- Gove on the Offensive. Blackadder content.
Crankboy is bang on. This government is stuffed with zealots like Gove, IDS, and Hunt who are so utterly convinced that their own incredibly narrow world view is the one true path, that nothing else is allowed to even be considered or countenanced at all. Anyone providing evidence to disprove their frankly bonkers theories is ignored, or attacked!
They are as intellectually and ideologically inflexible as any middle eastern despot, or North Korean dictator. And, given half the chance, I suspect they ‘d like to deal with non-believers in the same wayPosted 4 years ago
terroristzealot is another man’s freedom fighterconviction politician, eh Binners?
Strikes me that both the Tories and the Lib Dems have done a number of U turns (even Gove) and once you strip away the rhetoric Osborne’s ACTUAL economic policies are some way from how he proposed them originally. Cameron’s was also caught with his pants down over Syria etc. Hardly the behaviour of despots and dictators. How would focus groups have risen to promenence over the past decade or so, if politicians were so tied to pre-determined ideologies? Ed Balls is a self-confessed supporter of Keynesian economics and yet when in power moved far away from the teachings of his mentor. They are more tied to power and the practicalities of clinging to it.
The beauty of politics is, for the most part, these people are kept out of the productive process. Pity that this is only partially true in education though. Perhaps Gove should be given some standard history GCSE source papers to look at. He might improve his own analysis then. If nothing else he would bring it up to date.Posted 4 years ago
Thm – this lot have done a number of U turns, having been forced into them. Whereas if they’d have listened to the advice of considerably better informed experts, instead of pursuing a purely ideological agenda, they could have been avoided by better policy being written in the first place
Take Goves policy of abolishing GCSE’s, announced apparently on a whim, having consulted nobody. When the teaching unions and various educational experts pointed out that you can’t just scrap a national exam system and impose another overnight, they were condemned as lazy, self-interested dinosaurs, who were simply frustrating the masters grand vision.
So after 12 months, and god knows how much tax payers money, of pursuing his ideological idiocy, against all advice, he had to admit defeat. They were right. He was wrong.
It’s hardly the height of pragmatism is it?
And did you notice any constriction in the face of the exposure of such obvious stupidity? Of course not. It’s just on with the next hair-brained schemePosted 4 years ago
Partly true, but if, as you suggest, this lot have had U turns forced in them, then you cannot, by definition, compare them to dictators or despots. That doesn’t follow. And why are “this lot” any different from their predecessors (of any party).
Interesting, a lot of labour strategy at the moment is trying to address the perception that the party lacks vision and ideology. Zealots and conviction politicians eh? So are labour strategists barking up the wrong tree? Perhaps they could stick to Tony’s more pragmatic approach.
I think we often mistake ideology with compulsion to meddle – Gove being a very good example. If you want an internationally recognised, high quality, broad- based exam system you can buy it off the shelf. The clue is in the name – the baccalaureate! No need to invent a watered down version.Posted 4 years ago
As described above AA ( and as you know as a teacher).
It’s good for some people and satisfies a lot of Gove’s stated objectives. He doesn’t need to steal the name to dress up an incomplete idea. That’s meddling. Not suited for all though (“not comprehensive”) and neither of my boys chose it in the end. But from a broader academic perspective (and if you plan to work/study overseas) it has a lot of merit IMO. Plus it’s tried and tested globally rather than in Gove’s bathtub!
Shouldnt be up Gove’s street (despite evidence to the contrary) as it seeks, as a matter or priority, to remove national biases in teaching history. Something that dates back to its original raison d’être.Posted 4 years ago
Yes, the English Bacc is “my” example of meddling by Gove. The IB is an internationally recognised, high-standard, broad-based education program. As to evidence, there is plenty of debate (eg some Unis prefer it, higher subsequent salaries etc) in the profession as you will be aware. There are also growing numbers of adopters, but it didn’t suit either of my two.
