It's Only Teacher Wasteland

At the same time as Justine Greening was trying to grab cheap headlines (but little backing) for her plans for selection and the expansion of grammar schools, the Department for Education were releasing shocking statistics, data which again exposed the real issues which politicians should be talking about if they really cared for children's education.

The data came from the DfE's annual 'Local analysis of teacher workforce', now updated with the latest 2015 statistics on a range of different factors. Above all, the research confirms the ever-rising numbers of teachers leaving the teaching profession (or, to use the DfE's chosen, if blunt, description, the 'wastage' rates) .

As the notes explain, the data shows the annual 'wastage' rate - the numbers of teachers no longer teaching anywhere within the state sector from one year to the next - as being over 1 in 10. In Inner London, it is as high as 1 in 8 teachers. This is a shocking waste of talented, trained teachers who have entered the profession to try and support young people, yet feel that they cannot stay in the profession any longer.

It's also clear from the DfE data that the overwhelming majority of this 'wastage' is now by teachers who have left teaching to look for other jobs, not those who have retired. This trend is clear from the figures:

Some of the other revealing data is in the tables that have been produced giving the number of schools saying that they had at least one temporarily filled or vacant post on the November 2015 census day:

These figures give a lie to the official Government line that there is a negligible vacancy rate in our schools. The real facts are clear - nearly 1 in 4 secondary schools in England are carrying a post which they cannot fill permanently, rising to not far short of a third of secondaries in Outer London.

These statistics reveal the stark reality of the effect of years of demoralising, damaging Government attacks on teachers, not least the relentless workload which has never been addressed despite the various promises that have been made. Further funding cuts will only make matters worse.

Teacher wastage is damaging for schools and the individual teachers who feel unable to continue as state-school teachers. It is especially damaging for pupils who need a stable environment to support their development.

Instead of looking backwards at outdated selective models of education, the Government should be acting as a matter of urgency to prevent this continued haemorrhage from the teaching profession.

Click here for a downloadable copy of some of the main charts and graphs

OECD survey confirms teacher demoralisation and overwork

A press release from the National Union of Teachers commenting on the OECD's Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) reports the following findings on the views of Headteachers and Key Stage 3 teachers in England:

“Only one in three teachers feels their profession is valued by society – a statistic that should shock the Government. Conversely, 87 per cent of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that parents were supportive.

“Hours worked by full time teachers on all tasks is on average 52 hours a week. This is in line with the Government’s own Teachers’ Workload Diary Survey. Half of teachers reported working more than 50 hours a week and one in ten said they worked more than 65 hours. Among part time teachers, a quarter work more than 38 hours. In all cases these are high by international standards, especially compared with Finland – a high performing country where teachers’ average hours are 32 per week. Teachers in England also reported spending more hours on non-face-to-face teaching tasks such as planning, marking and general administrative work.

“Around half of teachers believed appraisal and feedback added no value to their teaching pedagogy or self-efficacy and merely served to satisfy administrative requirements.

“Amongst head teachers in England, the survey makes it very clear that they feel the main barriers to their effectiveness are Government regulation and policy (79%), inadequate budgets and resources (78%) and high workload and level of responsibilities (68%).

“This survey backs up what we already know about the existing problems and concerns facing the profession. The message to Government from this survey is clear: teachers’ workloads are unmanageable and unsustainable and teachers feel undervalued for the challenging job they do.

“This is an issue that concerns everyone. Our children deserve enthusiastic, energetic teachers, not overworked and stressed ones. It is high time the Government addressed these pressing matters. Failure to do so will lead, without a doubt, to further teacher shortages, which is clearly bad for education”.

A hidden message of a coming crisis buried in the STRB Report

Last week, the School Teachers’ Review Body delivered the predictable conclusions sought by their political masters: more performance-pay, more ‘flexibility’, an end to national pay scales. Yet, hidden in the content of the Report, their detailed research exposes the dangerous path being followed by Gove, Wilshaw and Co. in demoralising  teachers and holding down our salaries.

