Conor Boyle is a young conservative and unionist who works in the energy sector, having recently graduated form the University of Oxford.
As a small-c conservative, I’m the first to admit that the last Conservative government didn’t get everything right; in-fact there’s far more we got wrong than I’m proud to admit.
I could list of the areas of tax, regulation, the only partial delivery of Brexit, the abject failure on immigration, or the inability to change the conversation around health. One area, though, where I would risk any ridicule or unpopularity to defend the last government is education.
The last Conservative Government ushered in nothing less than a revolution in our schools, and we should be proud of it. The facts on this are clear beyond doubt. Britain (or England, I should say) has soared up the PISA rankings, and seen massive improvements in reading and mathematics in particular. We are the best in the west for reading and maths. That is an achievement that bears repeating, reflecting on, and working very hard prevent it being unravelled.
The keys to this success has been the most basic of conservative virtues; choice, high standards, zero tolerance of failure or low standards, and transparency. At the heart of this revolution has been the conservative belief that parents know what their children need better than any well-meaning official in Whitehall, and the explosion of academies and free schools has empowered parents to find an education that is adequately tailored to their child.
It is worth noting, that this is a luxury enjoyed for centuries by the well-off; those children always benefited from school choice. The Conservatives extended this to children of all backgrounds.
This went hand-in-hand with strengthening the inspection regime, to reaffirm that schools exist to deliver a service, and that delivering a poor quality version of this service is not acceptable, and making exams more rigorous. Condoleezza Rice aptly said in 2012 that ‘self esteem comes from achievement. Not from lax standards and false praise’. She was right. Making exams gradually easier was billed as a measure to enhance ‘inclusion’ and helping disadvantaged students.
Nothing could be further from the truth; their lives were being further blighted every time a well-meaning left-wing politician came up with a new quick-fix to inequality in education. This is part of the pattern of thinking which suggested that less should, or can, be expected of working class kids like me, and that the bar has to be lowered to allow us to get on. Apart from being incredibly insulting, and entirely without basis, it does not prepare us for life after school. In-fact, this approach puts disadvantaged pupils in a more perilous position the minute they leave the controlled confines of education, because the real world will not provide these same artificial boosters. Only disaster could follow.
I have been blessed in my life to have a mother and father who recognise the importance of gaining a good education for yourself, and to have received a great education from a Roman Catholic grammar school in Northern Ireland.
What I most acutely remember about my schooling was the strong ethos and value-set that the school had, and the lengths they went to so that we would buy-into it. This, like school uniforms or desks in straight rows, is one of those intangible things that really set the tone, and has an immeasurable impact. What has so annoyed me since leaving school however, is that my experience was little more than good fortune on my part to be living in the catchment of a good school (oh, yes, and in a jurisdiction which hasn’t decided to do away with grammar schools). This allowed me to go on a great university, take a good degree, and seek gainful employment. The story, I’m livid to reflect on, is not the same for far too many children.
This is something the free school and academies movement sought to address. If parents or community groups were unhappy with the quality of schools, they could set up a new school, with an ethos and approach which better suited them.
This is exactly what has made our left-wing friends so upset.
This empowers parents and pupils, and removes control from the local councils and unions. Not only do academies diminish union power, they embarrass them for the sinister crimes against children that all to many of them are engaged in.
It is usually at this point in any discussion of this nature, that our leftwing friends clutch their pearls and accuse us of not valuing teachers. It is one of their empty smears. Teaching is amongst the most noble of vocations, and we don’t, in truth, pay teachers enough for what we expect from them.
Our problem is not with teachers, our gripe is with the pernicious activist groups which protect the few bad apples at the expense of all the gems, and at the expense of the children. We can’t have on-the-spot or rigorous school inspections, because bad teachers can’t cope. We can’t have payment by performance, because bad teachers will earn less than their colleagues. We can’t dismiss teachers that don’t provide a good service for their students, because … well because the unions seem to exist to protect the roadblocks to excellence.
So, Labour, on behalf of their paymasters, are getting their own back on the children.
The so-called ‘Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill’ is 124 pages of educational vandalism.
It undoes two decades of progress in education, driven through by ideological zealots. In the now well-reported-on spat between the Education Secretary and Katharine Birbalsingh, Phillipson is supposed to have said she doesn’t need any advice from school leaders, because she was once a disadvantaged schoolchild herself. This would be admirable if she wasn’t denying other children her own success by bringing back the postcode lottery. More importantly, it’s a nonsensical statement. Being a schoolchild twenty or thirty years ago doesn’t, in itself, make you qualified to oversee education. I take the train to work everyday, would anyone serious claim that this is good enough experience to fix the train if it broke down?
The temptation as a conservative in these discussions is often to write a staunch defence of Katharine Birbalsingh, and of her wonderful Michaela school. I can see the temptation. Katharine is a wonderful woman who is doing so much for social mobility, and we would be in a great position if we had more like her. But that’s not even the point.
Free schools allow for parents to choose.
Parents can opt for a relatively softer approach to discipline, uniforms, etc. if they disapproved of Birbalsingh’s.
Under our system, people vote with their feet; good schools will be over-subscribed and will have enough pupils to stay open. Bad schools, which parents don’t want to send their children to, won’t have the numbers to survive and will close. Wonderful. There isn’t one child’s future worth ruining for the sake of saving the job of a single bad teacher.
Our system empowers parents, lifts pupils, rewards good teachers, and makes Britain a more meritocratic, well-educated, prepared nation.
Labour should hang their heads in collective shame for wanting to undo this.