But by design it gets round national government meddling in the curriculum – which is normally a good thing in my book!Posted 4 years agoepicycloSubscriber
athgray – Member
If you consider WW1 and WW2 almost as one conflict with a 21 year ceasefire, the death toll including Spanish Flu outbreak must be 5-10% of World population. Seems a horrendous price to pay to prevent German Imperial expansion.
Especially when we have seen the Germans manage this peacefully with the EU. 🙂Posted 4 years ago
Among the debate (and why I made my comments on Gove above) are:
The system has its share of critics. The most widely voiced concerns are that the IB promotes breadth over depth, and that it fails to instil in young people any of the national pride that might come from a more UK-centric take on education, particularly in subjects like history and English. (Translated literature is widely taught on IB programmes, unlike on A-level syllabuses.)
I can’t quite imagine Gove liking that!!!Posted 4 years ago
I thought IB was a post 16 qualification rather than a potential replacement for gcse. I also very much doubt there is any evidence to suggest it would be better for the country than a level given the very small numbers doing it and the fact that the vast majority of those will be public schools. Its much harder to have a qualification for the majority than a priviledged few.Posted 4 years agoCaptJonMember
maxtorque – Member
Very, very few children of any age are going to sit through boring, 5hr long factually correct documentaries or lectures on a subject that means absolutely nothing too them, even if they are 100% historically accurate.
Nor would many adults. Put your straw man away.Posted 4 years ago
No it has various levels including an alternative to GCSE. Why would those free from the requirement to follow the national curriculum chose it then? They are not stupid and they charge a lot of money to do something inferior.
The privileged few being students in 146 nations worldwide rather than those Gove has in mind in his bathtub?
The IB is more than its educational programmes and certificates. At our heart we are motivated by a mission to create a better world through education.We value our hard earned reputation for quality, for high standards and for pedagogical leadership. We achieve our goals by working with partners and by actively involving our stakeholders, particularly teachers… Our four programmes for students aged 3 to 19 help develop the intellectual, personal, emotional and social skills to live, learn and work in a rapidly globalizing world.
Sounds like something teachers have been crying out for!!!! Still we could stick with latest whim of whichever M of Education is in office.Posted 4 years ago
How many schools in the UK teach it at anything lower than post 16. In fact how many teach it at post 16 level? Other than their own copy you present no evidence that it is any good. Why would a priviledged few choose it, there needs are different than the majority.Posted 4 years ago
AA, it’s relatively new in the UK especially below A-level. I don’t really want to get into a debate about IB per se, my point was more a criticism of Gove who IMO is dressing up pretty modest ideas in the Bacc name to make them sound more grand that they are. His proposals are very different from the IB in principle and in practice. I guess my second point, was that if you want to achieve the broader aims, I would rather go with an internationally recognised and widely tested approach (if not in the UK) than the whim of one or a small group of non-specialists.
I won’t bore you with the stats – there are plenty out there though. I had to make the decision for both my boys and sat through several presentations on the pros and cons. One of the reasons why I like the IB is like the Scottish UNi system it allows/requires you to keep up more breadth in education. I think that, in general, that is a good thing. But it is not the best choice for all, which is why I didn’t chose it for either of my kids. Then again, I don’t believe in a comprehensive “one-size-fits-all” approach to education 😉
It’s also perceived as involving more work which doesn’t always make it popular among students!!!Posted 4 years agoninfanMember
Surely the Baccelaureate is essentially a step on the road to the much belated imposition of the Tomlinson report, since nobody has had the balls to challenge the unfathomable attraction to A-Levels
Interesting reading here on the opinions of four former education secretariesPosted 4 years agophil40Subscriber
I know of quite a few centres who have dropped the IB due to the expense of delivering it, and also the universities have stated to significantly up their offer requirements for those students studying the IB.