Teachers’ average earnings growth

First of all, the Report confirms the facts about deteriorating teachers’ incomes and the replacement of older staff by cheaper colleagues – colleagues, however, who may not stay long in the profession:

3.7 Over the last decade, teachers’ average earnings have tended to grow at a slower rate than earnings across the economy as a whole. Earnings growth across the profession has been close to zero since 2010/11. This reflects the impact of the pay freeze and the replacement of older, higher paid teachers with new recruits as part of the labour market cycle”.

3.8 In common with others across the public sector, teachers in England and Wales have experienced two years of the pay scales being frozen, followed by a 1% increase in values in 2013/14. Whilst many teachers have continued to receive progression-based increments, others (approximately 44%), at the top of their respective scales, will have seen little change in their annual salary during this period unless they have taken on new responsibilities. We have also noted that teachers, alongside the wider public sector workforce, are paying increased contributions to their pensions.

Graduate pay progression

The Report goes on to point out how poorly teaching compares to other graduate professions when it comes to pay progression:

3.16 For many graduates, an important consideration in occupational choice relates to their expectation of salary progression in subsequent years … IDS found that in 2012, average salaries of graduates with three-year tenure was 37% higher than the corresponding average starting rate; graduates with five-year tenure had an average salary some 71% higher than the starting rate

3.17 [However] teachers in England and Wales have typically seen their salaries increase through annual pay progression by 26% after three years (M1 to M4) and by 46% after five years (M1 to M6).

Regrettably, some of the authors of the Report appear to think that performance-pay is the solution to this problem, with the new legislation allowing schools to award more rapid pay-progression to favoured staff. Putting aside the difficulty of measuring individual contributions to ‘progress’ and the damage that it could do to teamwork and staff relations, schools simply haven’t got the budget to award such accelerated pay progression. For example, the employers’ contributions to the Teachers’ Pension Scheme will be increasing by 2.3% to 16.4% in 2015. Far from accelerating progress, the legislation will largely be used to block pay progression, meaning most teachers will make even slower progress up the pay-scale than the STRB has found so far.

Even the STRB has had to note:

3.18 Following implementation of our 21st Report recommendations, schools now have greater flexibility to set the starting pay of teachers, taking account of local pressures, and to determine their rate of progression based on performance, but the impact of this change on average earnings has yet to be seen in the data.

Future data will not be showing an increase in average earnings! After all, as the STRB Report later acknowledges:

3.53 The overall schools’ budget has remained flat in cash terms … We also note that forthcoming changes requiring employers to increase their contribution to meet the costs of pensions will accentuate the affordability challenge for schools.

Profession-wide earnings compared to other occupations

The unfavourable position of teachers is confirmed when the STRB looks at overall earning levels too:

3.19 Classroom teachers’ median earnings (excluding leaders) trailed those of other professionals in 6 (of 10) regions (Inner/Outer London, South East, East of England, East Midlands and West Midlands), compared with 5 (of 10) regions in 2011/12. Across the majority of regions the relative position of classroom teachers’ earnings had worsened since 2011/12. This reflects largely unchanged teachers’ median earnings in both years. While some caution is needed because of small sample sizes with the comparator data, this points to a continuing deterioration in the earnings position of teachers relative to other graduate professionals.

Recruitment and Retention

So, if teachers pay is decreasing, pensions worsening and workload increasing, what will this mean for the future supply of teachers to meet growing pupil numbers?

3.21 The latest pupil projections data for England show that ... between 2013 and 2017, pupil numbers in maintained nursery and state-funded primary schools are projected to increase by 8% (and by 15% between 2013 and 2022) … [after 2015] the increases in primary pupil numbers will start to flow through into secondary schools.

