WE'VE been unstinting in our criticism of Charles Clarke since he arrived in the Education Secretary's chair.
His attitude on student loans still troubles us, as do his apparently philistine views of some humanity subjects and the question of the Government's role in funding.
Today, though, we tilt our hat to him - and even venture an optimistic hope that he's now listening to the people who matter, teachers and parents.
He was due to unveil changes to primary schools' testing and targets regimes. And he was set to signal that Standard Assessment Tests for seven-year-olds would be less formal and form only part of broader assessments. At last.
Few people would disagree that assessment and testing is an important part a teacher determining progress.
But the fact that we expect far too much of our youngsters has finally filtered through.
It's too much, perhaps, to hope that this whiff of the smelling salts has cleared his head enough to think on. But we'll float this thought anyway.
Why do we insist on five-year-olds reading and writing?
The yobbish behaviour blighting residents across the Faithful City begs the suggestion that our children's time would be better spent learning the social skills that will benefit the whole of the community.
Developing an instinct to treat people and property with care is far more important than being able to negotiate a shopping list at that age.
The test for success in that direction is calculated over a longer period than one school year, of course, but it would be a school investment worth making.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article