I agree with Burnham!

Phillipson was awful. Powell promises to be even worse. I could weep for our schoolchildren with such hapless Education Secretaries.

They don’t want rigour, they think exams are too hard, and they are overseeing the closure of many schools following the cruel Labour policy of taxing education.

Empirical evidence shows that children do worse under progressive education techniques than they do through more traditional learning.

But evidence is not something that Labour cares much about. It has its beliefs, and that is it.

But… could there be something positive to come out of this new administration?

Our new Prime Minister has said that secondary school pupils in England will be able to study subjects including manufacturing and AI in addition to core academic learning.

The government said the courses, which would be available from Year 10, would be linked to local industries and designed to give children a clearer pathway into work.

Leaving aside how it will be funded, how the unions will be appeased, how industry will be included and how it will actually work … it is a positive position.

For years, I have been advocating something similar because Germany operates a system like this, which benefits them.

In that country, children all start on one of three tracks between the ages of 10-12 (depending on the Federal state).

For the first couple of years, the curriculum is quite similar, and children can move between tracks depending on suitability and performance, so it’s not selective in the same way as the 11+.

The Three Tracks are:

• Hauptschule: Ends at age 15/16 (Grade 9). Prepares students directly for the vocational route (Ausbildung).

• Realschule: Ends at age 16 (Grade 10). Prepares students for higher-tier vocational routes or transitions to academic tracks.

• Gymnasium: Ends at age 18/19 (Grade 12 or 13). Leads to the Abitur diploma, which is required for the academic route (University).

I certainly favour something like this system and making the separation at the same point as Burnham is suggesting – the split happening at the end of Year 9 (13-14yrs).

I would also advocate for three tracks, and that on the vocational track, the children study maths, English and science as core subjects and bolt-on vocational/practical/technical studies.

It would be useful to bring in businesses and involve them as future employers.

I feel that we, the British, are culturally similar to Germans in many respects, so there is no reason why we couldn’t get a system like this to work.

I know from my years of teaching that some students are simply not suited to academic exams, and a route that gives them alternatives – while ensuring they are numerate and literate – would be much better for them.

It is interesting to note that the 1944 Education Act proposed three tiers – secondary (vocational/practical), technical high (academic/technical) and grammar (more focused on academic study and university oriented.

So what Burnham is proposing is not unlike what we had in the tripartite system until the late 60s/early 70s and the rise of progressivism.

The issue will be whether Powell, or whoever she is replaced with, should she lose her position as Education Secretary, is wedded to progressive education theories.

If that is the case, the routes taken by children won’t matter because they will be taught without rigour in schools without much discipline by teachers without motivation.

I am sure that if Burnham is serious about the policy, he would draw support from Conservatives – but not if Powell continues down the progressive road she has started on.

ends