3.24 In Wales, primary pupil numbers are expected to increase by around 13% from 2013 to 2021.

3.30 Recruitment against target to primary ITT has fallen from 103% in 2011 to 96% in 2013. Recruitment for a number of secondary subjects was below target in 2013, including maths (-10%), physics (-28%), modern languages (-17%), computer science (-43%) and design and technology (-52%).

3.43 Our visits have suggested to us that some schools have advertised unsuccessfully for more experienced staff. The official [vacancy] rates also mask problems with the availability of sufficient suitably qualified specialist subject teachers. We note with concern that the average percentage of hours taught by teachers holding a relevant post A-level qualification varies considerably and can be low; examples are English (85%), maths (82%), chemistry (80%), physics (74%).

The conclusions reached need to be publicised – as they expose the real threat to the future of education if the attacks on the pay and conditions of the teaching profession continue:

3.54 We have identified some worrying signs in the recent data on initial training such as the below-target numbers of recruits to both primary and a number of secondary subject areas and have noted consultees’ concerns about the ability of the School Direct model to meet the demands of primary schools. … The increase in reported vacancies and the apparent shortage of suitably qualified subject teachers in secondary schools, evidenced by the proportion of hours taught by teachers with the relevant subject qualification, are a concern. …

3.55 We have also noted the significant impending increase in demand for teachers as increased numbers of pupils flow through the school system … These developments, coinciding with clear indications of a recovering graduate labour market, mean there is a real challenge for the sector in preserving the attractiveness of teaching as a preferred profession for good graduates.

3.56 There is clear and consistent evidence that both the starting and profession-wide pay of teachers is less competitive relative to other professional occupations in several areas of the country, and that this gap is widening. Our evidence also suggests able graduates in other professions progress more quickly in the first three to five years and have more opportunity to reach higher levels of earnings as their careers progress subsequently. This heightens the risk of those in the profession feeling under-valued and recruitment and retention suffering as a consequence.

3.57 The reforms to the pay framework in our recent reports have aimed to provide individual schools with greater freedoms within the national pay framework … We hope, and expect, that this additional flexibility will go some way to helping schools address the particular localised labour market challenges they face. School leaders will need to consider how best to use their limited budgets, and available specialist staff, to gain the right balance between quality and numbers of staff, in order to deliver the highest quality provision … However, these changes may not be sufficient to meet the wider supply and demand challenges in the medium term.

3.58 … Our analysis of the teacher labour market has highlighted areas of risk; this is despite the recent relatively benign climate for teacher recruitment and retention given the wider economic landscape. It is our view that these risks will be heightened as the economy strengthens and both graduates and existing teachers see wider employment opportunities.

So, hidden in this coded language is the truth. Government policies are putting the future supply of teachers to support a growing school-aged population at significant risk.  However, labour shortages can also help add to union strength – both in terms of reaching out to parents to expose the dangers to education and in strengthening our negotiating position. Let’s make sure that we take advantage of the STRB’s hidden warnings to bolster our campaign to defend teachers and education.

A criminal destruction of teacher morale

This photograph tells a sad but shocking story - yet it is a photograph that could be taken in so many schools at present.

18 envelopes - to collect 18 leaving presents - for staff that felt they had no option but to resign rather than carry on working in intolerable conditions. That's 18 staff in just a two-form entry school !

As the teacher who took the photograph posted on Facebook: "Forced academy. Many of these people have served over decade, others more. All brilliant. Forced academies for you. A disintegration of a talented, loyal and dedicated workforce".

The short-sighted, Gove-inspired managements too often put in place by many of the sponsors of academy chains may be driving this demoralisation, but they are not alone. I have spoken tonight to a teacher in a Local Authority primary school of a similar size who is one of 12 teachers leaving this summer.

This scandalously high turnover and overall drop-out rate from teaching has become an established fact. Sir Michael Wilshaw has confirmed that 40% of teachers leave the profession within their first five years. Workload and bullying management is destroying teachers' lives - but it is also destroying stability and support for students and schools as well.