I am not a particular fan of the A level system, but Gove’s latest ploy is to make a levels two year terminal qualifications. He has also linked funding so that centres will not get funding if they make students take a fourth a level subject. So far from broadening students study, as happened with AS levels where pretty much everyone took four and focused during the second year onto three A2 subjects, everyone will just do three all the way through. Another thing he slipped through is that students who take on a third year of study, ie done level 2 in their first year, being successful and moved onto a two year level three funding, who’ll only get 5/6 funding for their third year of study. No reason for this except that he seems to want to punish those students who dare to take more than his prescribed, a levels should take two years approach!Posted 4 years ago
Phil – one estimate I saw was £7m to introduce as it needs different teaching skills etc. So no, not cheap. Like Pre-U, the lack of consistency with Uni Applications is a factor reducing up-take! Certainly a factor that we considered.
Ninfan – thanks for that, interesting read indeed. Its a pity those sort of minutes do not get more airing. Some more refreshing honesty than is normal!Posted 4 years agokonabunnyMember
But from a broader academic perspective (and if you plan to work/study overseas) it has a lot of merit IMO.
This is a rubbish point, a solution looking for a problem. People with A-levels and Highers don’t have any trouble getting onto foreign uni courses. It’s not like there are huge numbers of kids that would like to study Estonian Nosefluting at the University of Poodnos but can’t get onto the course because the admissions office doesn’t understand what A-levels are about.Posted 4 years agoCaptJonMember
Tristram Hunt has written a riposte:Posted 4 years agokimbersSubscriber
michael gove writing in that delightful paper his wife works for having a pop at the bbc and slagging off left-wingers, whoda thunk it!?
Gove is remarkably transparent, hes still smarting at the government being blocked from bombing syria, this is just him cynically using the forthcoming centenary to vent some spleen
the man’s an arsePosted 4 years ago
Gove is about the last person on earth I would consult on matters of trench warfare. Even if he’s pandering to the Daily Failograph gallery, his language & reductive take on History mark him out as an especially odious & arrogant buffoon – and one who packs a good deal less intellectual weight than he thinks he does. Were my great-great uncle (the late Major Noteeth, listed as missing on the Menin Gate) alive to read such binary garbage, he’d probably have wheeled about & launched a section attack upon the Tory HQ. As for Gove’s remarks about Blackadder, Oh! What a lovely war etc: I suspect the satire would have been understood – and appreciated – by the editors of the Wipers Times. Therein lies its eternal value – as a necessary retort to the play up & play the game jingo of the “smug-faced crowds”.
Really, the man is a complete Twonk. Over the top you go, Gove.
Posted 4 years ago
konabunny – Member
But from a broader academic perspective (and if you plan to work/study overseas) it has a lot of merit IMO.
This is a rubbish point, a solution looking for a problem.
Cheers kona I will bear that in mind and change the advice I give to students, oh and ignore…
The most important factors for acceptance into a selective U.S. university is the combination of the level of your academic courses and the grades you receive. You can opt for either the more typical American high school college preparatory program or the International Baccalaureate. The IB is considered to be more advanced and challenging. The IB also gives you the option of applying to European universities.
Complete bllx obviously! Ditto the below
“We find that IB students adapt more easily to a university style of learning and become independent learners from an earlier stage compared to those from other backgrounds.” Imperial College
“IB is well known to us for excellent preparations. Success in an IB programme correlates well with success at Harvard. We are always pleased to see the credentials of the IB Diploma Programme on the transcript.” Harvard
” “The interesting finding that we have is that those who are coming in with the International Baccalaureate do better in firsts and 2.1s than the average, by about 6%, and no IB student has yet dropped out of university. We think that that is worth noting.” Exeter
Still, probably rubbish as you say, what do they know. Harvard, imperial pfaff…Posted 4 years ago
Gove and Richard Evans have “history”. Niall Ferguson gives some perspective
The link within that is also quite interesting.Posted 4 years ago
would you also argue that Gary Sheffield was also a twonk
Having just read [combat veteran] Tolstoy’s masterly take on the Battle of Borodino, I have no time for any of ’em – politicians or historians. 😈
I find my sympathies lie with Capn Blackadder rather than Mr Gove.
Seconded.Posted 4 years ago
Well I can sympathise there – at least with the former. As always with the enigma that is Gove, hidden beneath the surface there may be something interesting. I have just downloaded The Chief on kIndle to see for myself.
