HC Deb 13 July 1993 vol 228 cc815-7
2. Mr. David Evans

To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans he has to test teachers.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Mr. Eric Forth)

Under the appraisals regulations 1991, all teachers in maintained schools must be subject to an appraisal of their performance by 1995.

Mr. Evans

Does the Minister agree that teachers should be given a simple test to tell us the difference between the Labour party conference, the Trades Union Congress and the National Union of Teachers conference? They are all a lot of hooligans who jump up and down and sulk when they are asked to do any work. Is the Minister aware that a certain hon. Member who has driven us mad over the years has been learning to drive this morning? Would not it be a good idea if that whole lot over there, and some of the teachers had L plates round their necks?

Mr. Forth

I welcome my hon. Friend's sound endorsement of the principle of teacher appraisal. It must be right that teachers undergo a form of appraisal in a properly structured and agreed form, but I am not sure whether that includes the questions that my hon. Friend suggested. Appraisals should be carried out to assure the highest quality of teaching, by identifying the full potential of teachers and meeting their training, retraining and support needs. That is the objective.

Mr. Steinberg

In response to that predictably silly outburst from the hon. Member for Welwyn Hatfield (Mr. Evans), does the Minister agree that the hon. Gentleman would have great difficulty in passing the present standard assessment tasks, and does he also agree that the vast majority of today's teachers are far better skilled than they were in the days when the hon. Gentleman went to school?

Now that the opinions of teachers on testing have been vindicated, would the Minister please listen to the teachers during consultation over the new arrangements for primary school teachers?

Mr. Forth

It is certainly the case that properly structured and developed appraisal of teachers must be a major contribution to the quality of our education. It is a matter of some regret that a union that is not totally unconnected with the hon. Gentleman is persisting in opposing the principle of teacher appraisal. I know not why it is doing so—it is for the union to explain—but the rest of us are entitled to be a little suspicious.

Dr. Twinn

I thank my hon. Friend for his comments about teacher appraisal. To enable teachers to pass his appraisal system, will he place further emphasis during teacher training on more practical classroom skills and more subject-based knowledge?

Mr. Forth

My hon. Friend has unerringly put his finger on one of the main thrusts of the Secretary of State's proposals. Of course it must be right that all training of teachers must lay the maximum emphasis on practical classroom skills, so that we do not rely entirely on paper qualifications, important though they may be, but identify the ability of teachers to educate in the classroom. That would emanate from my hon. Friend's sensible suggestions.

Mr. Don Foster

Following the recent revelations about masonic lodges linked to schools in Conservative-controlled Buckinghamshire, does the Minister think that teachers and governors should be tested on their membership of secret societies?

Mr. Forth

Given that we are sitting in a Chamber which probably contains more secret and semi-secret societies than any other, I should be careful before embarking on throwing stones from this glass house.

Mr. Patrick Thompson

In connection with teacher training and assessment, does my hon. Friend agree that schools should be given more time and a greater role in planning and assessing such courses? Does he agree that, in that connection, there should be less stress on educational and sociological theory and more stress, as my hon. Friend the Member for Edmonton (Dr. Twinn) said, on subject knowledge, classroom skills and, in particular, classroom discipline?

Mr. Forth

Indeed. My hon. Friend shows yet again his enormous experience in this area, to which I defer. It must be right that the balance between theoretical and academic training, which must always have its place, and practical hands-on experience in the classroom is constantly reassessed. I am sure that my hon. Friend will fully support the recommendations and proposals that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has made recently, which we are now developing very much in the direction suggested by my hon. Friend.

Mrs. Ann Taylor

As the Minister has acknowledged that the quality of teachers is important, why are the Government proposing to dilute the professionalism of teachers by the introduction of a semi-trained mums' army? Although we all want mature entrants into teaching, surely it is important that those who are entrusted with our children's education are highly educated and well trained. Why are Ministers gambling with our children's future by more crackpot experiments?

Mr. Forth

I approach this in sorrow rather than anger. It is sad that the hon. Lady should assume that the possession of a paper qualification automatically gives someone skills in classroom teaching and, worse, that she should suggest that people who do not possess academic qualifications, such as graduate skills, are in some way less than good in the classroom.

The reality is that 50 per cent. of teachers are graduates. Is the hon. Lady suggesting that half of all teachers are incompetent and unable to operate successfully in the classroom? Our proposals are that intelligent and mature people with two A-levels and considerable experience with children should surely be the sort of people that we want to encourage to come into our classrooms and deal with our young people—rather than relying entirely on, let us say, a 21-year-old with a narrow degree subject, who the hon. Lady seems to suggest would be better qualified.