Yet the bullying culture of Ofsted/Estyn and 'Graded Observations' continue apace, despite the growing evidence of the complete lack of any reliability in the harsh judgements reached. Some teachers are being bullied out of their jobs as a result through 'capability' procedures, while the support and resources that teachers need are simply not being provided.

This is not only an issue for teachers in England and Wales. The lecturers' Union, the UCU, has just published a report condemning the use of graded observations in colleges. (http://www.ucu.org.uk/7105). The UCU website quotes the researcher Dr Matt O'Leary as saying: 'Attempts to measure the professional capabilities of practitioners through the lens of graded lesson observations are a pointless exercise based on a pseudo-scientific approach to teacher assessment ... The sooner we put an end to this pernicious practice, the better the sector will be for it. Although removing the graded element would certainly be a step in the right direction, it cannot be considered a panacea in itself. A root and branch reform of the way in which observation is conceptualised and engaged with as a form of educational intervention is what is required'.

In California*, the same anti-teacher mentality has led to a court judgement outlawing the existing contract on the basis that it needs to be easier to 'fire bad teachers'. Jack Schneider, writing for the LA Times website (http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-schneider-vergara-teachers-20140610-story.html) counters that "Engaged in difficult and demanding work, even gifted teachers need relevant, robust and continuous professional development opportunities. But very few get it, particularly in schools serving high-needs students. As a result, most teachers realize only a fraction of their full potential .. Making it easier to fire teachers — even if we imagine that such powers will be deployed judiciously by school administrators — will do little to ensure an effective teacher in every classroom. Instead, it will further erode trust between teachers and school administrators".

Of course, even the most supported, best trained teacher can only have so much effect. It's worth remembering that, as this US research points out (http://www.amstat.org/policy/pdfs/ASA_VAM_Statement.pdf) "most estimates in the literature attribute between 1% and 14% of the total variability [in test scores] to teachers. This is not saying that teachers have little effect on students, but that variation among teachers accounts for a small part of the variation in scores. The majority of the variation in test scores is attributable to factors outside of the teacher’s control such as student and family background, poverty, curriculum, and unmeasured influences".

Discussions at the campaign stall in Lewisham on Saturday

In explaining the action that we are taking to defend teachers and education, then we have to make sure parents understand the damage that Government policies are causing. We also shouldn't be shy in explaining the reality of teacher workload, the prospect of teaching at 68 and the effects of divisive performance pay and management bullying on teacher morale.

Our teaching conditions are our students' learning conditions. Let's have a serious struggle to defend them.

 * Messages of support can be sent to the California Teachers via http://d.shpg.org/46543107f?action_KEY=8688

Collective Action to Beat the Bullies

"I have to admit that I spent the weekend after that learning walk sobbing. I was so upset by the feedback I considered leaving the profession. I also work with an NQT who was talking about leaving teaching"   Email from a Primary Teacher

Once again, last week's strike showed the enormous anger of teachers at the stressful conditions they face in their working lives - conditions which, in turn, make it even harder to support the children we teach.

That anger was shown by the big turnout on most of the demonstrations and by the increased numbers of picket-lines as teachers recognise that our dispute will only be won by taking a serious and determined course of action.

The bald facts about hours worked, pension ages and pay policies all give good reasons for teachers to be angry. However, these form the background to a bullying regime, imposed from Gove downwards, which are making individual teachers' lives unbearable - and driving them out of the profession.

Let me relate just a few examples of this regime that teachers that I am supporting have been experiencing in just the last few days. I won't give the names of schools, but some teachers reading this blog will know who I am referring to.

First, the use of the threat of 'capability' to bully teachers into resignation. These are not teachers who are 'incapable' of teaching. Even if, as new appraisal policies put it, they are genuinely 'experiencing difficulties', many problems usually stem from the complete lack of genuine support and training and the impossible workload we are all facing. 

