Michael Gove, Shadow Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, answers your questions.
David Belchamber: "Mr Gove, having spent most of my working life in an around schools - mainly independent - might I raise the question of grant maintained status? I had the pleasure of meeting you in Desmond Swayne's constituency and I probably asked you the same question then. Why don't the Tories pledge to reintroduce GM schools? They worked very well and drove up standards by the simple expedient of cutting out the middle man."
David, I remember our meeting and it’s nice to hear from you again.
Grant-maintained schools were a great success, and the principle which underpinned them – greater autonomy to pursue excellence – is still at the heart of our schools policy. Tony Blair revived a watered-down version of GM schools as ‘Trust Schools’, and we supported the Education & Inspections Act which introduced them last year. In our Green Paper we outlined proposals for more new schools within the state sector - New Academies - which would have even more freedoms than the GM schools did. And we will be developing more policy ideas in the New Year which build on the principle of reducing bureaucratic control.
James Maskell: "Why has the Conservative Party been so very quiet about the very serious issue of looked-after-children?"
My apologies if our concerns haven’t been communicated clearly enough. My colleagues Tim Loughton and Trish Morris have worked immensely hard to improve Government policy in this area and their tireless campaigning on behalf of some of the most vulnerable in our society deserves more credit. It's part of my job in the future to ensure their efforts are rewarded.
Tim has recently highlighted the unhappy fact that the gap between the educational attainment of looked-after children and other children is widening and has made the case for urgent action to address educational under-achievement among those in care. Tim has also conducted a review of social work policy, and how it affects vulnerable children, which made a series of concrete suggestions about how we can build more stability into the lives of children who have been at risk and have been taken into care.
I am also, personally, particularly keen to explore every avenue we can to provide children currently in institutional surroundings with the warmth of family life and its an issue I touched on in my maiden speech.
The government is currently bringing forward a Bill to address some of the problems and both Trish and Tim will work hard to amend it to reflect our priorities.
John Ionides: "To what extent do you think that the introduction of phonics, and school uniforms, should be recommendations that double up as benchmarks for other systems, and to what extent should they be enforced? If existing schools are reluctant to change (after all they have been asked to make a lot of changes in recent years so there is not a huge stomach for more change) should change be driven by supply-side pressure (i.e. new schools coming online and driving change) or stronger enforcement from Whitehall and/or the LEAs?"
The short answer is - they’re tough benchmarks and the best driver of improvement is a system which generates innovation not more bureaucratic interference.
A longer answer, with more working shown, follows…
We think it’s important that schools are held accountable and parents are given the information to enable them to make the choices they believe are right for their children.
The evidence that synthetic phonics is the best method of teaching reading is formidable, and the detailed work conducted in Clackmannanshire and West Dunbartonshire reinforces the case for its deployment. Again, the evidence we gathered in our survey of the best performing comprehensive schools demonstrated a clear correlation between a strict uniform policy and high standards as well as good discipline.
We would encourage the adoption of best practice, and ensure that schools were held accountable for their decisions on how reading was taught and how they implemented their uniform policy. Ofsted would help in this process of ensuring accountability. As would our plan for a test after two years of primary school to ensure children had been taught to read. Those schools which had failed to teach reading properly would find it more difficult to escape proper scrutiny, and accountability.
Hand-in-hand with this accountability, we believe that supply side reforms which see new entrants in the state system would drive improvement. We want to give all parents the right currently only the rich have – to take their child out of a failing school and put them in a good school. And we believe that competitive pressure will drive up standards everywhere.
We’ve already seen that virtuous circle operate in Hackney with a new school, Mossbourne Academy, employing tried and tested approachs to teaching, generating superb results, attracting many more pupils and, as a result, applying a competitive pressure which has driven up standards in neighbouring schools.
Matt Wright: "My view as a governor is that having more good headteachers and getting rid of bad headteachers will have by far the biggest impact when combined with some greater freedoms for schools. What can be done to address this issue of headteachers so we we have the best in the world?"
Good teachers at all levels are absolutely key to raising standards. One of the best ways we can promote best practice is by ensuring that teachers entering the profession have the right materials and support available to them to use proven effective methods. But one of the big problems in head teacher recruitment at the moment is the fact that so many excellent professionals are put off the top job because of the pressure and paperwork. We want to free heads from many of the pointless interventions they now face, and give them real power to run their own school, including the power to exclude pupils who disrupt the learning of others.
Bringbackgrammars: "Michael - David Cameron's entire philosophy is giving power back to individuals because the government isn't best at deciding for us. Given that - why would a Conservative government decide that not building new grammar schools is best for us? If you are serious, give communities the power to build more selective grammar schools - all the evidence shows they offer the best education and the best route out of poverty. It is only your desperation not to be painted as traditional Tories that stops you."
We are not against grammar schools— they are excellent schools that provide a high quality education to pupils that attend them. But we want to give the fantastic opportunities grammar schools offer to every pupil in every school.
Labour have failed to tackle the problems of educational inequality in our schools: the attainment gap between rich and poor is still too high, and over half of all pupils leave school without the basic qualification of a good English and maths GCSE. We must do more to tackle this failure in all our secondary schools.
We don’t want to return to the 11+ exam nationally. Instead, we want every pupil across the country to be able to make the most of their talents, whatever their ability and aptitude. Only then will we be able to raise our standards internationally. That’s why we have set out new proposals in our Green Paper, ‘Raising the Bar, Closing the Gap’ to create new good schools, with additional incentives to have them set up in the most challenging areas.
