Michael Gove removes To Kill a Mockingbird and other classics from the GCSE syllabus.

I read today that Michael Gove has decided to cut such classics as To Kill a Mockingbird, Of Mice and Men and The Crucible from the GCSE syllabus from next year. According to the exam board OCR the works have been removed because the Department of Education wishes the exams to be more "based on tradition". By this they mean that students will now study at least one Shakespeare play, the Romantic poets, a 19th century novel from anywhere (US, European,British), a selection of post 1850 poetry and a British 20th century novel or drama. According to Paul Dodd, the OCR's head of GCSE and A Level reform another reason was because Michael Gove, who studied English at Oxford, had "a particular dislike of Of Mice and Men".

I am sitting here at my laptop somewhat lost for words ... I understand that change is inevitable and necessary. The education system has to change and move with the times, but the changes being made here seem, at the least, short sighted. To remove such inspiring classics such as To Kill a Mockingbird and Of Mice and Men and replace them with a narrower choice of work just seems ... wrong.

I remember reading To Kill a Mockingbird when I studied for my O Levels and I have re-read it several times. It inspired me. I have always enjoyed reading and devour books at a rate of knots. My degree was, for the most part, English Literature, and we covered a broad range of work - from the 19th century novel to Aphra Behn,from Shakespeare to Children's Literature. By the time I started my degree I had followed a path that led me from Black Beauty to The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe, from Treasure Island to The Count of Monte Cristo and from To Kill a Mockingbird to Our Mutual Friend.

I was fortunate that our house was full of books and I had access to them all. For many students their first brush with classic literature is through their GCSE. Therefore GCSE English Literature needs to be inspiring, moving, exciting. It is the gateway to the world of literature for many.

Bethan Marshall, chair of The National Association for the Teaching of English and a Senior Lecturer in English at Kings College, London, has said that the new curriculum is far from inspiring. She, in fact, goes as far as to say that the choice of work will "grind children down". Rather than being forward thinking, imaginative and modern the syllabus ( rumoured to have been designed by Gove himself) is like something "out of the 40's" according to Marshall.

If you are studying a course that "grinds you down" how can you be inspired? And how many will continue on to A Level and Degree English Literature if they are uninspired by their GCSE? Gove wants students to study Shakespeare, Austen, Dickens, Keats and, of course, I would say that yes these works should be studied, but the GCSE needs to be tailored to suit and to inspire today's 16 year olds. It is a gateway to literature and if they are crushed by a dry diet of heavy duty classics will they want to carry on to A Level?

There needs to be a balance of work that appeals to the students. The new curriculum is heavily biased towards British writers and because of the focus on "tradition" there is little scope for inclusion of more modern work such as those of Harper Lee, Steinbeck or, indeed, Arthur Miller's The Crucible.

The thing that shocks me the most about all of this is the fact that one man, Michael Gove the Education Secretary, can have so much power. His "particular dislike" of Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men means that he can arrange for its removal from the syllabus. His desire for "tradition" means that GCSE students are given a syllabus "from the 40's" which will "grind them down". His desire for "tradition" means that there will be no course work, but instead two exams at the end of the two year period.

There is a place for tradition. I love tradition. But there is also a place for understanding that GCSE should inspire students to further study. Literature does not rest solely at the feet of Dickens and Shakespeare. The US classics are equally as important and in many ways are far more accessible to teenagers. When faced with Our Mutual Friend or To Kill a Mockingbird which one is going to inspire a teenager to study and enjoy literature? Of course both are incredible books, but Harper Lee's classic is, in my opinion, the one that will touch a nerve, light the flame of love for literature. And when that flame is lit there will be no stopping a student.

I fear that Gove's obsession with an age gone by, an old fashioned ideal of education where children sit in rows of desks chanting " amo, amas, amat" and learning Shelley by rote, is an obsession that is both dangerous and wrong. It is an obsession that will result in fewer students being inspired by a love of literature and more and more turning away from something they consider dull and dry.

I still cannot help the tears springing to my eyes when I recall excerpts from To Kill a Mockingbird and it planted the seed in me that I should always do the right thing. The right thing is to fight this decision and to fight Michael Gove's narrow minded destruction of our education system.


Update:
Since writing this I feel the need to clarify. Michael Gove's new syllabus, in my opinion, narrows the choice of books eligible for study. It seems a shame that there are no fresh voices. The only chance for any literature from overseas is if it is a 19th century novel. Anything more modern has to be British. I don't understand why To Kill a Mockingbird and Of Mice and Men are to be removed and yet not replaced by books which cover themes which will appeal to teenagers, themes which are immediately relevant in today's world. It will be interesting to see the choice of 20th century work chosen for the syllabus. I am not against change at all and I agree with one commenter that a rotation of work would be a good idea so we don't get bogged down with the same books for 30 years. I think that Gove's syllabus seems to be based very much on works that are pre 20th century, very traditionalist and I wonder if there should not be more scope for the study of more modern work. We shall see.

Celebrate Teaching Assistants ... we might not be here for much longer.

I received an email yesterday from my union. I am a member of Unison and the email was to tell me about a day - 29th November 2013 - a day to celebrate Teaching Assistants. Now why would they be wanting to do that? Why celebrate Teaching Assistants? Well, the reason is because if the UK Government has its way there might not be any Teaching Assistants in schools in the future.

