Is Umbridge a commentary on British government's educational policy?

[Carol]

Carol earlier:
> 
> > What I'd like to know is whether British readers think that
Umbridge is a caricature of Margaret Thatcher (whom JKR evidently
didn't like). I'd also like to know whether Hermione's remark, "It
means the Ministry is ("are," if you're British) interfering at
Hogwarts," has any bearing on government interference in British
schools, "public" or otherwise.
> 
David responded:
> I don't see Umbridge as a caricature of Thatcher, myself.  Their 
methods are just so different.  Thatcher would have passed a law to 
abolish the Governors, and then fired Dumbledore, before ever going 
near Hogwarts, for example.  She just didn't need a Hermione to decode
her intentions.

Carol again:
True, but Umbridge wasn't the PM, just his senior undrsecretary, who
has to achieve her ends through manipulation (pushing Fudge's buttons,
playing on his worst fears) and insinuating herself into power. And I
wonder if she and Lucius were working together behind the scenes to
get DD fired before she appeared in the books, or whether she merely
saw him as a kindred spirit with a common goal. Clearly, she *knows*
him, so there's some connection. (I don't think I'm getting too *on*
topic for this list since I'm speculating rather than analyzing canon).
> 
David:
> I also have trouble seeing MOM interference in Hogwarts as satire,
too, because it's all in the context of a fight against an outside
threat.  The MOM's interference isn't a response to political
pressures about education (which is what British government
interference in schools is), but to do with differing perceptions of
threat.  Umbridge isn't really trying to improve DADA because she
thinks it's badly taught: she's trying to undermine it because she
thinks it's taught too well.
>
Carol:
Well, yes. there's the whole question of whether she knows that
Voldemort is back and is in league with the DEs (in contrast to Fudge,
who simply doesn't want to believe that LV is back and would rather
believe that DD is about to attempt a coup) or whether she really
believes that DD and Harry are spreading dangerous lies. But I'm not
talking about motives. I'm talking about methods. Of course, the
British government isn't going to send a high-ranking official into a
school to take it over and eventually oust the headmaster (Hogwarts is
the only school of witchcraft and wizardry in the British WW, so its
infiltration is more significant than, say, the infiltration of Eton
or Harrow, bad as that would be). I'm thinking more of educational
decrees and enforced changes in curriculum, say, watered-down classes
because they're considered too difficult for children to grasp (or no
longer "relevant," to borrow a term from the seventies). Umbridge
treats the students like little children and claims to be their
friend, protecting them from "lies," while she herself is doing the
brain-washing. Maybe it's not British schools but, say, Soviet-era
Russian schools that she's satirizing? The idea has to come from
somewhere and relate to something. (There's an apparent connection to
the Spanish Inquisition--which I realize was not the only inquisition)
in her title and tactics, IMO, but no one ever responds when I raise
that point.)

David: 
> However, I'm not a teacher, so I don't know if some of the details -
those clipboard sessions with Trelawney and Hagrid, for example - are
based on real incidents.

Carol:
Ah. Teacher inspections. The Boggart of all nontenured teachers, I
suspect. I certainly hated them when I was a teacher. I always feared
that I was going to be either fired or reprimanded. Fortunately, I
only had to endure them during my first year at each place I taught
(one high school, two universities.) I'm sure it felt extremely
degrading to the Hogwarts teachers who'd been teaching for more than a
dozen years, and terrifying to Hagrid, who was inexperienced (and,
IMO, incompetent). Inspections by the headmaster or principal would be
one thing, especially for new teachers, but inspections by a
government official would not be tolerated. Or at least, I can't
imagine an American teacher enduring such an inspection without
protest. But I have no idea what goes on in British schools these days
(and know only what I've read about nineteenth-century British schools
in the days before Dumbledore).

Carol earlier:
> Carol, isolated from British thought and politics in the world's
most arid backwater
> 
David:
> Can a backwater be arid?

Carol:
It was intended as a pun. As far as I'm concerned, Tucson is a
cultural backwater, but since it's in the desert (and we're short on
rain even by Arizona standards this year), I thought I'd throw in that
little joke. Probably neither funny nor clever, but I thought "arid
backwater" was a nice little oxymoron of sorts

Carol, wondering whether British teachers are encouraged or required
to "teach to the test" or subject to any other kind of government
pressure regarding lesson plans or curriculum