India Knight in The Sunday Times (pay wall) on Michael Gove’s curriculum reform:
Tagged in: michael gove, public service reform, schools
Gove, rightly, calls his proposals “fundamental building blocks”. These will result in children learning fractions from the age of five, knowing their times tables by the age of nine and learning to recite poetry from the age of five, with an added emphasis on grammar, spelling and punctuation.
These are good and achievable things, and put important knowledge in place before any “difficult” or troubled child has the chance to go Awol, which doesn’t usually happen until secondary school. I’m also in favour of learning history chronologically, and of English students not being entirely baffled by literature that wasn’t written in the past 12 months.
Gove’s proposals are, to me, socialist in their intention, which is to equip every child with the sort of education that has traditionally been available to only a very few. How is that wrong? And what do left-leaning academics think they’re doing when they say, “Ooh, no, the children won’t understand any of it; it’s bad for them”? What? As bad as the fact that state-school students are still shamefully under-represented at our top universities?
Latest from Independent journalists on Twitter