In a letter to The Independent and The Daily Telegraph this week, a hundred education academics criticised Michael Gove’s controversial new curriculum proposals as an “endless list of spelling, facts and rules” that will prove “miserable for children". Left Foot Forward has looked at some of the changes to the school curriculum proposed by Michael Gove and the criticism they’ve received.
In a letter to The Independent and The Daily Telegraph this week, a hundred education academics criticised Michael Gove’s controversial new curriculum proposals as an “endless list of spelling, facts and rules” that will prove “miserable for children”.
But what was it they were actually criticising?
Left Foot Forward has looked at some of the changes to the school curriculum proposed by Michael Gove and the panning they’ve been subjected to by academics.
MATHS
By the age of seven the education secretary wants pupils to be able interpret simple graphs and know their two, five and ten time’s tables.
At nine students should be able to read years in Roman numerals as well as know their twelve times tables, and by the time pupils leave primary school they should be comfortable with fractions, decimals, multiplication and division.
Criticism
The policy has been criticised for its emphasis on rote learning which, according to leading academics, demands “too much, too soon” of pupils.
ENGLISH
Gove wants more emphasis on spelling, grammar and punctuation which he argues are the “solid foundations” of cognitive skills. From the age of nine he wants children to be able to recite poetry out loud.
Criticism
This “narrow” approach has been attacked by the hundred rebel academics because are worried it will “leave little space for other learning” such as “speaking, listening, drama and modern media”.
SCIENCE
By eleven the curriculum proposes children should fully understand the effects of drugs and gauge the importance of diet and exercise – something at present deemed appropriate only for secondary school pupils.
HISTORY
The teaching of history in the curriculum has been met with almost universal dubiety by academics. Gove wants history to taught as “our islands story” and founded on “how the British people shaped this nation and how Britain influenced the world”.
Pupils would learn the chronology of British history from the stone age right through to the study of influential enlightenment thinkers such as Adam Smith and John Locke (but it would exclude thinkers such as Voltaire and Rousseau) all the way through the two world wars and the modern era ending with Margaret Thatcher’s election victory in 1979.
Criticism
The idea has been slammed by academics as an Anglo-centric “patriotic stocking filler” that will result in “the dumbing down of teaching”.
LANGUAGES
Gove is reintroducing compulsory languages in schools after the Labour government ditched the policy in 2004. From the age of seven children will begin learning a language, selecting either French, German, Spanish, Mandarin, Greek or Latin.
Criticism
There is broad consensus on reintroducing the learning of languages at a young age. Stephen Twigg, the Labour shadow education secretary, has recently backed the initiative.
What do you think? Are the academics right, or is Gove?
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
50 Responses to “The meaning of Gove”
Mick
Left wingers have such short memories. Just recently, people in Labour had been hammering on about performance tables or increasing numeracy and literacy standards.
And teaching more about British history again is always a good thing. Look at all our inventions, discoveries and achievements. We did far better than so many others in the world.
David Blunkett faced down teacher unions who much preferred strikes and child sex lessons for the under-tens, whilst Tony Blair faced down rebellious backbench Labour nupties over improvements and academies – numpties who represented some of worst performing areas academically, so they had no room to dictate the best ways.
‘Bog standard comprehensives’, remember? Gove wants kids to actually learn stuff again. after years of Labour failure of practicing what was preached.
Mick
“In a letter to The Independent and The Daily Telegraph this week, a hundred education academics criticised Michael Gove’s controversial new curriculum proposals as an “endless list of spelling, facts and rules” that will prove “miserable for children.”
I also remember the story of the infamous 64 economists, bellyaching about Geoffrey Howe to the Times. Turned out they jumped the gun a bit and the new economy took root and flourished into today’s model. Consensus can look a very impressive thing but even the boffins can get it wrong at times. Gove’s plans will work long-term too, as more traditional teaching methods worked in the past.
The real time to watch out is if he lets sadistic teachers thrash kids with sticks again, though in the case of some of the little buggers today, you could welcome even that!
Ermie
Well, certain responses on this page would certainly have benefitted from more empahasis on grammar teaching… no names mentioned….
Ed
You mean 364 economists… it’s somewhat ironic that you’ve got the figure wrong. (Maybe that’s inflation for you?) And it’s not clear that Howe was entirely right either: is it entirely good that we now have no manufacturing? Weren’t the unemployed deserving of more help to re-skill than Thatcher gave them? One hardly has to be a mad lefty to say that – only to go as far gauche as Michael Heseltine… Later in the 1980s the twin goals of increasing property ownership and reducing inflation came into conflict, but that (I guess you might say) was a Lawson story…
Ermie
“Turned out they jumped the gun a bit and the new economy took root and flourished into today’s model.” Well that worked out well for the world, didn’t it….?