Michael gove

So what overarching theory do Cameron & Co. believe in now?  Is it Phillip Blond’s “Red Toryism”?  Are they still invigorated by “libertarian paternalism”?  Or have they struck on something else?  This week’s Bagehot column in the Economist gives us a useful overview of all the -isms the Tories have gone through recently, before landing on a conclusion that the policy wonks in CCHQ may not like: “The Tories should stop worrying about whether their view of the world works in theory, and concentrate more on generating ideas that will work in practice. They can live without an ideology; what they urgently require is balls.” Bagehot’s take is certainly attractive. 

I gave it a passing mention in my last post, but it’s worth highlighting Michael Gove’s mischievous comment piece in the the Guardian today.  Why “mischievous”?  Well, because its purpose seems to be to rile Ed Balls and mobilise his internal opponents: ‘In a series of not so subtle signals to the grassroots, Ed has been emphasising, whenever the opportunity arises, that he is the socialist candidate for anyone in the party who wants to move away from the sullied compromises of Blair era. In a recent interview he explained that the battle for the leadership would be a struggle between David Miliband and himself – setting up the contest

Michael Gove’s speech today is another sign that the Tories are serious about raising educational standards. In it, Gove proposes a series of measures to improve the quality of teachers trained by the state. Under a Conservative government, those in state-run teacher training would not be allowed to retake the literacy and numeracy tests multipile times. Primary school teachers would need at least Bs in both English and Maths GCSEs (remember that in the state sector primary school teachers are generalists not specialists). Also, those who do post-graduate teacher training will have to have a 2.2 or better. Personally, I’m sceptical of the whole concept of teacher training. Teach First