I found ferguson’s comments interesting but not sure about his source analysis stuff. IMO that is a great addition to the teaching of history if not at the complete expense of learning facts!!!!Posted 4 years ago
sums up nicely the chasm
Indeed. A man who wouldn’t last five minutes in front of a secondary modern class… pontificating about how “the left” has skewed our understanding of industrial-scale slaughter.*
He makes me wanna puke.
*I have no problem with the notion that the British effort in WWI was just a little bit more complex than lions led by donkeys (not that this necessarily excuses the horror), but I have a big fugging problem with the Education Secretary – the friggin’ Education Secretary! – dribbling about it in such crass Daily Fail fashion, harnessed to his own profoundly-narrow vision of what History is, and embellished with cheap flag-waving. The ghastly, oleaginous twonk.Posted 4 years agoninfanMember
Wow, Ad Hominem attacks against Gove – Fresh!
Boris skewers Hunt:Posted 4 years agoJunkyardMember
One of the reasons I am a Conservative is that, in the end, I just can’t stand the intellectual dishonesty of the Left. In my late teens I found I had come to hate the way Lefties always seemed to be trying to cover up embarrassing facts about human nature, or to refuse to express simple truths – and I disliked the pious way in which they took offence, and tried to shoosh you into silence, if you blurted such a truth.
read that as I am a selfish **** and i think everyone is like me [ yes I am that arrogant] and therefore it is human nature to be a self serving ****.
Boris I am not like you for I have never needed to publicly apologise for being a racist nor for having numerous affairs whilst married….are we all greedy and unable to control our loins ? To be fair he does not seem able to control his hair or his mouth so it is slightly unfair to single out his penis here.
Once I have finished laughing at his lack of irony , especially when you consider what this debate is actually about and them trying to “rebrand” history and our nation to one we all put on a pedestal and adore- did thatcher not try and do this?
Surely you can love your country and have an accurate view of it?
What is it next week
Slavery – well we did give them trains and cricket and education [ and it existed before us and we ended it]so really why do the lefties have to say it was bad.
Empire – Brilliant wasnt it eh etc.
FWIW you can take either view on those or try to see some balance- politicised history is pointless
If Tristram Hunt seriously denies that German militarism was at the root of the First World War, then he is not fit to do his job, either in opposition or in government, and should resign. If he does not deny that fact, he should issue a clarification now.
It was one of the causes but not the only one – it ignores the fact they were only trying to have a force as large as ours and we would not let them. It takes two [ at least] countries to have an arms race. See cold war for a recent example. It is also to suggest there is only one cause for the war – again does anyone think that to state this you would get high marks at GCSE History?
Lets not forget what the DM said about the serving “traitor” that is “red ed” dad for historical accuracies that the right support. Anything that does not fit witht their highly right wing historical view is called left wing – they are so skewed they view the truth as a left plot. Dangerously paranoid – I am picturing the cabinet in a Dr starveling style meeting of minds.Posted 4 years agoMr WoppitMember
Boris skewers Hunt:
The replies to his article are interesting. You might expect the Telegraph readership to be in natural agreement with him but this is evidently not the case. There are several good replies that highlight the poverty of his analysis.
It seems that right-wing politicians are saddled with the inability to see causes and effects only as far as the end of their own noses.Posted 4 years agoNorthwindSubscriber
If you look at the immediate cause of the War, yes it’s possible to take a simplistic view that “Germany’s imperialistic desires caused it”. But it doesn’t take a genius to realise this didn’t happen in a vacuum, WW1 was the culmination of centuries of war and imperialism in europe in which just about everyone had a shot at being the aggressor, and it wouldn’t have played out the way it did without this history of friction, rivalry, and bloodshed.
There’s a reason it was described as the war to end war- you would think to hear some people talk that Germany shattered a golden age of peace.Posted 4 years ago
The topic ‘Gove on the Offensive. Blackadder content.’ is closed to new replies.