ATL

Party talk

With a general election looming, ATL general secretary Mary Bousted looks at what's been said during the party conferences

It was TS Eliot who wrote that April is the cruellest month of all. As general secretary, I am inclined to disagree with him. For me, September is the cruellest month, as I wear out my shoe leather traipsing the country attending party conferences.

This year, however, the impending general election makes a massive difference. For the first time in a long time there is a genuine possibility of a change of government. ATL is rightly proud of its independence from any political party affiliation, but we are not naïve; we know the education system is a key target for politicians of all persuasions. Education has been transformed from the "secret garden" of James Callaghan's famous 1976 Ruskin College speech into a motorway with politicians racing each other down every lane promoting their cures for the supposed educational ills of this country.

As both the Conservative and Labour governments retreated from having an industrial policy and adopted (with disastrous consequences) a 'light-touch' policy on financial regulation, so social policy - and in particular health and education - has become the site of constant intervention by government and its agencies.

ATL members have experienced New Labour's educational policies in their professional lives since 1997. You will all have your own views about what has worked and what has not. In my view there have been many positives: real increases in pupil funding; the rebuilding of decaying and decrepit school buildings; Sure Start and children's centres; lifting children out of poverty; rises in teachers' and headteachers' pay; and the Workload Agreement, which, while it has not secured downward pressure in working hours, has given primary teachers planning, preparation and assessment time - a massive achievement.

Of course, there are also negatives: educational standards have risen, but at an enormous cost to teacher professionalism. The curriculum and its assessment are over-prescribed by national statute; teachers are told what to teach and how to assess. The accountability regime, enforced by an overgrown Ofsted, is manifestly unfair, putting enormous hurdles in the path of schools serving the most challenging areas. Unaccountable to anyone, Ofsted remains a source of fear and loathing for the profession and drives ways of working that teachers and lecturers know is unsuitable for their pupils.

But what could the profession expect from a Conservative administration that has pledged an education bill as the first act of its administration? The Shadow Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families, Michael Gove, laid out his plans in his speech to his party's conference. He made much play of "what every sensible parent knows". He said schools need to look forward to a rosy past: proper uniform, setting classes by ability and traditional subjects taught "in a rigorous way".

Gove made several references to the "educational establishment" - a dark and dangerous body responsible for "faddy ideologies", "political correctness", an "entrenched culture of dumbing down" and a "comprehensive decline in educational standards". I have to confess that I do not know if Mr Gove regards teachers and lecturers as part of this establishment. Neither do I recognise the picture he paints of standards in state education, which have risen exponentially in the last ten years.

But at the heart of Gove's speech was a pledge to see "a radical shift of power in education" enshrined in his proposal to adopt the "Swedish model" of state education run by private providers. In his own words: "We will dramatically accelerate the number of academies... every state school could have the chance to free itself from bureaucratic control - and get the extra money, freedom and flexibility... to dramatically lift standards."
I have written to Mr Gove with the following questions:

1. What does the educational establishment consist of? Does it include teachers, lecturers and support staff?

2. What evidence can he put forward to substantiate his claims of a dramatic decline in educational standards?

3. How will surplus places be funded in a system where parents and other private providers can set up schools? (Given that the state schools left behind will still need to deliver a curriculum, employ teachers and support staff, and maintain the school estate?) Are these schools to be left to sink or swim? What is the minimum guarantee of educational provision to be received by all pupils in any state-funded school?

4. What freedoms would a future Conservative government extend to school leaders who must be, in Gove's words, "captain of their ship"? In particular, will a national pay scale be retained for schoolteachers or will school leaders be given much greater freedom to decide who gets paid what?

I will report back to you Mr Gove's responses.