In many cases, however, the evidence for 'incapability' is sparse, based on debatable classroom observation reports. Yet school managers know that, if they threaten putting a teacher on 'formal capability procedures', despite the lack of real justification, they can bully that teacher into resigning rather than take the risk of having 'incapability' on their employment record.

Then there's the use of 'learning walks', 'audits' and 'mini-Ofsteds' to come in to classrooms to criticise, bully and demoralise. Once again, these are based on debatable classroom observations which even Ofsted are now confirming should not be used as reliable indicators of an  individual's performance.

The email that I received this morning - quoted above - shows the demoralising effect of this regime. The anger is added to by the fact that conclusions often appear contradictory, with goalposts constantly shifting for classroom teachers.

The conclusion that teachers are rightly reaching is that this regime has to be fought collectively - through national action such as March 26, but also through local struggles. So, in another school where a 'mini-Ofsted' was threatened this week, teachers met and made clear that they would not accept it, putting in place Action Short Of Strike Action guidelines. Their threat to all refuse to co-operate but switch to shared reading if an inspector appeared, won the changes staff were seeking!

Tomorrow, the National Executive meets to discuss a priority Motion for NUT Conference to set out the next steps for the national dispute. I will be arguing for an escalation of action next term. We can't allow things to carry on like this.

A parting note from another teacher heading for the exit

Thanks to my stand in the Vice-President election, I have received emails and letters from teachers across the country who want to share their stories about the realities of teaching. This is an edited version of one letter that I was sent from yet another teacher who has decided that they are going to have to leave the profession: 

" I'm a teacher, but then I guess we're all teachers in a way. I entered this profession for honourable reasons and I enjoy teaching the children ... I dare say I'm pretty good at it, in fact I'd go so far as to say I'm a natural. 

Everyday I'd get in at around half past seven, work through my lunch break, then leave sometime between five and half-five. Upon getting home, I'd then continue to work until I reached the point when I was too exhausted or had simply had enough. Then I'd fall asleep and repeat again the following day. 

At weekends I'd have to commit at least half a day minimum to getting work done. Though the salary is pretty decent, if you calculate it on an hourly rate it's not as great as it seems. Factor into this useless morning briefings, staff meetings that last a minimum of an hour, having to provide evidence for everything you're doing. I mean it's not like teachers are ‘trained professionals’, so of course it makes perfect sense to check up on us as if we can't be trusted to do our jobs...right?

There are other niggles that I personally find really irritating, for example being sent emails at 4am, or being asked why I didn't check my 'work' email over the weekend. 

I've worked in schools for many years in a variety of roles. I've seen an abundance of behaviour from senior management and indeed other staff that we are supposedly meant to be stopping the children from exhibiting. Bullying, gossiping and spreading rumours, inconsistent treatment of staff. Let's not get started on the ethics of the Year 6 SATS administration…are they a true reflection of the children’s levels or data that has been manipulated in line with an agenda that has nothing to do with the children?

I've been graded as 'outstanding' on several occasions now and to be honest I never really cared. I'm fully aware of how subjective the grading is and how fickle SLT are. The minute you fall from 'grace' you can kiss those outstanding grades goodbye. There's no objectivity...if SLT have an issue with you it doesn't matter how good you are at your job. 

The profession is so ridiculous, the bar is constantly being moved, and it would be nice if every so often the teachers were informed. 

These days the number of children with additional educational needs seems to be increasing ... fill in a form for any children that you are concerned about. That's fine but how long does it take before anything happens? Well, when I know the answer I'll let you know as I'm still waiting. 

Providing evidence for EVERYTHING so that SLT can monitor your every move, submitting plans that are barely stuck to, going through the motions of 'having your say' but knowing full well that you don't have a voice. In reality, the job isn't about children, it's about data. 

