Don't put England's education success at risk

It is just a few months since families across East Hampshire were celebrating their GCSE and A-level results. Our local schools include some of the best in the country and this year’s achievements were a testament to the hard work of pupils and their teachers.

But there is also a bigger story. It is not just individual schools performing well; England’s educational results as a whole have improved over the last decade and a half relative to other countries – and quite dramatically.

A key international study is the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) which compares the results of 15 year olds across countries. English pupils are now in the world top ten for reading, maths and science.

Last month, The Guardian reported that “the UK bucked the trend” of European nations’ results dipping. It later issued a correction to the article, for this is not a story about the UK bucking the trend; it is England bucking the trend. Education is devolved – Scotland and Wales, under SNP and Labour administrations respectively, took an approach to education different to England’s.

The fantastic results are of course down to the children and their dedicated teachers. But there are great teachers in Scotland and Wales, too. And there were great teachers in England, too, while we were falling down the international rankings up to 2009, as well as in the period since in which we have been rising.

England has pursued education reforms based on a knowledge-rich curriculum, proven methods like synthetic phonics and maths mastery, and greater school autonomy. Scotland and Wales did not, preferring the more ‘progressive’ approach of what is sometimes called a ‘21st Century Skills’ curriculum.

A big irony is that the PISA tests are in fact tests of practical application (the so-called 21st Century Skills) not recall of knowledge. It turns out a knowledge-rich curriculum is better for both.

To be fair, some of the reforms can be traced to pre-2010, especially the first stages of the academies programme. That makes it all the odder that the present government now calls into question the progress.

At least the last education secretary took a relatively cautious approach to a curriculum review. The new one has blown it wide open. ‘Oracy’ is to be given ‘equal status’ with reading and writing in the national curriculum.

The government talks about wanting to promote more vocational or technical education. I agree. Indeed this has been a theme for many years now. I am proud of what we did in government introducing T Levels and raising apprenticeship standards.

The new Quango, Skills England, takes away the independence of standards-setting. Having more vocational specialisation at age 14 (rather than 16) I know sounds attractive to many – but it is not what happens in leading vocational educational systems across the world. It is not – contrary to common belief – what they do in Germany.

No doubt in the years ahead we will see increases in domestic pass rates and average grades. But international comparisons provide a valuable additional measure.

In time (and there is quite a lag), if the government carries on as its statements suggest it will, I fear we may see our international comparative results decline. It would be disadvantaged children hardest hit. Scotland stands as a warning of how quickly an academic gold standard can erode.

Our teachers and pupils deserve enormous credit for the great strides in education. The right response for ministers is to build on what works, not pick apart what is one of our great national success stories.