What does Nicky Morgan not seem to understand?

[theluckiest]

Nicky Morgan urges teachers' unions to 'do their bit' www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-35899478

No Nicky, teaching is not wonderful at the moment. No, teachers are not just moaning yet again (because that's what we usually do, isn't it?). No, your constant interfering, moving of goalposts and unnecessary 'reforms' are not helping anyone. In fact, you are damaging education irreparably.

Here's an example: the 'more rigorous' testing that you insist all 11 year olds should be put through are actually damaging. They are demoralising teachers but much more importantly, they are seriously damaging children's mental health. Yes, really. The stress these children are being put under is unforgivable this year. As a school we are held to ransom because of these tests (let's be honest, tests that we teachers, parents and schools know are bullshit).

They feel like they have failed already because your 'rigour' is inappropriate, unnecessary and completely pointless. They despise learning this nonsense and I can't blame them. At a time of their lives when learning should be exciting, they are force-fed inaccurate, archaic grammar and given the message that their writing cannot be good enough if it doesn't have a semi-colon.

Sounds crazy doesn't it? Because it is. So forgive me if I don't "Use the tools available to them to build up teachers, promote the profession and tell the story of what a rewarding job teaching really is" at the moment. (how I laughed when I read that one!!)

And don't get me started on academisation....Nicky, take your fingers out of your ears and listen. Before it's too late.

Too many politicians are swayed by public opinion;
Well, let's not bother to have elections then - why get the public to vote for you if you are not interested in their opinion. Just set up a dictatorship and be done with it.

She needs to read this

We have known about the success of the Scandinavian education system for years so why does no one want to emulate it here?

Just makes me so and

Ha, ha. WTF?!

When they do that, then the electorate don't know what the party stands for.

But promising the opposite of what the party actually intends to do in it's manifesto makes it really clear to the electorate what a party stands for?

But promising the opposite of what the party actually intends to do in it's manifesto makes it really clear to the electorate what a party stands for?

On this we will have to disagree.

There is nothing in the manifesto that is contradicted in the White Paper, IMO. I know you don't agree with that - but it comes down to personal interpretation of the words written.

Education commentators and analysts have interpreted the words in a way that you disagree with.

Pretty, just curious, do you have any respect at all for teachers? Your posts always seem full of contempt for them. You're certainly dismissive of any and all concerns they raise.

I have a huge amount of respect for teachers; I could not do their job. Classrooms full of children scare me.

That doesn't mean I agree with the opinions of all teachers about the strategy and framework within which teachers educate DCs.

Teachers have been, and are, involved in developing education policy that teaching Unions have objected to and fought the government over. Many are actively engaging with the changes being proposed. There is not unity within the profession about these issues.

Of course there isn't unity in the profession about these issues! Ask the CEO of the MAT I work for - they are exceptionally positive about academisation, of course they are, and they are now earning a fortune from having seen which way the wind was blowing early on. The MAT I work for is all about partnership and sharing resources, the 'nice' kind of MAT that schools choose to join, the sponsor is the school I work for, not any business.

Then you've got the academy chains like Harris which have a terrible reputation as an employer, and from what I read on here aren't particularly liked by parents either. The ones who are predatory and take over any school that shows a hint of weakness, the ones that parents and governors fight against.

Ask the teachers at my MAT and ask the teachers at a Harris academy and you will get different views because they are entirely different kettles of fish.

And there is the huge problem. There's no universal concept of an academy, let alone an MAT.

Whether you are a teacher, pArent or pupil, you may get lucky. Or you might not. Allowing schools to become an academy if they think that is what's best is one thing. Forcing schools into a situation where they are forced to become part of an MAT without much say about which one is a different matter.

Whether you are a teacher, pArent or pupil, you may get lucky. Or you might not. Allowing schools to become an academy if they think that is what's best is one thing. Forcing schools into a situation where they are forced to become part of an MAT without much say about which one is a different matter.

Teachers, parents, pupils nor schools are helpless victims in this process. It is not happening to them without their having any influence. The only schools that will have "no say" in which MAT they join are the ones who ignore those opportunities, hoping that the Government will change and the initiative will be scrapped.

Current LA, VA and VC schools (all of which have Governing Boards with parental and teacher representation) can make proactive decisions about how to move forward. There are a range of models. Becoming a MAT from the outset and seeking other schools to join with them, or forming a Federation with other local schools and then converting to an MAT, or seeking an existing sponsor and joining a MAT which shares the schools values and ethos.

Parents and teachers can ask for the opportunity to make their views know to the Governing Board. The Board has a responsibility to strategically plan for the schools future, and, now that the White Paper has been published, the strategic plan for all schools should include a strategy for conversion to a MAT. If the GB does not do this, then they are failing in their role. They are not demonstrating good strategic leadership, which is an aspect of the School that is judged by OFSTED.

*are not helpless victims

I think your first version was more accurate. Freudian slip?

But there is still no choice of remaining with the LA, if your school decides that's best for it.

It's a bit like choices on the menu - you can have lamb or beef, but if you want vegetarian, tough, and why are you whining, you have been given a choice.

But there is still no choice of remaining with the LA, if your school decides that's best for it.

