What is it like now that Gove has gone?

[LavaDragonflies]

As a parent it's hard to tell if it has made any difference, but teachers - has Gove going made any difference to what it is like in schools?

I will not say whether I am a teacher or not -dont want to out myself - but on the ground little has changed

BUT

There are no longer unremitting snide remarks being made by the Secretary of State about state schools and their staff. (That role seems to have been taken on by the New School Network the charity set up by Gove, fully funded by our taxes, but as not part of the civil service, not accountable. They promote Free Schools and Academies, and they are keeping the torch lit, as best they can...)

No. Because Gove's policies were all nicely lined up and are still coming in but by bit.

And the other Michael is still in post with his punitive inspection regime.

Not at the moment. We're still introducing his legacy (sigh). BUT, rather suspiciously several of the exam boards have extended their deadline for giving us their outlines for the new GCSEs. This, hopefully, suggests that they're taking on board the fact that he's gone. Rumour has it that the dfe is in complete turmoil.

NSN was not set up by Gove and is not fully funded by taxes. It was set up in 2009 by Rachel Wolf, a former adviser to Gove. In the most recent year for which accounts are available they had income of £1.35M of which £745k was a grant from the government to support free school proposals.

Headteachers did get a letter from Nicky Morgan with a very different tone. Not all criticisms and threats, more well-done, thank you and we're all in this for the children. It was a refreshing change.

we have Continuity Gove. Nicky Morgan's no better in terms of substance.

Although like Curioushorse I've heard from well-informed friends that the exam boards are discreetly slow pacing the release of new material, because they're, ahem, not wholly committed to the new specifications they were drafting before Gove got booted...

hmm prh47bridge I've always wondered if you work in politics, or for a rightwing think tank (like Policy Exchange which was founded by Michael Gove and whose members also founded the NSN). I certainly think you are being disengenuous about NSN being some independent charity with nothing to do with Gove! Rachel Wolf was a very young 24/25 year old when NSN was set up, and her former job was adviser to Michael Gove. Another person influential in setting it up was Dominic Cummings, his special adviser at the DfE. He breached parliamentary rules by failing to register his employment at NSN while holding a parliamentary pass.

www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2011/11/18/dominic-cummings-given-parliamentary-pass-while-at-new-schools-network/

I do not work in politics or for a think tank of any political complexion, nor have I ever done so. I am not a member of any political party nor have I ever been.

I specifically pointed out that Rachel Wolf was a previous adviser to Gove. She certainly shares his outlook on education. There is an admiring article about her in the Independent shortly after she set up NSN which does not contain any hint of involvement by Gove. He certainly was not one of the initial trustees. He may have offered advice and encouragement. He may well also have helped her with appropriate contacts. But nlondondad's statement that he set up NSN is clearly wrong.

According to the article to which you link Cummings first involvement with NSN was in June 2010. That is nearly a year after it was set up. By that time it was well established, so unless you have other evidence I don't think he was involved in setting it up at all.

Gove is a co-founder of the Policy Exchange with Francis Maude, Nicholas Boles and others. Saying PE was founded by Gove implies he did it alone which is not correct, although he was the initial chairman. As far as I can see only one of the initial trustees of NSN was involved with PE. The current Director and one of the Advisers used to work for PE but they both joined NSN at least a couple of years after it was set up. I don't know what level of involvement Gove had with PE by 2009. He was certainly no longer a trustee by that stage.

As far as I am concerned my last post was not making any kind of political point. Nlondondad stated that Gove founded NSN. Most people would take that to mean he founded it alone or that he played the leading role in setting it up. That is clearly not the case. Nlondondad also stated that NSN is fully funded by the taxpayer. Again, that is clearly not the case. I do not see how correcting those statements is in any way party political. And if you pay attention to all my posts you will note that I am critical of some parts of Gove's agenda and unconvinced of others.

