Light On Dark Water

Could It Finally Happen?!?

Might the British government at long last create a Ministry of Silly Walks? Thought it's still a very long way off, this story certainly raises the hope that the, um, first step has been taken:

Speaking earlier this week, the acting deputy general secretary of the [Association of Teachers and Lecturers],
Martin Johnson, said: "There's a lot to learn about how to walk. If you
were going out for a Sunday afternoon stroll you might walk one way. If
you're trying to catch a train you might walk in another way and if you
are doing a cliff walk you might walk in another way.

"If you are
carrying a pack, there's a technique in that. We need a nation of people
who understand their bodies and can use their bodies effectively."

And all these walks would eventually require a ministry to administer them, right?

 

Considerably less amusing, from the same source:

Mr Johnson branded the national curriculum "totalitarian" because it
prioritised academic education over other types of knowledge.

Mr
Johnson said: "For the state to suggest that some knowledge should be
privileged over other knowledge is a bit totalitarian in a 21st century
environment."

Actually, no, there won't always be an England, not in the sense that the word was formerly understood.

Maclin Horton
,

15 responses to “Could It Finally Happen?!?”

  1. Marianne

    This just sounds so 1960s retro:
    “The union suggested that instead of the current national curriculum, which focuses on core subjects such as maths, English and science, teachers should have the freedom to adapt lessons to reflect a curriculum that concentrated on life skills.”
    Have they learned nothing in the last 50 years?
    Scary that this particular union is considered “traditionally moderate“. Its membership is quite a bit lower than that of the two largest: it has about 121,000 members, while two other unions have a combined membership of about 590,000. Wonder just how radical those groups are?

    Reply
  2. Mac

    That thought sort of flickered through my mind, too: “are they still talking like this?!” But now that I think about it I think I hear that basic idea pretty often. Who would ever have thought that walking was a “life skill” with which students needed help, though?
    I’ve read some good things about this Gove fellow.

    Reply
  3. Grumpy

    I have to say you guys are wrong, or anyway, I don’t agree with you. If you recall, in the 1980s, there were protests against Trident. Teachers began to teach ‘Peace Studies’ in schools. Certain rightwingers, and I use the term advisedly, began an outcry against the teaching of Peace Studies in schools. I don’t know how much of it ever actually happened. Mrs Thatcher’s government then decided to impose a ‘national curriculum’ which would prevent such things, because the government would prescribe a list of exactly what topics should and should not be taught in the class room. I do not think any conservative could possibly approve of this action or regard it as anything other than totalitarian. As it happens, I have a tiny place in this history, since I typed the speech which Lord Keith Joseph gave against the National Curriculum in the House of Lords. The National Curriculum became law, despite my efforts and those of Lord Joseph :), and it was an unmitigated disaster for tiny subjects such as Latin and Greek. Since they were not on the National Curriculum they were eliminated. Of course they were dying already, but it was the death blow. Then of course, in the hands of subsequent left wing governments, eg Blair for eighteen years, and left wing teachers, the government used the National Curriculum to impose the teaching of precisely the subjects they thought should be taught in schools, and in the way they thought they should be taught. So yes, the loony leftist teacher speaks accurately and truly.

    Reply
  4. Mac

    Gosh, that’s not what he seems to be saying at all. Must be a lot of missing context, because it sounds like he’s saying that it’s totalitarian to “privilege”, e.g. teaching mathematics over e.g. teaching different styles of walking.
    I have no trouble believing a national curriculum could be totalitarian in the sense you’re describing it, of specifying exactly what should be taught. Maybe you’ve heard of the controversy about something called the Common Core, which is being attacked by conservatives for the same sorts of reasons you mention. Whether the charge is justified or not I don’t know, although one should probably assume so unless proved otherwise, our government being what it is now.

    Reply
  5. Paul

    Was Keith Joseph not education minister when the national curriculum came in? How did he not manage to stop it?

    Reply
  6. Grumpy

    It was 1988. He was not education minister, he was in the House of Lords. He was against it. I know, I typed his speech.
    Yes, those teachers’ objections to some subjects in the National Curriculum were silly! But the objection to the National Curriculum as such is very sound, in my opinion.

    Reply
  7. Paul

    I’m not casting doubt on his objection, Grumpy, just wondering how an educational change could be pushed through against the wishes of the man I thought was the minister responsible. I suppose I was taking the “national curriculum” to be part and parcel of the shift to the General Certificate of Secondary Education, which I’m pretty sure was on his watch.

    Reply
  8. Paul

    The funny thing is the idea that maths, English and science are not life skills. Levels of personal debt might be much lower if more people had a better grasp of maths and English, and a mild grasp of science could save people from all sorts of other charlatanry.

    Reply
  9. Mac

    Indeed.
    “But the objection to the National Curriculum as such is very sound, in my opinion.”
    I agree. What I was reacting to was the idea that there’s something oppressive in saying that Shakespeare is more important than some evanescent popular novel or, more typically, the latest in feminist-post-colonial-queer theory, which, whether or not this guy thinks it, is definitely not unknown among academics.

    Reply
  10. Marianne

    I know nothing about the educational system in England. Just found and read this very detailed piece, “Towards a totalitarian education system in England,” by Sir Peter Newsam. Seems a right mess.

    Reply
  11. Paul

    And from all I can tell at a distance, Marianne, the evils he complains of have only become more pronounced in the 18 months since he wrote that.

    Reply
  12. Louise

    We need a nation of people who understand their bodies and can use their bodies effectively
    Seriously???
    Of course, lunatics can be found anywhere on the globe.

    Reply
  13. Louise

    I do agree with Grumpy about the whole National Curriculum thing though – pretty totalitarian really and quite opposed to the Catholic view of education (I don’t mean just in content, but moreso in its very concept).

    Reply
  14. Grumpy

    Paul I believe that the National Curriculum was much more specific about what was to be studied than any previous legislation. This was a reaction to ‘peace studies’. But of course once the principle was in place a left wing govt could mandate peace studies.

    Reply
  15. Grumpy

    This is from the piece Marianne linked to:
    By 1988, the Conservative government had decided that further work on the curriculum was to be undertaken without other than token assistance from teachers or local education authorities. The curriculum was to be nationalised. There were a number of different ways in which a national curriculum could have been created that had a statutory basis requiring a degree of compliance but would have left room for ‘independent thought’ on the part of teachers. Advice on the matter poured in from all directions, not least from Lords Tebbitt and Joseph. Both warned against an over-complex set of statutory requirements. All such advice was ignored. On notions of how learning ought to occur, not altogether dissimilar from those in the nineteen century’s Revised Code, a detailed, ten subject, curriculum was devised with measurable content and defined levels of achievement, for which schools could be held accountable. After more than twenty years of expensive amendment, that national curriculum has now reached an advanced state of disintegration but still determines the content of what schools in England are required to teach and on which it is believed a school’s merit or lack of it can be measured and judged.

    Reply

Leave a reply to Marianne Cancel reply

Instagram / TikTok / X

Designed with WordPress