More and more of those teachers who, in my opinion, would make the biggest impact on children's lives, the creative, free thinking individuals are being pushed out. The way some heads operate is disgusting, all powerful dictators able to get away with murder as long as they're producing favourable data. If a school is unable to hold onto its staff isn’t that a signal that something is wrong…but the data is ‘good’, so who cares?
 
Why is it that you're expected to work extensively outside of work and contracted hours? Well it's simple, there are so many that will do exactly that, that those who refuse are ostracised and easily replaced by someone that will. Some won't stand their ground out of fear, increasingly head teachers thrive on this.

Securing a job as a teacher is the only time that the colour of my skin has counted in my favour. But then again it's not nice doubting that you're wanted for your ability rather than because you tick a box. As Cecil Gaines (The Butler) said "I guess I wished I was there for real, instead of for show". It's not a nice feeling, having to walk on eggshells for fear of being labelled aggressive or intimidating. Having had this label thrown at me in a diverse school, I am completely disillusioned. Part of the problem is that unless it's direct, overt racism it's not seen as so or it's "maybe you're interpreting it in the wrong way". So what are my options; become completely passive or compromise aspects of my identity? 

It's a shame because I do genuinely enjoy teaching, it's challenging but rewarding. I became a teacher so that I could help children achieve standardised levels to make the head teacher look good?...yeah right! 

Teaching is 80% marking, meetings, discipline, tidying the room, working through lunch, at home and weekends, planning and preparing resources...only 20% teaching. This is one situation where the 80/20 rule doesn't work...I got into this gig for the 20 not the 80, so now I'm making my exit. "

Yes, Michael Gove, "unbearable"

Now that I know that Michael Gove, or one of his civil servants, is following my blog, then let me be clear: " No Minister, I’m not guilty of 'hyperbole', your ‘reforms’ will make teaching 'unbearable'. " 

If you're not Michael Gove, let me explain ... 

It was only today, when a colleague pointed me to the transcript of Michael Gove’s speech to the Policy Exchange last Thursday, that I discovered that I merited a personal mention by the Education Secretary!

Gove scoffed that “Martin Powell-Davies of the National Union of Teachers National Executive has claimed that our education reform plans will make teaching ‘a totally unbearable profession’.” However, many teachers would agree that there’s nothing to scoff at in my prediction.

Being accused of ‘hyperbole’ by an ex-journalist is also a little rich. True to his roots, the Education Secretary also chose to be very selective in the facts he quoted to try and portray teachers as a contented profession. 

Surveys of ‘school leaders’ and undergraduates will obviously not give a true picture of the feelings of classroom teachers. A more accurate picture was painted by a YouGov survey of teachers taken at the beginning of this year:

As you can see, 55% of respondents described their morale as “low” or “very low”, only 15% had 'high' or 'very high' morale. In further questions, 71% said they 'rarely' or 'never' felt trusted by the Government. 

At the end of the survey, teachers were asked to give an open ended answer to the question "what other New Year’s Resolution would you like the Secretary of State for Education to make?". Not surprisingly,  the NUT reports that most popular response by a long way was “I will resign or something very similar"!

I publicised those findings, along with other reports showing a rise in teachers quitting the profession and significant increases in teachers taking stress leave, on this blog in January ( http://electmartin1.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/get-rid-of-gove-before-he-gets-rid-of.html ). 

Yet this was the very post where Gove’s researcher must have found my quote that “this is what teaching is already like in many schools before Gove tightens the screw of performance-pay even further. If he gets away with his plans, teaching will become a totally unbearable profession”. Strangely, the researcher was happy to ignore the evidence on which my conclusion was based!

I’m pleased that it seems to have dawned on Michael Gove that he needs to try and sound a little less anti-teacher and to try to praise our qualities in his speech. However, the damage has already been done*.

Neither do teachers need lectures to know about ‘the importance of teaching’. We know how important education is to the youngsters that we teach. That's why we are so determined to defend education from the damage being inflicted by this Government’s policies of privatisation, cuts and rationing of educational opportunities.

