Don't run, confront the arguments

5th June 2009 at 01:00

In referring to Chris Woodhead's book A Desolation of Learning, your correspondents (Letters, May 29) concentrate on the person rather than his arguments.

However much one may disagree, as I do, with his belief that selecting children into grammar schools is the only way to educate clever children properly, he raises a number of other serious questions that deserve answers.

For example, is it sensible to set a minimum level of achievement, such as a particular level of the GCSE, that all children are required to reach? The Government believes it is. Professor Woodhead disagrees.

Since Matthew Arnold, most inspectors have been on the Woodhead side of the argument. Christian Schiller, one of the greatest of post-war HMIs, put it this way: "If a minimum of attainments is fixed such that it is in the power of all, it is demonstrably irrelevant to the vast majority and of no practical value. If a minimum is fixed such that only some can reach it, it must demonstrably be beyond the powers of the rest and its imposition will undoubtedly lead to a distortion of their powers. In my view, the goal of a minimum of attainments is incompatible with continuity in the process of learning."

Whether Ofsted agrees with this is unclear, but until politicians do, the hounding of schools with a high proportion of children who will never reach the ever-changing "minimum of attainments" prescribed by government will, presumably, continue.

The important point Professor Woodhead makes is that teachers should be free to develop their own ways of providing worthwhile activities for children for whom they know that externally imposed standards of this kind are wholly inappropriate.

This is an important argument. Others in the book deal with such matters as the importance of subject knowledge, the developing role of Ofsted as an enforcer of government policy rather than an independent agency, and the future of independent education.

The way to deal with the serious educational arguments in Professor Woodhead's book is to engage with them, rather than run away. Sadly, that is what the "eloquent silence" Professor Colin Richards advocated in his letter amounts to.

Sir Peter Newsam, Former chief schools adjudicator, director of London's Institute of Education, and chief education officer for the Inner London Education Authority.

Log-in as an existing print or digital subscriber

Forgotten your subscriber ID?


To access this content and the full TES archive, subscribe now.

View subscriber offers


Get TES online and delivered to your door – for less than the price of a coffee

Save 33% off the cover price with this great subscription offer. Every copy delivered to your door by first-class post, plus full access to TES online and the TES app for just £1.90 per week.
Subscribers also enjoy a range of fantastic offers and benefits worth over £270:

  • Discounts off TES Institute courses
  • Access over 200,000 articles in the TES online archive
  • Free Tastecard membership worth £79.99
  • Discounts with Zipcar,, Virgin Wines and other partners
Order your low-cost subscription today