Unison is fighting to save Teaching Assistants. The Government has decided that Teachers can do the job of Teaching Assistants. We are an expensive luxury.

So, let me tell you a little bit about my day and you can decide whether I am an expensive luxury and whether my Teachers can do my duties instead.

I am paid, as are my colleagues, from 8.50 am. I actually arrive each day at 8.25 am and start to prepare for my day. I help my Teacher welcome the Year 1 children and look after any of them who are upset or wobbly that day. I am there for any parent who wants to chat. If a parent needs to chat to my Teacher, I take the children in so they don't have to stand in the cold.

I have organised a rota for myself, (in my own time,) so that I can fit in all the children who need extra help. Working from information collated by my Teacher I have organised the children so that all of of them can reach their potential. By 8.50 I have started 1 to 1 work on phonics, handwriting, reading, number work.At 9.05 I bring out my 2nd group for 15 minutes, catching up on phonics, High Frequency Words. During this time the Teacher has taken Register and is into the Phonics session.

All the time I am listening to the lesson in the classroom, ready to go in if needed, because there are children who have Special Needs and I might be needed to sit with them. In Year 1 children very rarely have been statemented yet so there is no funding for 1 to 1 support. Therefore the General T.A (me) has to be there for them.

By 9.15 the Literacy Lesson starts and I either sit on the carpet with particular children to support them or spend time writing up my interventions so far that morning ( because I have to provide evidence of the work done with the children). Then I start checking reading books. I either change them or initial that the record has been checked. When the children go to their tables to work I go with them. I know which table because I have spent time (my own time) reading the Teacher's detailed plans, emailed to me each week.

Most of the time I work with the children who find school tricky. The Teacher and I alternate daily with the groups so that she spends time with all the children. There are children who find it so hard to sit still, concentrate, form letters. I am there to encourage, push, support, explain.

Its amazing the number of ways you can find to explain a single thing! And its amazing how many children find the simplest thing (to you and me) impossible to grasp. If I or the Teacher wasn't sitting with them they would not know what to do, how to start. One of my greatest skills is patience. To find yet another way to explain something, but to do it with kindness and humour is what I love to do. And at the same time as I am helping this child there are another 5 on the table who need me too.

Of course the Teacher could sit with them ... but what about the other 25 five year olds?

By 10 am its time for Assembly and I keep a group back to read with. I read with every child in the class at least once a week, assessing their skills and giving them tips and encouragement as we go along. Whether that child gets lots of support at home and loves to read or receives minimum support and finds reading hard, hard, hard -  I find the way to help them achieve their best, help them enjoy reading. The joy of seeing a child move up a level or get excited about a book is just wonderful.

After break (10 minutes) I read the story while the Teacher reads with another group (they try to read with every child once a week too).

Then its Maths and the same sort of support as I have given in Literacy. My last group goes out with me at 11.50 for a quick recap on numbers - formation, number lines, counting. Then at 12 its time for home ...

But we don't go home do we? Most T.As in my school stay and get the jobs done that they couldn't do in the morning...like changing reading books, putting up displays, changing the roleplay area, filing ... Its a rare day that I go home before 12.35 and some days I stay until 1pm, an hour over my paid time. Obviously this is up to me. Its my choice that I stay, but then that's the sort of people T.As tend to be. We don't do our job for the money, we do it because we love it, love the children.

An ordinary morning is what I have described above. I haven't told you about my playground duties, my chats with children whose parents are breaking up, whose granny has died, who have seen their dad beating up their mum... I haven't told you about the chats with parents who are worried or don't "get" phonics. I haven't mentioned helping children who have wet themselves or been sick everywhere or had a massive nose bleed.

Of course the Teacher could do all these things too. She gets into work at 7.30 and stops for lunch at 12.55 ( 15 minutes break ... soooo lazy!!) then works through until 5.30 when she goes home sorts life out for her own children and then carries on with school work. The thing is though that if she did my job, the things I do, then when would she actually be teaching? Or maybe we should just forget about all the small groups I take out, forget about reading with the children?

There are Teaching Assistants in my school who work 1 to 1 with children who are autistic or have long term illness, children with behavioural problems who, if left to their own devices could be dangerous both to themselves and other children. Without their T.As these children would be lost. As it is, their parents have to fight for help. How could they access education without the care and 1 to 1 support of a Teaching Assistant? T.As deliver physiotherapy programmes, Speech and Language interventions, administer medication...

Teaching Assistants are the unsung backbone of the education system. We work for just over minimum wage and we work because we choose to give our best for the children in our care. In my school the T.As are hard working, intelligent (many are Graduates) and very caring. Often it is the T.A who has the time to sit and listen to a child, who picks up on the underlying problems a child faces. We are part of a team, with our Teachers, trying to create an environment where children can learn and enjoy learning.

Teachers work incredibly hard already. If we were not there to do the things we do then I really hate to think what would happen to the children who need us. Teachers cannot physically do their own jobs and ours. Its impossible. I despair at the short sightedness of the UK Government and their plans.

If you have a child in school then please celebrate how fortunate they are, not only to have Teachers who work their socks off, but also Teaching Assistants who do their best to support, care and guide. It has been a long time since all we did was wash up paint pots.