Wilshaw and teacher bashing; what does it mean?

Michael Wilshaw is the head of OfSTED and since coming to office has set about alienating and attacking teachers with what can only be described as a sense of twisted relish.  He came into office proud of his ‘Dirty Harry’ image and eager to present this aspect of his personality to the media (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-15537037). This was not a chief inspector who was going to make emollient noises towards the teaching profession or offer any crumbs of comfort to struggling schools coming into the sights of his inspection teams.

This week he has popped up in the news again this time with a story about teachers and stress. Wilshaw contends that teachers do not know what stress is, and that they use stress as an unjustifiable excuse for poor performance. Likewise he argued that Head Teachers of today have never had it so good. In his early day of headship (1985) he describes how wildcat industrial action would leave him having to do lunch cover singlehandedly whilst a bunch of lefty teachers marched off the premises  because their entitlement to bourbon biscuits at afternoon break had been curtailed.  This is all faintly ridiculous, and quite rightly Wilshaw’s comments have been likened to the 4 Yorkshiremen sketch where the protagonists compete to show how hard their childhoods had been. It is clear to anyone who has ever been anywhere near a classroom, let alone taught, that it can be a very stressful business indeed.  Of course stress levels are highly dependent on context, but whatever the challenges of a particular class, the fact remains that teaching is a profession which relies on a kind of performance. It is a ritualised presentation of the self (or of a version of the self) to achieve a specified end, and for that reason the teaching itself is pressured as this performance has to be absolute. Even compliant children will seize on a weak performance and exploit it.  Yet teachers do many hours of this every day and for weeks on end.  If you read that last part and a Pavlovian bell went off in your head ringing ‘what about the holidays?’, then please please stop reading now, this article is not for you.  Outside the classroom a relentless pile of paperwork awaits, as endless political meddling in the business of schools has created layers of extra administration which all need completing.  Wilshaw said nothing of this in his glib speech, nor paradoxically of the rise of OfSTED as an adversarial agency of educational inspection, replacing the more consensual and developmental ethos of the Local Authority Inspection which proceeded OfSTED (pre 2001). It would be fascinating to have the exact number of teachers days lost to stress as a direct result of OfSTED inspections, and this would be a very high number indeed.

So why is Wilshaw attacking teachers and painting them as a bunch of whingers? His job is to raise educational standards, which suggests that keeping teachers on side rather than alienating might be the wise move, unless of course he is going to return to the heroic exploits of his youth and make it round to every failing school in the land to teach a few lessons whilst the teachers sit around in the staffroom and moan about how difficult everything is.

One explanation is that these kind of stories please his political paymasters back in Whitehall.  Characterising teachers as unproductive plays beautifully into one of the dominant narratives of the Conservative party, namely the myth of the unproductive and wasteful public sector. This narrative paints the public sector as a drain on the nation’s finances, with billions being wasted on second rate expensive services which could be delivered so much better by the private sector. It was this flawed logic which provided the flimsiest fig-leaf of justification for the NHS bill (ignoring the fact that the NHS is one of the most efficient health services in the world).

Teachers are a problem for the Conservative party. They are well organised and most belong to unions which offer support and a united front against the worst excesses of political meddling.  National pay and conditions have survived to date, as have national standards for teacher training and in the last decade, enhanced pay for exceptional teachers who want to stay in the classroom rather than pursue careers in management.  The political answer to this has been the Academies Programme where local pay and conditions can be set, breaking the national framework and weakening the collective bargaining of the profession.  With unions fragmented, the opportunity presents itself for the neo-liberal tendency to start picking off parts of education. You can see the promotional literature sent to heads in 4 years time: ‘Maths department failing? Well sack them all, and “Virgin Teaching” can step in and provide a team of teachers to bring it back up to standard’. At the moment this scenario is not a possibility (no doubt much to the frustration of Gove et. al).  Despite years of inexorable erosion of their status, teachers are still largely well regarded and too powerful to allow this kind of liberty to be taken.  Which is where attacks on teachers, such as those mounted by Wilshaw come into play. They aim to gradually weaken public support for universal education and for teachers as a national professional body.  If Wilshaw’s next speech opens with ‘teachers’ holidays are too long’, then I won’t be surprised, as such attacks play brilliantly to the indignant middle England Daily Mail crowd and increase the public perception that teachers have an easy life and the profession is ripe for reform.

It is disappointing that  Wilshaw, who holds a position of great responsibility and the chance to be a different kind of OfSTED working in partnership with teachers, is using his position to mount attacks on teachers to further the ends of this government and its neo-liberal agenda of the destruction of public services.

Image courtesy of Ian Boyd under Creative Commons Licence.                                     Available http://www.flickr.com/photos/itsaboyd/5397010770/

4 thoughts on “Wilshaw and teacher bashing; what does it mean?

  1. If the conservatives really wanted to improve schools, they wouldn’t be doing this. They want to break up the system as quickly as possible. It’s shock doctrine stuff. Undermining public confidence in a public service is worth more to the Tories than improving them. And it allows them to grandstand to their supporters, too.

    What was intriguing about Wilshaw’s speech was that it showed what a fantasist he is. He’s created lots of myths about himself but they’re all myths that can be busted easily. He says he did lunch duty single handed, for example, for three years. Teachers haven’t done lunch duties since 1968, when the school meals agreement came in. He should have hired supervisors. He says teachers walked out without notice but if they really had, he could have disciplined them. He portrays himself teaching five classes at once in the gym. This makes him a rugged individualist who breaks union agreements but, notice, also has the charisma to tame 150 kids at once. What a hunk. My hero.

    However the worst and more dangerous fantasy he has is that he took on the unions and turned around a failing school. He’s referred to this in his speech to ASCL and in other places. Now where was this failing school? It wasn’t St Bonaventure’s in Newham where he was head from 1985-2003. St Bon’s was a boy’s grammar school which became a successful boy’s comprehensive. He’s probably talking about Hackney Downs, isn’t he? Everybody knows that Hackney Downs was a mess and in special measures when the government sent in a hit squad, led by Michael Barber. The hit squad didn’t work and the school closed after a year. In 1995.

    Now I’m no historian, but neither, it would appear, is her Majesty’s Chief Inspector. He arrived at Mossbourne, built on the site of the former Hackney Downs, directly from Newham and he became the head of a gleaming new school with only year sevens in it, funded at top whack. It doesn’t quite fit with the four Yorkshiremen narrative. A brand new school is a cushy number.

    Most intriguing of all, where did he work before becoming a head? Anybody know? Sir Michael appears to have risen without trace. Maybe he does have superpowers after all.

  2. The logic behind Wilshaw’s onslaught on teachers is quite simple, they are an easy target. The government, and I include the Lib Dem puppets, have clearly targeted the public sector.
    As an example I am sick of hearing the claims of the disparity between the public and private sector pension provision. The public sector may be better, marginally, but people made career choices, God forbid some may even have considered their old age provision when making these choices.
    Anyway this is not about pensions so suffice to say that public sector bashing is in vogue and the teachers are in the crosshairs.
    Parents and society as whole should consider the impact on thier childrens education if they are taught by demoralised and undervalued teachers. They are our future and we will de dependant upon them at some point.
    Wilshaw needs to understand and accept that all jobs carry a certain amount of stress, what he has done is ramp up the stress levels up of teachers when they read that someone in such an influential position is bashing them yet again.

  3. Pingback: Senses Working Overtime | Dirty Looks

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s