Whatever ‘our surveys say’, the real test of teachers’ views will come in October when the NUT and NASUWT have called the next regional strikes. As in the North-West in June, I suggest that the overwhelming response to the strike-call will show Mr.Gove just how out of teach he is with the real mood of teachers.

Of course, those strikes will be a test of public opinion as well. Once again, Mr.Gove may be in for a surprise. For example, following the announcement of our latest action last week, the Coventry Telegraph carried a banner headline “Teachers: We Will Shut Every School”. Gove might have hoped that such a threat would be met with parental protest – but the 'vox-pops' inside the paper reveal where any public protests will be directed:

Janet Smith, 65, Keresley: “I don’t think it’s fair to link teachers’ pay to performance in the classroom. You can’t really say how a child is going to react, can you?" 

Jacob Peedell, 30, Radford: “If you are teaching in a deprived area, the kids aren’t going to do as well so I think that’s unfair. Obviously striking isn’t fair on the parents but I can understand why they are doing it!" 

Elena Klink, 30, Whoberley, “Striking is the right thing to do because it’s the way for them to get what they need. I know how hard it is for the teachers to look after the kids”.

Those kind of views will be repeated in towns and cities across England. They should give teachers encouragement to make their real views clear to Mr.Gove - by taking strike action to oppose his damaging attacks on teachers and education.

To see Michael Gove's speech, see: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/michael-gove-speaks-about-the-importance-of-teaching or  http://youtu.be/31lfj0VEDR8

* ... and Mr.Gove has just done more damage to his public image by his crass comments about food banks. Perhaps you're suggesting that, if teachers taught school leavers better financial management, they'd all be able to afford £7,000 furnishings like you Michael ?!

Gove’s attack on teachers is an attack on everyone’s working conditions

Teachers – and many parents – have been shocked by Michael Gove’s announcement at last week’s ‘Spectator’ Conference that he wants to lengthen the school day and shorten school holidays.

Whatever Gove might pretend, these proposals have nothing to do with improving education. There is no real evidence to show that making students work for longer will improve their learning. Forcing teachers to work even longer hours certainly won’t help to produce high-quality education either.

It’s not just teachers who are exhausted by the intensity of an education system distorted by an obsession with targets and test scores. Many young people are also tired at the end of the school day but now Gove wants to make those days longer. Like all of us, young people need proper breaks to work efficiently. They also need their own free time and holidays to develop their interests and personality outside of school and to spend time with family and friends.

Gove tried to portray our school terms as some outdated ‘nineteenth century’ relic, arguing that we need to learn from Hong Kong and Singapore where school holidays are supposedly shorter (although even that 'fact' is being disputed by some researchers). As a supposed advocate of ‘facts’, Gove should study the evidence which shows that, in comparison to most countries, Britain already has some of the shortest holidays. For example, schools in Finland, consistently at or near the top of international educational rankings, have a 10-11 week summer break from early June to mid-August !

Gove should think twice before basing his education plans on countries like Hong Kong or he may end up with more than he bargained for. Last year, 90,000 marched against the HK Government’s new national curriculum in a protest against ‘Government brainwashing’! (http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/5874)

The xenophobic comment from ‘a Whitehall source’ quoted in the Daily Mail report on Gove’s speech reveals what these plans are really about: 'We can either start working as hard as the Chinese, or we'll all soon be working for the Chinese.' (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2311111/Michael-Gove-Long-school-summer-holidays-consigned-history.html)

These plans aren’t about helping students learn, they are about helping British bosses to compete for profits. Instead of investing in a future workforce through genuine education expansion, instead of investing in new technique that could help to reduce the working-day, this Government just wants to compete on the basis of cheap labour, where all workers – not just teachers – are forced to work for longer hours with shorter holidays and reduced pay. 

