a mistake made by Labour to very devastating effect.

Hmm...you don't really know much about education do you Crumbled? Education is not just about teaching 'stuff' and making exams harder or improving rigour is definitely not about increasing the amount of 'stuff' being taught.

Some subjects such as English are almost entirely skills-based and making them about teaching and getting kids to regurgitate stuff would, in fact, make them easier.

However, put that to one side, I'm interested in what you, and others, might see as the advantage of fewer students achieving high grades.

One consequence might be that fewer kids go on to university. Maybe you see that as an advantage but I wonder where you think they will go instead?

Rigour: the quality of being extremely thorough and careful

So more 'rigour' is needed.
All the academies and free schools can devise their own curricula (that's around 2,055 different curricula, as of February 2013).
All maintained schools have to follow the 'national curriculum' (that's one curriculum).
Is that a reliable way to track and raise standards? How can progress in each school be compared? What will happen when children move schools? How will it impact on forces children?

How can you say 'teachers were not motivating children'? That's a bland and generalised statement with no basis on fact at all.

How can children work harder to learn a lot less? That doesn't make sense.

Under the old O Level system fewer people achieved high grades but there is no evidence that 'standards' were higher. More kids were put off education and more kids went into manual work.

You cannot turn back the clock in education when the social and economic context is so different.

This is what is so stupid about Gove's policies. They seem entirely motivated by his personal experience of education and turning the clock back to a golden age that never really existed or was only 'golden' for the very few, who like Gove, were privileged enough to access it.

Crumbledwalnuts
"He's seen too many children let down by child led "learning""

If gove considers child led learning to be bad why is it such a major requirement for an ofsted outstanding lesson?

"But Mr Gove also wants to change the curriculum, improve the rigour and widen the "stuff"."

but he doesn't want to widen the curriculum. He wants an academic curriculum taught by rote and a vocational curriculum.

It didn't work 50 odd years ago and it won't work now.

"Hmm...you don't really know much about education do you Crumbled?"

Hmm that looks like a smear. Don't you like debate?

You assume that by "stuff" I mean "facts". That would be a mistake

And I repeat that you are very mistaken if you think that independent school teachers and right wing teachers and educators are in favour of Gove's policies. Anybody who understands them realizes they are absolute nonsense. I work in an independent school where Gove is as despised as the state school where I used to work.

There should be a full stop after mistake.

By stuff I mean all the component parts of a rounded and full education. Anyone who assumes I mean facts would need to manage their own prejudice.

Care to respond to my post now that I've clarified that for you?

What exactly do you mean by teaching 'more stuff' then Crumbled because for all the world you sound like Gradgrind in Hard Times:

' such terms, no doubt, substituting the words 'boys and girls', for 'sir', Thomas Gradgrind now presented Thomas Gradgrind to the little pitchers before him, who were to be filled so full of facts.

Indeed, as he eagerly sparkled at them from the cellarage before mentioned, he seemed a kind of cannon loaded to the muzzle with facts, and prepared to blow them clean out of the regions of childhood at one discharge. He seemed a galvanizing apparatus, too, charged with a grim mechanical substitute for the tender young imaginations that were to be stormed away.'

Sound familiar?

Fivecandles: I have my own anecdotes. Are we talking anecdotes?

'By stuff I mean all the component parts of a rounded and full education'

Exactly which of these 'component parts' have been missing, Crumbled?

Fivecandlesl: x post: I refer you to my post above and to my use of the work prejudice.

I am over-familiar with Dickens' works, thanks, and about the requirements of English Language and Literature. I'm an English graduate. I wouldn't have got too far without either rote learning or analytical skills.

Are you going to respond to my post about the gradings any time?

Not an anecdote, no, that was a direct quotation from Chapter Two of Hard Times by Charles Dickens. I've been teaching Dickens for the last 15 years so he's obviously not one of the 'component parts' even though he must have been absent from your own education.

X post again:

Exactly which of these 'component parts' have been missing, Crumbled?

Judging by your Dickens reference you yourself don't seem to have a very high opinion of facts, for a start. I've seen that in the classroom before.

I work in an independent school where Gove is as despised as the state school where I used to work.

I know what a direct quote is - do you know what an anecdote is?