Notebook: Labour’s Education Tightrope
Labour are striking the right tone on education for their core vote, but little else
12 August 2014
Shadow Education Secretary Tristram Hunt is having trouble differentiating the Labour Party’s policy offer on education. This is because he largely agrees with current government policy. Today’s announcement in the Guardian on maintaining AS Levels highlights his predicament (see link below):
“…Tristram Hunt, is poised to announce that Labour would put on hold all A-level reforms due to be introduced next year and scrap the central plan to abolish AS-levels.”
Hunt followed up on Twitter:
By opposing the abolishment of AS-Levels on the grounds that they make university admissions more difficult Mr Hunt is able to avoid the larger question on A-Level reform. The article goes on to state:
“Labour sources said that elements of the new A-levels would be retained, but that a delay is needed to consult and give schools the opportunity to embed the new GCSEs.”
This ‘delay’ is a sop to teachers, labour unions and Labour’s core vote who reject the pace of reform. The phrasing of the statement does not however suggest that a Labour government would reverse the broader changes to A-Levels, namely prioritising stricter final exams at the expense of coursework and modular testing.
Mr Hunt has used a similar strategy by opposing the appointment of unquailified teachers in state schools. By focussing on this issue he has been able to achieve union support without admitting he’d maintain academies and free schools.
Its seems that unless we hear something dramatic in his upcoming policy speech there is little that a Labour government would actually do to roll back the current government’s reforms.
Contact: godwinadvisory@gmail.com
Update: 18 August 2014:
In an article in the Guardian today Tristram Hunt wrote the following:
[A Conservative government] would mean more unqualified teachers in English schools damaging learning; more infant pupils educated in class sizes of more than 30; fewer apprenticeships for young people; no local oversight or accountability of our schools system; and zero strategy for the forgotten 50% of young people: those wanting to pursue technical and vocational pathways.
As expected, there was no major policy announcement, nor a pledge to overturn current government reforms. The most interesting element of the above statement is perhaps the comment about ‘local oversight’. This could be a hint at bringing LEA control over academies and free schools. Watch this space.
