Quote:Writing in his 2010 autobiography A Journey, Mr Blair wrote: ‘We had come to power in 1997 saying it was “standards not structures” that mattered.
‘This was fine as a piece of rhetoric; and positively beneficial as a piece of politics. Unfortunately, as I began to realise when experience started to shape our thinking, it was bunkum as a piece of policy. The whole point is that structures beget standards. How service is configured affects outcomes.’

Ferocious Aardvark wrote:So it seems that this exceedingly simple point, obvious to the point of being banal, nevertheless did not occur to either our Prime Minister, or any of his team, when they were discussing it and putting it in their manifesto. Fook me.

DaveO wrote:I think this is another piece of poor journalism from Mail and I don't think it makes a valid connection with what Blair said and what Hunt is saying now.

Hunt is referring to the need to have all teachers in state funded schools be qualified teachers. So it doesn't matter if you are an ordinary state funded school or an academy or free school, if you get state funding you will employ qualified teachers.

That seems eminently sensible to me and does not mean it precludes having a different structure for how schools are organised if you think that is going to improve matters.

By the way, the reason why it seems sensible to insist on fully qualified teachers teaching our children is illustrated by what happens here in Chester at nursery level.

My wife works at the only state funded nursery school in the county and it employs two fully qualified teachers and they teach the kids the requisite number of hours and then it is structured play and activities. It is always Ofsted outstanding but never mind that, it is held in high regard by many local people with several generations of families having attended.

The private nursery's in the area either don't employ a qualified teacher at all or employ one giving an hour or so's education. They essentially just provide child care. It doesn't stop them advertising a "nursery education".

This is what you will get if free schools are allowed to employ people teachers who are not qualified. People around here seem very gullible in that it is clear some of them see the two free schools here as a "free" public school education. They probably don't even realise there is a chance their kids will be taught by non-qualified teachers, employed no doubt on the cheap.

So to get back to the point, it doesn't matter what structure you have, you can employ whatever kind of teacher you like but in my view insisting on all teachers being qualified is simply common sense.

Mintball wrote:Irrespective of the accuracy or otherwise of what anyone is reported to have said, the point remains that – and there appear to have been no denials on this score – that Blair has been meeting Gove to 'encourage' him to further an agenda that Blair himself agrees with and helped start via academy schools.

It's an illustration – were one needed – of how far from any traditional 'left-wing' positions was Blair's ethos. But for those who harp opn about the Labour government being 'socialist', left-wing' etc, does that now mean that Gove too is a lefty? Or will it help to aid some semblance of understanding that we have been – and remain – on a neo-liberal, right-wing course for some considerable years?

JerryChicken wrote:It serves the football style supporter of political party's to believe that there is an absolute opposite political opinion between Labour and Tory and its not really surprising that those who bleat the loudest tend not to have been born when there REALLY was an absolute opposite political opinion between Labour and Tory - what we have now is a pale imitation of a political spectrum and a gross simplification of that spectrum in the media in order to appease those who cannot think too hard about the subject.