Ofsted, Secretary of State & Reading Borough Council given until February 7th 2024 to respond to Coroner's report on Ruth Perry's death

The Berkshire Senior Coroner, Heidi Connor, published her Report to Prevent Future Deaths on headteacher Ruth Perry's death today.

She gave a narrative finding of:

Suicide contributed to by an Ofsted Inspection in November 2022.

The Chief Inspector of Ofsted, Secretary of State for Education for Education and the Chief Executive of Reading Council are given until February 7th 2024 to respond the the findings in the report.

The Report:

The report is likely to lead to increased demands from educatioalists, school trade unions and professional associations, the public and political parties for the reform, at the minimum, or abolition of Ofsted.

Commenting on the report, Jenny Cooper, Co-secretary of Brent NEU said:

 Very sadly Ruth Perry is not the first person to die with Ofsted having contributed either directly or indirectly. And she will not be the last if this damaging, authoritarian, inappropriate and unfit for purpose system of inspection is allowed to continue. The NEU has called for its abolition and stands by this call.

Governors urged not to panic over government academisation policy: 'seize the agenda and be collectively creative'

Gail Tolley, Strategic Director of Brent Children and Young People, advised governors at this weeks Governors Conference, not to be panicked into action on the Government's aim to convert all schools to academy status.

She said:

There is no time pressure for schools to panic themselves into action - you have the opportunity to pause and reflect on what action to take.

The immediate time pressure disappeared when the Government backed down in the face of opposition from Tory MPs and Tory shire counties.  Academisation of all schools remains a long-term objective but the legislative timetable is unclear ion the light of recent events.

The Government retains the policy of  triggering mass academisation in local authorities which are deemed to be failing or where the number of academies has reached a tipping point where there are so many academies that LA management of the remaining LA schools is not viable.

Brent is not a designated 'Achieving Excellence Area' (newspeak for failing) nor are there a majority of academies across the borough.  93% of Brent primary schools are deemed Good or better by Ofsted (91% of Brent schools overall).  12 out of 23 Brent academies and free schools are part of a Multi Academy Trust.  86% of Brent primary schools and 17% of secondary schools remain with the LA.

The Senior HMI in Brent has told Ms Tolley that Brent is now a 'light touch' local authority and meetings with the HMI will now take place on an annual, rather than termly, basis.

However the local authority will come under pressure financially due to the changesin the National Funding Formula LINK and the phasing out of the £3m Education Services Grant.  There may also be reductions due to the loss of European funding.

The local authority will retain core responsibilities:

• school places, admissions, school transport, emergency planning
• vulnerable children, special educational needs and disabilities, attendance, exclusion, safeguarding, looked after children
• acting as a champion for parents

The collaborative BSP (Brent Schools Partnership), run on a school subscription basis, will undertake more education and training and school improvement functions. LINK Its Strategic Director, Farzana Aldridge, told the conference that most Brent schools, whether LA, voluntary, academies or free schools, were now part of the Partnership.  They had offered 'neutral' information sessions on academisation.

In discussion it appeared that various options were on the table including the LA itself, or perhaps  the BSP, setting up multi-academy trusts of Brent schools.

The role of the Regional Schools Commissioner (RSC) came under some scrutiny. Our RSC is responsible for a large chuck of London and large areas of the South East outside London. They have powers to convert schools deemed failing to academy status and can over-rule the local authority. The RSC capacity to intervene with particular schools at a detailed level is extremely limited.

A new provision is that the LA and governing bodies now have a statutory duty to assist the academisation process in these circumstances.

A further change which has not received much publicity is that LAs will have to comply with a request by the Secretary of State to transfer its land (not just 'education' land) to the SoS for free school or academy use.  This involves a major loss of local public land to the government. Currently the land is leased to the free school or academy at a peppercorn rent for a 125 year lease.

The question for me is whether the LA can survive the forthcoming financial cuts sufficiently to maintain the borough's current success in its oversight of schools and thus avoid a 'failing local authority' designation leading to forced academisation.

Gail Tolley remained optimistic telling governors they had the opportunity to 'seize the agenda' and be 'collectively creative and make a focused response.'

She emphasised that it was extremely important for governors to respond to the second round of consultation on the National Funding Formula - this is clearly vital given the potential impact of cuts.

Cllr Wilhelmina Mitchell Murray, the new lead member for Children and Young People, did  not intervene on any matters of detail but told governors that the voice of parents and governors was important. She asked. 'What do you do with failing academies?*' and said that the government should concentrate on 'running the country - not running our schools.'

* The answer is hand them over to another academy trust. They are not allowed to revert to LA status.

Where next for Green Party policy on education?

My motion instructing the Green Party Policy Committee to initiate a policy development process in the light of Coalition policies, which would result in a  a redrafted Education Policy being presented to a future  Conference, failed to win a majority today. Part of the process I suggested was  to invite contributions from relevant teacher unions, educators and parent campaign groups to help shape the review.