Gove clearly wants that ‘work-until-you-drop’ culture to be drummed into children too. With Tory Childcare Minster Elizabeth Truss incredibly now complaining that toddlers 'are running around with no sense of purpose' in nurseries, it shows just what kind of regimented and stultifying education system they have in mind. Performance-related pay, with teachers having to 'teach-to-the-test' to protect their livelihoods, will further narrow the curriculum.

Teachers are in the immediate firing-line. With existing contracts failing to properly limit the hours required for planning and marking, even official figures show that the average teachers’ working week is already over 50 hours. The TUC estimates that this equates to £7 billion of unpaid overtime every year. The NUT is fighting for a legally-binding 35-hour working week – but Gove wants to rip up even the existing open-ended teachers’ contracts.

At the same time, Gove is also forcing through his plans to cut teachers’ salaries by introducing performance-related pay (which really IS resurrecting the failed nineteenth-century policy of ‘payment-by-results’!). Both attacks are also driven by the Con-Dem agenda to break trade union opposition through deregulating conditions as well as to drive down costs so that big businesses can make money out of privatising schools and other public services.

Teachers have every reason to be angry but parents must also support teaching unions to oppose these attacks. Gove just wants to turn schools into a joyless child-minding service to assist employers to force all of us - teachers and parents alike - to work even longer hours.

Far from being ‘family-friendly’ as Gove claims, this Government is breaking up relationships and damaging children’s lives by its attacks on benefits, jobs and conditions. If the Tories were serious about supporting working parents, why won’t they reverse the cuts that have already axed so many youth services and holiday play-schemes? Why not introduce a 35-hour working week without loss of pay to help create jobs to reduce unemployment? What about investing in breakfast and after-school clubs instead of forcing existing staff to work for longer?  What about forcing holiday companies to keep their prices down instead of fleecing parents in the peak-holiday season – which could now be even shorter of course?

Education shouldn’t just be about child-minding. However, the fact that the so many employers rely on schools looking after their workers’ children gives teachers enormous potential power. It means that when teachers go on strike, it isn’t just schools that have to close; many other workplaces are affected as well. Now teachers have to use that power not just to defend their own pay and conditions but to defend education as a whole from this Government’s attacks.

Gove is playing a dangerous game. Emboldened by the delay in teaching unions calling strike action to oppose his attacks on pay, he is racing ahead with attacks on conditions too. But even the National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT), who have been going along with some of Gove’s plans up to now, can see the anger that this latest attack will provoke.  The NAHT responded by saying that “we have no wish to participate in such a polarised and destructive debate. We will not support such moves ... we cannot see how such comments will help attract and retain teachers”.  

The main teaching unions, the NUT and NASUWT, need to be confident that, with a clear call to action, combined with a bold public campaign to expose Gove’s real agenda, a solid campaign of escalating regional and national strikes can be built which can defeat these vicious attacks on teachers’ pay and conditions.

A joint plan of strike action was, at long last, agreed between the two unions, starting with a regional strike across the North-West of England on June 27^th. Further regional strikes are planned for September and October with a national strike due in November. As a minimum, that strike plan has to be confirmed, with further dates set for 2014 to force Gove to retreat.

Every area, not just the North-West, needs to be calling urgent reps’ meetings to build for action. Local campaigning, rallies and demonstrations must be built, supported by teachers, parents and the wider trade union movement.

However, it’s strike action, the withdrawal of labour by Gove’s would-be ‘child-minders’, that can really put the pressure on this Government. And teachers aren’t alone in facing attacks on their pay and conditions, jobs, services and pensions from this Government of the rich. Strike action shouldn’t just be co-ordinated between teaching unions but as widely as possible across the private and public sector. November’s national teachers’ strike could be built into a 24-hour strike co-ordinated right across both the public and private sectors.

If Gove’s announcement proves anything, it’s that the more that trade unions hold back from action, the more this Government will attack our pay and conditions, our public services and our communities. It’s time we stood firm and took action together. Our children and families deserve no less from us.