The New Education Secretary, and one-time nemesis of Mathew Taylor, Michael Gove, seems to have a traditional view of education. There are lots of details, but the thrust is that we need to preserve the classical canon, wear school uniform, preserve traditional measures of academic success. In other words, his view of education is primarily about holding on to what he sees as the best of the past.
By contrast, progressive education, manifest most recently by Whole Education emphasises the need to give students the competencies and dispositions they will need to adapt to the protean uncertainty of the 21st century. In other words, they believe the best in education is about forecasting for the future.
So far, no big deal, but Zimbardo's lecture on time makes the point that people, indeed even countries, can be characterised as having (principally) one of six attitudes to time. On this analysis, it occurred to me that the reason traditional and progressive education often seem to be speaking different languages is that their basic source of value is different, and the difference can be characterised in terms of their attitudes to time. Traditionalists like Gove are primarily past-optimistic while progressives tend to be future-optimistic.
Not sure if this gets us anywhere, but I hope it will encourage a few of you to watch the Zimbardo video.