One of the arguments against was that there had been a full and very thorough review in 2007 and that this should not be thrown away. Instead it was argued that a series of amendments should be tabled at a future Conference. It was also argued that the review would take time and may not be ready for the election period.

I believe something far more fundamental is required as you'll see from my speech notes, particularly as the ful schope of the Tory strategy was not evident at the time. . I wanted a far broader and participatory process but if we are to have a relevant policy in place for local elections in 2014 and the General Election in 2015 we must start thinking about amendments for Spring Conference now. The policy is 15 pages long so it is a substantial task. The current policy can be read HERE

These are the notes of my speech (not all of which may have been delivered as set out because of  the time constraints in a very rushed debate at the en of the morning session).

I want to start by acknowledging the work that went into the current policy and the many good and innovative ideas it contains. Don't blame me for the need for revision - blame Michael Gove!

The problem is, as Melissa Benn said at the panel on Friday, we are in a period of profound and unprecedented educational change in terms of both speed and ruthlessness. The post - war  settlement is being bulldozed into oblivion.

This is not just about individual policies but the neoliberal framework - subordination of education to economic aims and accompanying privatisation and profit making and the commodification of childhood.

Michael Gove is stealing our schools, our teachers' professionalism and our children's childhood.

Teachers 'deliver' lessons to deliver higher test results to deliver higher league table position and thus deliver us from Ofsted! (Prayer)

I am involved with many campaigns with parents, governors and teachers and am often  asked, where do you stand, what would you do? I have found the present policy wanting in giving a response.

The foundation of our policy needs to be strengthened - rejecting the Coalition's ideology and linking our approach to alternative views on the economy as well as the aims of education and the defence of childhood.

Although our policies are Green Government 'aspirational' they have to start with present realities and counter them. Don't protest -demand!

Areas for revision:

Local authorities fast disappearing regarding role in education   - academies & free schools and diminishing school improvement services.  We need to think about the 'middle tier' and role of Secretary of State. What democratic structures do we propose beyond the school level. What powers should the Secretary of State have?

We need to sharpen our critique of free schools and academies to stress issues around accountability, reinforcing social divisions and marketisation. Do we propose reintegration into a locally accountable community school system as we do with private schools? Should all schools have the same 'freedoms' as academies and free schools.

Sure Start - reducing and nature of early years education changing. We need more than 'continuing successful schemes such as Sure Start' what is our vision for the early years?

Ofsted - we say 'inspections will be revised' but we need to take account of its increasingly politicised role, the fact that it is privatised (Serco, Tribal) and overlaps with academy chains. What sort of school improvement service do we envisage - role and powers? How does this relate to institutions such as the HMI?

In our policy we say that the Inspectorate and LAs will be involved in the monitoring of governing body accountability structures - revision needed in the light of academies and free schools and decline in role of LA.

Pupil population expansion - because the Government has said any new school should be an academy or free school, LAs are being forced to expand primary schools with some in urban areas having more than 1,000 4-11 year olds and losing play space and additional rooms such as libraries and halls in the process. Again the role of LA in planning and provision has been undermined so we need to reaffirm their right to build new community schools to cope with the rising population.

Teacher education - university level teacher education is rapidly disappearing and being replaced by various 'on the job' training schemes with a neglect (and disparagement) of research, cognitive psychology, philosophy of education etc.   

I hope I have demonstrated sufficient grounds for revision, but more than this I am convinced that with the right policy, actively campaigned for in communities, teacher organisations, parent groups that we have a chance of building massive support and contributing to success in the forthcoming elections as well as having people flocking to support our campaigns. (I mentioned the successful NUT 'It's Time to Stand Up for Education' rallies aimed at parents, governors, teachers and pupils that were held in Brighton, Nottingham and London yesterday)

Declaration of Interests: I am a retired member of the NUT and a retired primary headteacher. I am currently chair of governors of two Brent primary schools and help convene the Brent Governors' Forum.  I am a trustee of the Brent Play Association and run Brent School Without Walls, a voluntary organisation that provides free nature and outdoor activities in Fryent Country Park for primary classes and out of school clubs. 

Copland staff and parents issue challenge to Michael Gove and Brent Council

The teacher unions at Copland High School, Wembley, which is facing forced academisation by the DfE and an Interim Executive Board imposed by Brent Council,, have issued the following press release:

Since the very well supported strike action on 23rd May, Copland Community School staff in Wembley have set up an action group. On Thursday 13th June at a lively parents meeting at the school parents decided to also set up an action group. They will be coordinating jointly to continue their opposition to the imposition of an Interim Executive Board (IEB) and a forced academy.

Key demands are a secret ballot of all staff and parents before any decisions are made and a commitment from the Government to rebuild the appalling school buildings that the HMI said were not fit for purpose and adversely effected pupils' education.