Conor Boyle is a young conservative and unionist who works in the energy sector, having recently graduated form the University of Oxford.
As a small-c conservative, I’m the first to admit that the last Conservative government didn’t get everything right; in-fact there’s far more we got wrong than I’m proud to admit.
I could list of the areas of tax, regulation, the only partial delivery of Brexit, the abject failure on immigration, or the inability to change the conversation around health. One area, though, where I would risk any ridicule or unpopularity to defend the last government is education.
The last Conservative Government ushered in nothing less than a revolution in our schools, and we should be proud of it. The facts on this are clear beyond doubt. Britain (or England, I should say) has soared up the PISA rankings, and seen massive improvements in reading and mathematics in particular. We are the best in the west for reading and maths. That is an achievement that bears repeating, reflecting on, and working very hard prevent it being unravelled.
The keys to this success has been the most basic of conservative virtues; choice, high standards, zero tolerance of failure or low standards, and transparency. At the heart of this revolution has been the conservative belief that parents know what their children need better than any well-meaning official in Whitehall, and the explosion of academies and free schools has empowered parents to find an education that is adequately tailored to their child.
It is worth noting, that this is a luxury enjoyed for centuries by the well-off; those children always benefited from school choice. The Conservatives extended this to children of all backgrounds.
This went hand-in-hand with strengthening the inspection regime, to reaffirm that schools exist to deliver a service, and that delivering a poor quality version of this service is not acceptable, and making exams more rigorous. Condoleezza Rice aptly said in 2012 that ‘self esteem comes from achievement. Not from lax standards and false praise’. She was right. Making exams gradually easier was billed as a measure to enhance ‘inclusion’ and helping disadvantaged students.
Nothing could be further from the truth; their lives were being further blighted every time a well-meaning left-wing politician came up with a new quick-fix to inequality in education. This is part of the pattern of thinking which suggested that less should, or can, be expected of working class kids like me, and that the bar has to be lowered to allow us to get on. Apart from being incredibly insulting, and entirely without basis, it does not prepare us for life after school. In-fact, this approach puts disadvantaged pupils in a more perilous position the minute they leave the controlled confines of education, because the real world will not provide these same artificial boosters. Only disaster could follow.
I have been blessed in my life to have a mother and father who recognise the importance of gaining a good education for yourself, and to have received a great education from a Roman Catholic grammar school in Northern Ireland.
What I most acutely remember about my schooling was the strong ethos and value-set that the school had, and the lengths they went to so that we would buy-into it. This, like school uniforms or desks in straight rows, is one of those intangible things that really set the tone, and has an immeasurable impact. What has so annoyed me since leaving school however, is that my experience was little more than good fortune on my part to be living in the catchment of a good school (oh, yes, and in a jurisdiction which hasn’t decided to do away with grammar schools). This allowed me to go on a great university, take a good degree, and seek gainful employment. The story, I’m livid to reflect on, is not the same for far too many children.
This is something the free school and academies movement sought to address. If parents or community groups were unhappy with the quality of schools, they could set up a new school, with an ethos and approach which better suited them.
This is exactly what has made our left-wing friends so upset.
This empowers parents and pupils, and removes control from the local councils and unions. Not only do academies diminish union power, they embarrass them for the sinister crimes against children that all to many of them are engaged in.
It is usually at this point in any discussion of this nature, that our leftwing friends clutch their pearls and accuse us of not valuing teachers. It is one of their empty smears. Teaching is amongst the most noble of vocations, and we don’t, in truth, pay teachers enough for what we expect from them.
Our problem is not with teachers, our gripe is with the pernicious activist groups which protect the few bad apples at the expense of all the gems, and at the expense of the children. We can’t have on-the-spot or rigorous school inspections, because bad teachers can’t cope. We can’t have payment by performance, because bad teachers will earn less than their colleagues. We can’t dismiss teachers that don’t provide a good service for their students, because … well because the unions seem to exist to protect the roadblocks to excellence.
So, Labour, on behalf of their paymasters, are getting their own back on the children.
The so-called ‘Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill’ is 124 pages of educational vandalism.
It undoes two decades of progress in education, driven through by ideological zealots. In the now well-reported-on spat between the Education Secretary and Katharine Birbalsingh, Phillipson is supposed to have said she doesn’t need any advice from school leaders, because she was once a disadvantaged schoolchild herself. This would be admirable if she wasn’t denying other children her own success by bringing back the postcode lottery. More importantly, it’s a nonsensical statement. Being a schoolchild twenty or thirty years ago doesn’t, in itself, make you qualified to oversee education. I take the train to work everyday, would anyone serious claim that this is good enough experience to fix the train if it broke down?
The temptation as a conservative in these discussions is often to write a staunch defence of Katharine Birbalsingh, and of her wonderful Michaela school. I can see the temptation. Katharine is a wonderful woman who is doing so much for social mobility, and we would be in a great position if we had more like her. But that’s not even the point.
Free schools allow for parents to choose.
Parents can opt for a relatively softer approach to discipline, uniforms, etc. if they disapproved of Birbalsingh’s.
Under our system, people vote with their feet; good schools will be over-subscribed and will have enough pupils to stay open. Bad schools, which parents don’t want to send their children to, won’t have the numbers to survive and will close. Wonderful. There isn’t one child’s future worth ruining for the sake of saving the job of a single bad teacher.
Our system empowers parents, lifts pupils, rewards good teachers, and makes Britain a more meritocratic, well-educated, prepared nation.
Labour should hang their heads in collective shame for wanting to undo this.