Well, no, because LA's just won't exist the way that it is widely believed they do now - not just in relation to Education provision, but across all services.

As it is, the way in which LA's deliver their statutory functions in relation to education varies enormously from LA to LA and, just like with MAT's - the public do not have any say in how the LA's deliver.

Some LA's have commissioned all the statutory services to outside companies - with a skeleton staff of commissioning managers overseeing those contracts. Some schools found themselves having to contract services from the private sector directly when the LA stopped delivering payroll, HR, H&S services and the like.

There is as much variation in method, quality and extent of services from one local authority to another as there is between MAT's - and it's a damn sight harder to change if it isn't up to scratch. The Government can't just take a LA's responsibilities away. Even if an LA is deemed to be inadequate, responsibility cannot be taken away. LA Controlled Education Provision relies on the LA being willing to accept its weaknesses and welcome support from other LA's - it is not possible for the Government to take enforcement action against LA's, no matter how bad they are. There is no contract between the Government and LA that stipulates performance and quality.

Pretty, can I ask your specialist opinion on what is holding the English education system back and what is preventing the standard of teaching from improving? What would you do if you had a free hand?

But the public can vote for change regarding local government but not MATs and parents are included as part of LA school governance but not MATs.

PrettyBrightFlies are you a teacher or do you work for schools in some capacity?

Are you a SPAD Pretty?

Arguably it's much easier to change direction in an LA than a MAT. Their guidance is much less prescriptive, hence the variation within schools in an individual LA.

What do you think you are going to do if you decide you've made a mistake over the MAT you chose? What if the advertising doesn't quite match up to the reality? How do you change direction and do what's best for the children then?

I fail to understand your reasoning PrettyBright - you seem to say some Local Authorities are good, some less so, so lets scrap the lot for an experiment, which so far has shown extremely mixed results. No, actually, you don't seem to know about good Local Authorities. You may be one of the lucky ones who has had dealings with a good MAT.

One thing I can say for sure is that Nicky Morgan will be long gone and forgotten but the potential damage she could inflict on significant numbers of schoolchildren will endure.

Meanwhile, serious issues such as lack of school places, teacher shortages, ill thought out and rushed curriculum changes and inappropriate tests for primary school children are completely ignored.

NM has moved on from academies. It's leaving the EU that's going to ruin education today.

The words pot, kettle and black spring to mind.

She seems to be being wheeled out a lot at the moment. Is she the only support Cameron has left in the Cabinet? Other than GO of course.

Nicky Morgan is getting the flack but let's be clear that the shit currently hitting the fan (and it will get much worse over the next couple of years) is Gove's legacy.

No, I am not a SPAD. No, I am not a teacher. I work with schools, supporting them in relation to their non-teaching functions.

And, as I have said, a multitude of times, on this and other threads, (and was quoted In The Guardian as saying so) I don't know if academies will be any more successful than the current system or not. It is based on the ideology of the current government which was, like it or not, democratically elected.

In my opinion, the professional thing is to do everything I can to ensure that the system I work within delivers the best possible outcomes for DCs. (Yes, jargon, yuck). Fighting the system takes time and energy. I would far rather put that into making things work as well as I can. But, that's because I am a little fish. I can't influence policy. I can't change political decisions. Particularly one which has been on the cards for 5 years, and which the government has made clear they will push through irrespective of opposition.

I don't agree with all of what Nicky Morgan has said over the last few weeks. But I do agree that the profession has a choice. It can spend years fighting the inevitable, which will impact on DCs, or it can find a way to work within the systemic make it as good as it can be. The current political climate means that this Government can push through unpopular legislation with impunity. In a few years, when there is greater opposition, then that may change.

Would you actively support a system that destroys the collegiality of a profession, that seeks to undermine pay and your own working practices, drives down wages, destroys the professional status of the profession you trained for, regards you as expendable? This is what you are asking teachers to do. To just make the best of it . To accept without criticism. To not ask for evidence. I wonder PrettyBrightFlies if you are an academy broker? I don't think that it was actually made clear that all schools would have to become academies and I was particularly surprised that it was announced as part of the budget.

Maybe we should give up as a society and just lets things be 'done' to us rather than protest about injustice or unfairness. Just allow ourselves to be governed by a benign dictatorship, as other people from a certain type of background know best. I wouldn't dream of lecturing a corporate lawyer or a journalist about how to do their job correctly because I don't have the experience or expertise. However, I have been told how and what to teach by such people.

No. I'm not an academy broker.

I'm not sure whether to be flattered or insulted about the speculation that I work within the political system in some way. I'm not even a member of a political party. I'm not a civil servant. I don't work for anyone other than myself.

I may be in the minority, but I know I am not alone in being willing to embrace these changes and make the best of them.

I wouldn't dream of lecturing a corporate lawyer or a journalist about how to do their job correctly because I don't have the experience or expertise.

You wouldn't. But lawyers and journalists are "told how to do their job" by the inexperienced and unqualified people who pay their wages every day. Do it faster. Do it cheaper. Do it differently. It's what happens when you work for someone else. They sometimes often think they know better than you how to do your job.

If teachers have had absolute autonomy in their profession up until now, then I'm not surprised that they are objecting to change now. But, that change brings their profession into line with most others.