I'm glad to hear you are not employed by politicians or a thinktank. There are plenty of links between Policy Exchange, New Schools Network and other rightwing think tanks such as Civitas, backed by wealthy Tory donors. But it is unfortunately true that Michael Gove was not working alone - he has packed the DfE, School Commisiiners, Ofsted and the House of Lords with unelected appointees and sympathisers and they often cross over - ex-Civitas Lord Nash employee and Annaliese Briggs (short lived unqualified head of free school Pimlico Primary) is now employed by the Policy Exchange, for example. I took the spirit of what nlondondad said as the fact that getting rid of Gove has not got rid of his circle of influence and legacy of his appointments when in office. But literally speaking New Schools Network does not equal Gove.

I was explaining to my Y9s the other day that they would have been headed nicely for a C under the old GCSEs but would unfortunately be sitting new ones where the equivalent to a grade C, a 4, would not be considered a pass grade. They weren't not impressed with Gove. My Y11s are not impressed with Gove either because of his pissing around with A-levels which they are starting to think about taking. Gone, but very much still getting sworn at in classrooms.

Re exam boards being slow about releasing new specs - the maths ones had trouble getting accredited by Ofqual and are only now starting to be signed off for first teaching next September. I wonder if the extensions in timelines to other subjects are because they are learning from that?

There are plenty of links between Policy Exchange, New Schools Network and other right wing think tanks

It happens with left wing think tanks and certain left-leaning charities as well. People who work for that kind of organisation tend to move from one to another.

he has packed the DfE, School Commisiiners, Ofsted and the House of Lords

The DfE is full of civil servants who are not appointed by politicians. Yes, Gove did appoint the regional school commissioners - as they have not existed before that was inevitable. He did not, however, appoint the head teacher boards that advise them. The Secretary of State always appoints the Chief Inspector and the chair of Ofsted, although the latter is not now a Gove appointee. The inspectors are not appointed by politicians. Gove certainly cannot be accused of packing the House of Lords, nor can the government. There are 221 Conservatives in the House of Lords out of a total of 780 members. For comparison there are 220 Labour members of the Lords.

with unelected appointees and sympathisers

The posts where Gove has appointed people have always been unelected. And of course whoever is Secretary of State is likely to appoint people sympathetic to their agenda. They are hardly likely to appoint opponents. But I note that Wilshaw at Ofsted has criticised some aspects of Gove's agenda.

Yes, two zealots criticising each other when they tread on each others' toes. I'm sure Wilshaw's delighted to have centre stage again as he instils military discipline in all our schools, without Gove stealing his limelight.

So what do you think of the speed with which Rachel de Souza got ennobled for being head of an outstanding school? She was at Ormiston Victory for only two or three years and results are still well below average on some measures. Apparently she was given advance notice of inspections. Now she works for Theodore Agnew - appointed to the DfE, also trustee of Policy Exchange and his own academy chain. He nearly got the Ofsted chair gig on top.

And what do you think of Lord Nash being governor of more than two schools, therefore breaking the rules of the department he runs?

Or Alan Lewis, deputy Tory chair who, it was claimed on several websites and reports, was chair of governors at a Bradford free school but now denies it because of financial scandals and his involvement in land and rent deals?

Theodore Agnew seems to have awarded his own trust DfE development money, too.

For what it is worth the alleged advance notice of inspections, which has been denied, relates to her current role at Inspiration Trust which is chaired by Theodore Agnew. As Inspiration Trust is, like all academy trusts, a charity it is not owned by Agnew - it cannot be owned by anyone, so it is not "his own academy chain" in the sense most people would understand. I accept, however, that he may well have be behind Inspiration Trust in the same way Lord Harris is behind the Harris Academies. Both the major parties sometimes ennoble people quickly. I don't really have an opinion on that.

Lord Nash is not breaking any rules. The recent report by Peter Clarke into the Trojan horse affair in Birmingham suggested that there should be a rule that, other than in exceptional circumstances, no-one should be a governor of more than two schools. This suggestion is one of many to which the government has not yet issued a response.