We believe that children from all backgrounds will benefit from an education where the focus is on those policies which evidence shows raise standards across the board: setting by ability within school, tried and tested teaching methods and good discipline policies.
I believe passionately in greater social mobility and recognise that is a value dear to many Conservatives. I believe our proposals for raising standards in all schools will help deliver that.
Dontmakemelaugh: "What is your view of teacher training colleges?"
I’m concerned that within teacher training colleges there is insufficient focus on the tried and tested teaching methods which empirical evidence has proven work best. I’m specifically concerned, for example, that more needs to be done to ensure the next generation of teachers are able to deliver effective reading of teaching. I fear there is insufficiently good support and guidance on synthetic phonics.
Dave Bartlett: "As I understand the 'Raising the Bar' green paper, Conservatives policy is to fund new schools from central government, rather than local government. (Dedicated Schools Grant, section 2.1.2) Surely if there is any substance to the Conservatives commitment to localism, centralising policies should be avoided?"
Our policy is certainly not a centralising policy. It will see cash liberated from bureaucratic control and following the pupil. Money will go where there is a demand for new good schools, not where bureaucrats decide.
John: "What is your view on state funded schools which teach creationism in science lessons? Will you support their expansion or will you prevent their expansion or neither? Will you defend them when criticised?"
I don't know of any school that tries to teach creationism as if it were established science such as relativity or quantum mechanics. In our green paper we have set out an approach which would mean there were rigorous checks that will only allow fit and proper teachers to educate pupils. This means that schools will not only teach the basics, but ensure that every pupil leaves school with a proper understanding of scientific theory.
Trueoutsider: "you've made a big thing of being a social liberal-that is someone who supports the freedom of people to live the way they live-rather than a Guardian liberal who seeks to use the state to persecute traditional Christian lifestyles. How on earth does your position on the "equality legislation" fit with that. How on earth is freedom compatible with shutting down catholic adoption agencies? How on earth can any believer in social liberalism stop hotels from only renting to married couples? How can they shut down gay clubs etc etc? It seems to me what started as a belief in individual liberty has become a blind adherence to the Guardian line and hostility to conservative values and a willingness to use the powers of government without limit to support the former and crush the latter."
I believe that people should not be subject to prejudice on the basis of their sexual orientation. I believe the law should guarantee equality to people whatever their sexual orientation. I respect the religious beliefs of other Christians but my belief in equality is rooted in my own faith.
Terry: "As a loyal Scot you must look at our performance north of the border with dismay. Why do so many of your countrymen see us as irrelevant? Any ideas how we might win back some of the lost ground?"
There are deep historic reasons which lie behind the Tory decline in Scotland. The restructuring of the British economy in the Eighties hit areas with traditional heavy industries hardest. That harmed us in Scotland. It also harmed us in other areas such as the North-East of England (where I worked for 5 months).
Against a difficult background the party in Scotland has been performing well recently. Under Annabel Goldie and Murdo Fraser we have more than held our own. We avoided having our vote squeezed by the nationalists at the last Holyrood elections, even though they were seen in media eyes as the only alternative to Labour. And Annabel was, rightly, judged the star of the campaign. I know Annabel and her team, supported by David Mundell, are developing policies attuned to Scotland’s new politics and I’m confident that, underpinned by David Cameron’s passionate defence of the United Kingdom, that we will be in a much stronger position in the future.
Janet Clowes (via email): "What is Conservative thinking on the Blair/Brown Children's Centres projects that were designed to help eradicate child poverty and promote adult education and the return of parents to work, yet now, in Stoke on Trent, seem on the verge of collapse? I work in Stoke on Trent (with Children under 5 years with Special Needs) where Childrens Services are currently under 'Special Measures' and all Early Years Nursery Places in the Children's Centres are frozen until April 2008. The creation of Children's Centres forced private and voluntary nursery providers (eg the PLA) out of business over the past 5 years and so, in this area of particular social deprivation, the most vulnerable children in our society are being denied access to Early Years Education and to the nursery education funding that is allegedly promised to all 3 - 5 year-olds. As far as we are aware at the moment (and as you can imagine we are not being told very much), Stoke City is offering the Childrens Centres Nursery & Childcare Provisions to Private Tender. We are at a loss to understand how any of our families, many living in poverty or on the margins of poverty, are going to be able to access/afford the charges for these services in April. The Childrens Centres are beautiful buildings with wonderful equipment and resources (please visit us) but no adequate thought was given as to how these centres would be funded and administered in the longer-term. Even as Stoke begins building work on the last 2 Children's Centres (planned for in the original budget), those already completed cannot afford to admit any new children."
We support the aims of the Sure Start programme, which was established to help children in the most deprived areas. But, as your examples highlight, there are concerns that scheme isn’t as effective as it should be in reaching those who need most support.
I personally believe we need to do more to provide affordable childcare to help parents balance work and home life more easily, to help support adult education and to provide a structured route into more formal education, especially for children from more disadvantaged backgrounds.
I’m reluctant to say more about the specific situation in Stoke without visiting (which I’d like to do) to assess the facts on the ground.
Greg Wilkins (via email): "Is it true you are afraid of flying?"
It’s nice of you to ask. I wrote about my dislike of flying in The Times a few years ago now. I subsequently heard from a number of people who weren’t huge fans of flying and discovered that Tony Blair used to hate it, driving to Italy, I think, for his honeymoon. He forced himself to get on planes again and again and there really is no alternative. When I’m travelling to Ulster, Germany or the States it’s not really practical to cycle.
