2010 and the Case for Change: a look back at what was promised

In November 2010, the Conservative Government, and Michael Gove, as Secretary of State for Education, set out their vision for state education in a document entitled ‘The Case for Change’.

The concluding paragraph said:

Reform should seek to strengthen the recruitment, selection and development of school teachers and leaders. It should strengthen and simplify the curriculum and qualifications, to set high standards, create curriculum coherence and avoid prescription about how to teach. It should increase both autonomy and accountability of schools, and ensure that resources are distributed and used fairy and effectively to incentivise improvement and improve equity.” The Case for Change, DfE, November 2010

Bold claims.

Looking at them in more detail, here are a few thoughts. Other suggestions welcome in the comments

Reform should seek to strengthen the recruitment, selection and development of school teachers and leaders: The move from a higher education led system of ITT to a school-based system failed. There are probably fewer trainees on employment-based routes now, as opposed to SCITTS or higher education routes, than during the Blair government era.

Between 2013 and 2023, the Conservative government presided over the longest period of under-recruitment to ITT, against their own targets for training. This failure to train enough teachers has had a profound effect on schools, ad has not been solved by the present government

should strengthen and simplify the curriculum and qualifications: Decoupling of A/S and A levels in 2015 substantially changed the post-16 landscape. The introduction of the English Baccalaureate weighted the curriculum in favour of traditional academic subjects. The change was never enforced on schools, although it was reported in the data about schools.  

set high standards: I am never quite sure what these are. Examination results improved to a point where exam board were required to change grade boundaries, so fewer entrants received the top grades.

avoid prescription about how to teach: Phonics was the prescribed method of teaching reading. The ITT curriculum was made even more prescriptive

increase both autonomy and accountability of schools: Local authority schools had almost complete autonomy, as their budgets were sacrosanct. Academies were fine if stand alone, but as part of a MAT, their autonomy could be seriously reduced, but their accountability may have increased, although there was no accountability for MATs as they weren’t subject to inspection.

ensure that resources are distributed and used fairy and effectively to incentivise improvement and improve equity: The National Pupil Funding Formula was introduced during a period of rising school rolls, with no consideration as to what would happen when rolls started to fall. A study of PTRs by the author shows London schools with generally better staffing ratios than schools in the north of England throughout the period of the conservative government. The Lib Dem Pupil Premium may have help provide extra resources for pupils on Free School Meals, but the staffing crisis often meant that schools with large number so FSM pupils found recruitment of staff an issue.  

Were the claims met? In many cases not, and the funding for schools in real terms declined during much the period the Conservative were in government making improvements harder to achieve. The failure to address the staffing crisis was, perhaps, the most important failure of the vision set out in 2010.

Love, charity and reading

2026 marks the National Year of Reading, sponsored by the National Literacy Trust and the DfE. There is a somewhat odd logo of ’GO ALL IN’ for the year that I am afraid leaves me cold. This is despite the fact that as an author, blog writer and general supporter of words, in visual as well as spoken form, I fully support the aim of the Year, to see more people reading for pleasure; especially young people.

Of course, reading can be for purposes other than pleasure, although, for many, reading for research can itself be a great pleasure. This was brought home to me earlier today when I was listening to the BBC4 radio programme at 0815 that used to be a service of Sunday worship. These days, the format is more catholic in nature.

Today’s programme celebrated the 500th anniversary in 2026 of the publication of William Tyndale’s New Testament. This was the first part of the bible to be published, by the still relatively new printing process, in the vernacular English, rather than the Vulgate Latin, used in the Mass by the churches of the day.

What sent me off on research of the printed word was the extract from 1 Corinthians Chapter 13 used in the programme, where the reader used the word ‘love’.

As someone brought up before the publication in the 1960s of the New English Bible, this well-known passage has always been associated with the words of the Authorised or King Jame’s version of the bible. In that version, the word ‘charity’ not ‘love’ is used to describe the Greek ‘agape’.

Was this a Trump moment for the BBC Religious Affairs department, where the modern word ‘love’ was substituted in the reading for ‘charity’, or did Tyndale use the word ‘love’?

As the radio programme suggested that 80% of the Authorised Version used the text of Tyndale’s translation, this was a point worth clarification. Reading the text seemed to be the best way to allay my concerns, as the programme didn’t mention this change of wording between the two versions.

Happily, these days we can both read a version of Tyndale’s Testament and the King James version on-line. We can even ask AI – in my case, copilot – to do the heavy lifting of finding websites online with the text of both versions, and why the words were changed.

Here is what copilot told me

Why “charity” in the KJV instead of Tyndale’s “love”?

The decision was deliberate, not accidental. The KJV translators knew Tyndale had used “love,” but they chose “charity” because they believed it captured a more specific, more theological, and more communal nuance of the Greek word ἀγάπη (agapē).

And here are the links to sites I used before asking copilot why the change was made

1 Corinthians 13 – TYN – Bible Study Tools | Bible Study Tools

1 CORINTHIANS CHAPTER 13 KJV

This simple exercise remined me why I value reading so much, and helped me see the BBC used the correct words in their programme, even though a bit of explanation for this key difference might have saved my research, but also prevented this blog from being written. Thanks to the producer of the programme for stimulating my interest.

Finally, a somewhat tenuous link between Tyndale’s testament and this blog’s early days. In October 2013, in the post No time for God | John Howson I wrote of the fact that Michael Gove, as Secretary of State for Education,  has ordered a copy of the King James Bible to be sent to every school.

The BBC programme remined me that nearly 500 years ago, Thomas Cromwell had ordered a copy of Tyndale’s New Testament to be sent to every parish church in England. I wonder whether Michael Gove had that act in mind when he made his decision to send the King James Version to every school.

Certainly, for those of us schooled before the 1960s, the language of the Tyndale and King James testaments is both archaic in places, but is also wonderful, especially when read aloud.

Verily, verily, I say unto you’, may be as archaic as much of Shakespeare, but it rolls of the tongue.

So, whether it is reading for purpose, reading for meaning or just reading for enjoyment, let us all support 2026 and the National Year of Reading.