Parents and staff, as well as the Headteacher and Chair of Governors, were very disappointed that neither Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of the Council and a Copland school governor, nor Cllr Michael Pavey, Lead member for Education attended the meeting despite claiming that parents views were important. No-one came from Brent Children and Families either despite claiming to support the school and its Headteacher.

It was clear that the parents remain loyal to the school and are prepared to defend it. Questions asked by Hank Roberts, ATL President in his letter to Labour Councillors at the end of May (see below) remain unanswered. 

The Unions and Action Groups have also asked to meet with Michael Gove. The letter reads:

You will be aware of the situation at Copland Community School in Brent. After a parents meeting last week to discuss the Ofsted report and its ramifications, parents set up an action group which will be co-ordinating with the staff action group.

Representatives from these action groups request an urgent meeting with you before any decisions are made about Copland's future. We are aware that you have met with representatives from Gladstone Park Primary School. We would hope and expect, therefore, that such an invitation be extended to Copland as well.

 The joint unions are looking for another day of strike action before the end of term if  they cannot get agreement from the Local Authority and the DfE that Copland will not be forced to become an academy.

Questions yet unanswered by Councillors

1) What actual educational evidence, other than Government propaganda, do you have that turning a school into an academy improves teaching and learning?
2) Why would you seek to ignore the Ofsted Report's recommendation that there be “an external review of Governance” at Copland, which is not an imposition of an IEB?
3) How do you answer the detailed points raised in the Chair of Governors letter, written on behalf of the Governing Body, explaining what had been done and crucial background information?
4) If Brent is claiming to be acting in the best interests of pupils' education then will you be asking the Governors to call a meeting of parents and carers to actually establish their views, or do you intend to have no consultation with parents?
5) As the last IEB at Copland failed to overcome the school's problems, what leads you to believe, and what evidence do you have, that it will succeed this time, especially if the staff did not want to co-operate with this imposed undemocratic body with no proper staff or parent representation?
6) Why would you and a Labour Council be acting to implement Gove's policies and do his 'dirty work' for him?

Battle likely at Copland following critical Ofsted report

Following Ofsted's designation of Copland High School as Grade 4 Inadequate and requiring special measures battle lines are being drawn over the possibility that the DfE will attempt to force the school to become an academy.

Unions representing teaching staff are overwhelming in favour of industrial action against any such move. School support  staff have still to reach a decision but they are the group of workers most likely to suffer a deterioration in conditions of service on academisation.

There are reports that Ark Schools, already running the Ark Academy in Wembley and negotiating to take over Kensal Rise Primary, have their eyes on Copland which is the last remaining secondary school in Brent which is neither an academy or faith school. 

Copland governors are unlikely to favour Ark as a sponsor.

The views of parents are mentioned but only 11 parents completed the on-line Parent View and there are 1,487 pupils in the school.

The report LINK gives an Inadequate grade to achievement of pupils, quality of teaching and leadership  and management and a Requires Improvement grade to behaviour and safety of pupils. In summary it states:

Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector is of the opinion that this school requires special measures because it is failing to give its pupils an acceptable standard of education and the persons responsible for leading, managing or governing the school are not demonstrating the capacity to secure the necessary improvement in the school.

Ofsted acknowledge the difficulties the school has been through following the allegations of financial mismanagement against the previous headteacher, deputy head and other staff and terms it 'an extraordinary turbulence in leadership.'

Significant weaknesses in the quality of senior and middle management remain. A number of senior staff, subject leaders and pastoral managers are currently absent or subject to capability.

Other background factors have not helped the school including the scandal of its poor buildings:

The building remains in very poor condition. This was also reported in the 2006, 2009 and 2010 inspection reports. Some classrooms provide a completely unacceptable environment in which to teach and learn. The budget deficit has been reduced significantly over the past two years, but still stands at around £1 million. The reduction in student numbers has meant that further budget cuts are necessary. The building and the budget are adversely affecting the school’s capacity to provide an adequate education for students.

Significantly, apart from eliminating the budget deficit and action on the  building, the role of the local authority is scarcely mentioned.The local authority's response to the Ofsted report and any support and improvement plan it puts into place will be of vital importance in resisting forced academy status

Ofsted acknowledges Gladstone Park's strengths and confirms its capacity to improve

 Writing to a grandparent of a Gladstone Park Primary school pupil, Deana Holdaway, HMI , Principal Officer for Quality Assurance at Ofsted reiterated the areas where Ofsted found weaknesses in the school but went on:

However the report also gives due credit to the school's  strengths. The judgement that leadership and management are not inadequate is an important one: it shows  that staff have the capacity to continue the school's improvement. (My emphasis)

Clearly this raises a vital question: If Ofsted thinks the present leadership and management has the capacity to 'continue to improve' (ie the process of improvement is under way) then why should the DfE think that the school needs to be forcibly converted into an academy with all the upheaval that involves.

One can only conclude that there is a conflict between Ofsted's professional assessment and the DfE's political agenda.