Education, education, education: Labour's not given up yet

By David Higgerson on Jun 30, 09 04:30 PM

ED BALLS is a funny fish isn't he? If you only read the newspapers, you'd think he was only in Government because he was a mate of Gordon Brown's.

He's been in the job of "children's secretary" (education secretary in old money) since Brown came to power, arguably one of the most important cabinet jobs.

But you're much more likely to see his name in the same sentence as "Brownite" or "plotter" or "loyalist" than you are close to the word "schools", "exams" or "league tables."

And while I've no doubt there's a whole heap of plotting he's been involved in, it's been interesting to see how he's done when the job he does finally comes for the media's attention.

His Schools white paper had the potential to be full of the sort of quick-headline, substance-lacking initiatives which Labour, and latterly the Tories when they actually have the good grace to announce policies, have become well-known for.

And lets face it, given Labour's current position in the polls, and the recent furore triggered by the gaffe-prone Hazel Blears, now would be the right time to deploy such tactics.

It would also be very easy to come out with initiatives which the Government hope won't get too much opposition. A very quick win, for example, would have been to give in to demands from teachers to reduce, or scrap, SATs test. We all know the argument: it stops teachers teaching, it puts pressure on students, it causes youngsters just to be coached for exams. The fact it also shows how well teachers are at doing their jobs is often lost.

Or failing that, Balls could have deployed Labour's other tactic, one Brown is well-known for: the option of fiddling while Rome burns. In other words, a shake-up for the sake of it.

But, from where I'm sat, it appears Balls has lived up to his name and shown some with his education plans.

Although the moderate NASUWT union has supported the idea of a licence for teachers - which has to be renewed every five years - I suspect opposition will emerge in the coming weeks from other unions.

Yes, it might stress a teacher out to be personally reviewed by the head and an external body every five years - but if they have the correct experience and ability to teach effectively, they'll have nothing to worry about.

And so what if that means teaching is no longer a job for life? I'm sure we all know of teachers who simply aren't up to the job - be that a memory from school or knowledge of a modern-day classroom. The impact a poor teacher can have on a community shouldn't be underestimated - whole generations can suffer as a result.

Mr Balls told reporters: "This is not a problem we are addressing, although it may be that we will discover some teachers who do not make the grade and some who aren't re-licensed." (Source: BBC)

Nice way to keep teachers on side - but rooting out weak teachers is exactly what this is intended to do.

I suspect Mr Balls will also run into stormy waters over plans to simplify the league tables system in this country. Instead of difficult to read performance charts, which generally are only understood by the education profession, there will be a report card which covers all the key issues and gives a school a single grade.

I'm sure teachers will point out at the fact it's impossible to judge schools on a like-for-like basis but here's news: That's life. When they stick a grade or a mark at the bottom of every pupil's work, are they assessing it just on the work and how close it comes to hitting the target the teacher sets, or are they taking into account the pupil's background and other factors? If it's the latter, the marking system is corrupt. If it's the former, then it's no different from the dozens of other judgements passed on people throughout life.

And parents do have a right to know how a school performs, how well-behaved pupils are and what the test results are. Labour played too much into the hands of teachers when it introduced the dreadful "value added" measure, which, as I understand it, assesses a school on how well a child develops while at the school. It's presented in an unwieldy way, with schools scoring less than 1,000 deemed to be not developing students enough, but those over 1,000 doing better than expected. To parents, it's a number that means nothing - how much better is a school which scored 1,015 than one which scored 1,014.

Of course, for Mr Balls, this can all be done reasonably safe in the knowledge that Labour will be heckling from the opposition benches by the time much of this happens, if it happens at all. But the fact he isn't simply delivering uncontroversial, headline-grabbing ideas shows he's got a stomach for a fight, and the best interests of the system at heart.

And after weeks of MPs expenses, internal party fighting and election campaigns, it's good to finally get a measure Ed Balls the chidren's secretary, and not just Ed Balls, the plotter myth