There certainly appears to be considerable lack of clarity over the Bradford situation with Alan Lewis denying he was ever chair. He was never registered as such at Companies House so, if he was chair, the law was broken. I am a little surprised that those making allegations and stating that there was no chairman in place from October 2011 to October 2012 have not taken the elementary step of checking the accounts, which show that the chairman was Dr A A Suleman. But clearly it is not good (to put it mildly) that various bodies appear to have stated that Alan Lewis was chairman if that was not actually the case.

This suggestion is one of many to which the government has not yet issued a response.

You are right about that, and thanks for replying to my questions. It is the problem with this government, isn't it? They skew and cherrypick evidence generally, but don't respond to reports that raise questions or contradict their arguments, such as the Academies Commission report, or even read their own research. But they have just been forced by the statistics watchdog to back down on the claim that free schools are twice as likely as other schools to get an 'outstanding rating', which is a flawed comparison as many outstanding schools have not had a visit since the new inspection framework came in.

As a Guardian reader points out, the New Schools Network continues to make this claim.

It is the problem with this government, isn't it? They skew and cherrypick evidence generally, but don't respond to reports that raise questions or contradict their arguments

That's hardly unique to this government, though, is it?

I don't think they lied as much. The last government at least had more education ministers who had been educated in, had children in, or had taught in state schools, unlike this lot, and were less likely to turn education into a market. There were therefore fewer conflicts of interest.

I wouldn't go so far as to accuse either party of lying. They tell the truth as they see it. They pick evidence that supports their beliefs. Opponents tend to class that as lying.

Gove was initially taught in state schools before winning a scholarship to an independent school. He sends his children to state schools unlike most of his predecessors in the last government.

The Twitter item to which you link is stretching the truth somewhat. Nick Gibb did attend an independent school for a while but was mainly educated in state schools. Sam Gyimah was initially educated at state schools in Ghana then went to a state school in the UK. He was not privately educated at all. The attempt to justify the description of Achimota School in Ghana as a private school shows a basic failure to even investigate the education system in Ghana. Senior schools are subsidised by the government, not fully funded, so according to Professor Shaw they are all private schools.

There are lies, damned lies and statistics. The DfE press office under this government has repeated misused statistics or based claims on flimsy evidence, and been criticised by the statistics watchdog and put under special monitoring by the Information Commissioner.

Perhaps all governments have done this but we're just not aware of it. I hadn't heard of the Statistics Authority before, but if know any examples of dodgy claims on education by previous Labour governments that have been officially criticised in this way, please provide the links.

The monitoring by the ICO was the result of a dispute between the ICO and the Civil Service as to whether emails sent by politicians using personal email accounts could be covered by FoI requests - nothing to do with use of statistics. The Civil Service was adamant that emails from private accounts weren't covered by FoI and issued guidance under the last government advising Civil Servants accordingly. If you look you will find on the internet an email from a BERR civil servant in 2008 saying, "It feels wonderful to work free from fear of FoI!!"

The UK Statistics Authority did not come into being until 2008. Before that the Office for National Statistics was overseen by Treasury ministers and hence did not criticise the government. Its first criticism was issued in December 2008 and related to the previous government's "premature, irregular and selective" use of knife crime figures. Inevitably, given the timing, the majority of the Authorities criticisms relate to the current government. As far as I can see the only criticism related to education is the one you highlight. However, given that the Statistics Authority is such a recent creation, I don't it can be argued that this gives the previous government a clean bill of health. Note that the previous government also made many claims alleged by opponents to be on flimsy evidence. Some of those opponents are the same people making such allegations about the current government - opponents of academies, for example.

Sorry - I seem to have lost a sentence before posting! After the quote from a civil servant at the end of the first paragraph I meant to add that the ICO decided to use the DfE as a test case.