The left in general – needs to embrace and strengthen the current curriculum, behaviour, instruction agenda. These are our best bets by far. But ideological dogma stands in the way.

I’m no expert on PISA but the response to it has been fascinating as well as frustrating. I think we can all understand that measures like this are complex and flawed; they are just one indicator and there’s a big margin of error. We can also agree that claims of cause and effect are problematic. However, the pattern for England seems to be clear enough in relation to Wales and Scotland as to suggest that there’s a strong likelihood that the comparatively strong outcomes are the product of what has been a sustained set of agendas over the last decade.

However, frustratingly, annoyingly – and predictably – the Labour leadership have been unable to acknowledge this without falling into the tedious old groove of partisan opposition – as if the worst thing you could ever do is give Gove/Gibb et al the slightest opportunity to claim credit. In fact Lucy Powell’s general tone since taking office has been driven by some weird need to distance herself from an academic knowledge focus and the need to emphasise failures and challenges, perhaps for fear of not having a coherent agenda of her own. From her first pronouncement on the over-emphasis on academic knowledge, Powell has, to me, seemed out of touch with the depth of thinking and dynamic work going on across the system: the discourse around curriculum, evidence-informed practices and the design of behaviour systems. It has the vibe of a non-expert with lay person’s general knowledge preaching to a room of actual experts – which is annoying in any profession.

On social media this week I suggested that the Education Secretary’s response to PISA might be:

The PISA results for England are incredibly positive showing that the system is on the right track; teachers and leaders should be congratulated for all the efforts they’ve put in. We should now have confidence that a well defined curriculum, a strong focus on instructional teaching and good behaviour with secure foundations in reading will lead to strong outcomes across the system. We will endeavour to sustain efforts in these areas to make sure that we consolidate the gains for future cohorts, supporting schools
to invest appropriate time in teacher development.

At the same time, we plan to explore ways to about widen access to technical education; strengthen approaches to the arts and oracy and to ensure that children across the attainment range have opportunities for success with secure guidance for progression into further education, HE and apprenticeships, building on deeper knowledge and a broad range of learning experiences.

And then, having seen some irritating responses to that, I added another post:

When you see as many lessons as I do around the place it is so obvious that there are huge gaps to close in terms of curriculum, behaviour and instructional teaching and these are the ways to secure deeper learning for more children. It’s just absolute nonsense, folly, for people on the left to align those things with a right wing agenda. It just puts a massive ideological roadblock in the way of actually improving education of so many people. It seems ignorant to me; a total lack of understanding of how learning happens in actual real schools and how to improve it. And anyone who puts a ? in front of the central role of instructional teaching basically can’t be taken seriously on education in my not so humble opinion.

This issue with Labour has a long history, going back to David Miliband’s absurdly undeliverable personalised learning drive in the 2000s. 90% wishful rhetoric; 10% practicalities.

The thing is that it feels like we’re starting to make real progress – despite all the challenges with funding, teacher recruitment and so on. The curriculum has been stable enough, the teaching and learning agenda sustained enough and the discourse around behaviour coherent enough for a consensus to have emerged that is starting to pay dividends. Across the profession, teachers and leaders with different political outlooks agree on the path we’re following to a very large extent. But we’re only half way up the mountain. We can see the path ahead. It’s not easy but it’s clear. This is not the time so protest that we’re climbing the wrong mountain or that it’s too hard or unfair to continue.

This doesn’t mean that we can’t add other concepts to the mix. Yes, in my opinion oracy – which embeds the idea of learning through talk – is an essential element that needs strengthening. Why? Because this turbo charges the learning and inclusion agenda. It’s not a new path; it makes the existing path to achievement for all much clearer. Yes, we need to attend to assessment options for students for whom the GCSE diet is too heavy, unbalanced or lacking in opportunities for success. But as Alun Francis points out, the desire for more technical and vocational pathways is not actually neatly the answer to the problem of supporting those with low achievement in Maths and English. There’s a good debate to be had about how much knowledge content is all the different subjects, how many exams they need and how to rebalance in favour of more arts subjects. But that’s not some giant new change of direction; it’s natural to take stock, get our bearings and refine curriculum goals to maximise success.

What should remain is that teachers continue to focus on improving ever more effective and inclusive instructional teaching, creating an excellent curriculum experience across a range of subjects, with strong knowledge foundations, all supported by clear, supportive behaviour routines and cultures. That’s the agenda – and Labour has the chance to seize that, own it, drive it forward and capitalise on the progress we’ve made. This isn’t the time to play party politics. Let’s not lose focus; let’s double down and get right up that mountain.