This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/theobserver/2013/feb/24/michael-gove-history-curriculum-teaching

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Children should not be subject to Michael Gove's idea of history Children should not be subject to Michael Gove's idea of history
(7 months later)
The right question to ask of Michael Gove's draft history curriculum is how Parliament has allowed an individual politician to dictate what history is to be taught in the nation's schools ("Plan for history curriculum is too focused on Britain", Letters).The right question to ask of Michael Gove's draft history curriculum is how Parliament has allowed an individual politician to dictate what history is to be taught in the nation's schools ("Plan for history curriculum is too focused on Britain", Letters).
Gove's curriculum is not unlike the "What should be known at the end of the course" section of the 1927 version of the Board of Education's Handbook of Suggestions for Teachers, some of which remains perfectly sensible. The crucial difference between then and now lies in the preparatory note to those suggestions. It was there emphasised that these were to be regarded simply as "a challenge to independent thought".Gove's curriculum is not unlike the "What should be known at the end of the course" section of the 1927 version of the Board of Education's Handbook of Suggestions for Teachers, some of which remains perfectly sensible. The crucial difference between then and now lies in the preparatory note to those suggestions. It was there emphasised that these were to be regarded simply as "a challenge to independent thought".
The board went on to endorse what its predecessors in 1904 had wanted to see: "That each teacher shall think for himself, and work out for himself, such methods of teaching as may use his powers to the best advantage and be best suited to the particular needs and conditions of the school."The board went on to endorse what its predecessors in 1904 had wanted to see: "That each teacher shall think for himself, and work out for himself, such methods of teaching as may use his powers to the best advantage and be best suited to the particular needs and conditions of the school."
That is the way forward for education. Gove's authoritarian tinkering is a warning that a statutorily enforceable national curriculum, controlled by an opinionated individual, has no place in a democratic society. It is the road to serfdom.That is the way forward for education. Gove's authoritarian tinkering is a warning that a statutorily enforceable national curriculum, controlled by an opinionated individual, has no place in a democratic society. It is the road to serfdom.
Sir Peter NewsamSir Peter Newsam
(past education officer, ILEA, director,(past education officer, ILEA, director,
London University Institute of Education)London University Institute of Education)
Thornton DaleThornton Dale
N YorksN Yorks
I agree in general with the historians' criticisms of the draft programme for history in the national curriculum. However, I take issue with one statement. Professor D'Avray et al write: "... children, many of whom will not continue with the study of history beyond the national curriculum ...". I would hope this is not true. My formal study of history stopped at the age of 13, in the 1940s, when I went to a technical school that did not even offer it. Yet I believe I am reasonably well informed on many of the topics mentioned. Surely one of the fundamental aims of any curriculum, and the education system in general, should be to lay the foundations for lifelong learning, in all subjects.I agree in general with the historians' criticisms of the draft programme for history in the national curriculum. However, I take issue with one statement. Professor D'Avray et al write: "... children, many of whom will not continue with the study of history beyond the national curriculum ...". I would hope this is not true. My formal study of history stopped at the age of 13, in the 1940s, when I went to a technical school that did not even offer it. Yet I believe I am reasonably well informed on many of the topics mentioned. Surely one of the fundamental aims of any curriculum, and the education system in general, should be to lay the foundations for lifelong learning, in all subjects.
Frank JacksonFrank Jackson
Retired physics teacherRetired physics teacher
HarlowHarlow
EssexEssex
I'm getting rather tired of the education secretary's new history curriculum being described as like that of a "1950s grammar school". Having actually studied O-level history at a boys' grammar school in the 1950s, I can tell you it was nothing like that. There was almost nothing about "kings and queens and heroes". Nor, disappointingly, were there any battles. The curriculum started with the industrial and agrarian revolutions and most of the emphasis was on political and social legislation. No Clive of India, but plenty about the Chartists. More about Parnell than Queen Vic. I think it fulfilled quite well one of the purposes of studying history, which is to learn how the world is run. In fact, the Enclosure Acts can pretty well do that on their own.I'm getting rather tired of the education secretary's new history curriculum being described as like that of a "1950s grammar school". Having actually studied O-level history at a boys' grammar school in the 1950s, I can tell you it was nothing like that. There was almost nothing about "kings and queens and heroes". Nor, disappointingly, were there any battles. The curriculum started with the industrial and agrarian revolutions and most of the emphasis was on political and social legislation. No Clive of India, but plenty about the Chartists. More about Parnell than Queen Vic. I think it fulfilled quite well one of the purposes of studying history, which is to learn how the world is run. In fact, the Enclosure Acts can pretty well do that on their own.
John WilsonJohn Wilson
London NW3London NW3
History teaching in schools should aim to give students a depth of rich historical knowledge and understanding. Limiting students to the study of great British monarchs, along with learning key dates, is far too narrow.History teaching in schools should aim to give students a depth of rich historical knowledge and understanding. Limiting students to the study of great British monarchs, along with learning key dates, is far too narrow.
It is an old-fashioned way of teaching that ignores some of the enlightening developments affecting our predecessors. These include topics such as the history of the family, together with economic and social developments.It is an old-fashioned way of teaching that ignores some of the enlightening developments affecting our predecessors. These include topics such as the history of the family, together with economic and social developments.
Learning about real-life issues in an engaging way is critical in providing us with a more rounded understanding of our heritage. It would, in addition, spark students' interest.Learning about real-life issues in an engaging way is critical in providing us with a more rounded understanding of our heritage. It would, in addition, spark students' interest.
Mary Honeyball MEP Mary Honeyball MEP
Labour spokesperson in the European Parliament on culture and educationLabour spokesperson in the European Parliament on culture and education
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.