A Bible in every school from Michael Gove

Derek Wilson, in his recent book about the Authorised Version '"The people's bible: the remarkable story of the King James Version", makes clear that as far as James l was concerned the production of an Authorised Version was an exercise in religious and political repression. The whole idea was that all the other versions, such as the Geneva Bible used by Shakespeare, would be replaced by an authorised version which had no nasty marginal glosses attacking his bishops, and would have lots of Latinised words making it suitable for worship. Surprisingly, it actually took about a century for the Authorised Version to drive the others off the market. Could Gove be the wisest fool in Christendom? 

The argument about teaching History

'Dr David Starkey rarely disappoints as a controversialist, so it is no surprise he thinks most of Britain is a white monoculture – "unmitigatingly white", he told a conference this week in London. The debate had been about the national curriculum, which Starkey said needed a "serious focus on our own culture". '
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/18/ian-jack-teaching-history-british-empire?

The debate about the national curriculum is based, in my opinion, on a false premise - that there is something seriously wrong with the teaching of History in our schools. In the summer of last year Michael Gove looked under the bonnet of National Curriculum History, shook his head, gave a low whistle, and announced that a simple service would not do and that we needed an entirely new vehicle. As every car manufacturer knows, it's the dream rather than the vehicle that needs selling, so he immediately approached three highly successful manufacturers for ideas, Ferguson, Schama, and Starkey. Gove chose Schama, who on the surface seemed to offer the same kind of flashy red sports model as the other two, but who then surprised everybody by going out and talking to both the technicians who produce the vehicles, and, even more surprisingly, consumers themselves [i.e. children, and, for all I know, parents.]

It is interesting that there have been very few contributions from History teachers to these comments on Ian Jack's excellent article. The reason for this is that they are far too busy dealing with an ever increasing pace of change, such as recent changes in the examination system which have wrecked modular courses they have spent so long preparing. (Incidentally modular courses, for instance at AS, are the very 'vehicles' which allow young adults to engage with the more sophisticated arguments to be found in some of the comments above. They are also much more like the real problems we have to think about and research in the workplace.)

But going back to Mr Gove's concern, voiced at a Conservative Party Conference and then at a book fair last year, that our children were being short-changed with regard to their (English) historical heriatage: the concern is simply misplaced. There is nothing wrong with the History National Curriculum originally set up by Mrs Thatcher's government, or at any rate by the committee of educationalists and teachers the government appointed. It provides a good framework, allowing teachers to devise their own schemes of work and lessons.

If there is a problem it is simply that the curriculum time available for History has been relentlessly and progressively squeezed, both in Primary and Secondary Schools.

The presentation of a coherent narrative of British History probably dropped out of schools some years ago, but recent trends, such as skipping a year of Key Stage 3 in order to prepare for GCSEs, have suddenly made things worse.

Ironically Academies do less History – an 'unintended consequence' perhaps.

Reflections from my living room

The word 'reflections' can suggest not just thinking, but thinking deeply about things. Thinking, and thinking deeply, can be two very different activities, the one involving, say, solving a crossword puzzle, the other involving thinking about the universe, which, as someone once pointed out, is very big indeed! Some people deliberately try to avoid thinking too much, for example by not watching or listening to the News.

But just sitting in our own living room minding our own business can itself raise ethical questions. Did the materials inside your mobile phone or flatscreen television come from reputable suppliers, or was it dug out by viciously exploited workers in darkest Africa? Has your buying fairtrade coffee made the problem of exploited coffee farmers go away? What about the leather in your sofa, cheap cashmere sweaters, cotton goods or laptops produced by child labour, or children's toys packaged courtesy of virgin wood from Sumatra? If we shie away from thinking about issues like these, we've probably given up also on the bigger issues – like too many people in the world, too few resources (even simple ones, like water), and climate change.

Pessimism, or even cynicism, has become a way of thinking, perhaps even a way of life. Any teacher will tell you that conveying an optimistic view of life to children and young people often goes against the grain of what society as a whole thinks. It is all too easy to believe that family life is disintegrating, communities are becoming uncaring, bullying is rife in the workplace, and those of whom we expect high standards, such as bankers, politicians, and journalists, are all in it just for the money.

I recently read a university magazine article by a leading industrialist predicting that the present world (probably receiving its 7 billionth inhabitant this year) will collapse by the end of the century. However, he assured his readers that the few who survived (apparently his dinner-party guests) would be able to live a wonderfully fullfilling life, with a life-span extended hundreds of years by ever-improving science and technology! (I'm not making this up – he even had a 'Sir' in front of his name.) The gentleman (or should that be 'knight' if he's a 'sir') seemed to have forgotten the founding Christian principles of his own university and the society it serves.

As Christians we are realistic about whose world this is (Psalm 24 v.1) and our own place in it (John 3 v.16). Our salvation covers the past, the present, and the future. We also believe in a God who loves all of us (Luke 12 v.6 above). This gives us a profound optimism that as long as we stay in partnership with the God who made us we can look forward to a better world for everyone. 

[My thanks to 'The Guardian' for the specific examples of unethical household objects]