Brent pledges solidarity with the Palestinian people - public meeting and demonstration

Early notice of a local meeting organised by Brent Trades Council and Brent and Harrow Palestine Solidarity Campaign at a time when support for the Palestinians is more important than ever.

Brent and Harrow PSC will be joining other London PSC groups on Saturday 11am-1pm outside HSBC Bank in Kensington High Street (opposite the station and to the right) to protest at HSBC financing companies manufacturing arms used against Palestinians.  Support welcome - placards provided.

Government Spin Won’t Fund Our Schools - how you can help get fair funding for ALL schools

 

This is DfE advice on how to achieve 'efficiences' - all would affect the quality of education

Guest blog by Kiri Tunks and published with her permission. Original is here Our Community-Our Schools

The government claims that school funding is protected; that the funding per child is the same; that they are equalising funding inequities across the UK.

But this simply isn’t true.

The government has accused teaching unions and parent campaigns of scaremongering but, in fact, we are witnessing the largest real term cuts in education funding since the 1970s.

Using statistics from the DFE, the National Audit Office and the Institute of Fiscal Studies, education trade unions have created the School Cuts website. Just enter the name or postcode of your local school to see the cuts it is likely to face.

This analysis of the impact of the government’s policy on schools around the UK shows the truth is rather different.

Funding per child is not in line with inflation so claiming it is the same is disingenuous because in real terms it simply won’t cover the same costs.

On top of that, the government has put more costs on to school budgets without increasing funding to cover them. These are things like the apprenticeship levy, the annual pay awards to staff and salary increases, increases in the teachers’ pension scheme and National Insurance costs as well as other inflationary pressures on non-staff spending.

None of these things are in the control of the schools and colleges and yet they will have to find a way to pay them with no extra money being given to cover them.

What does this mean?

The only way a school can increase its funding is to increase the number of children on roll without increasing its staff allocation.

So we are already seeing:

• Increased class sizes
• Teachers teaching out of their specialism
• A reduction in Teaching Assistants and administrative support
• Unqualified/inexperienced/cheap teachers and support staff
• Staff pay being held down unfairly and their conditions worsening
• Staff leaving or not being replaced
• The narrowing of the curriculum as schools focus goes on core/EBacc subjects
• Cuts to all “non-essential” activities such as trips or libraries or
• Lack of resources – teachers are reporting a lack of pencils, glue and paper

 

This isn’t scaremongering. This is reporting from the front line.

And it is going to get worse.

 

How bad are the cuts?

 

According to statistics from the National Audit Office, these are the largest real-term funding cuts in education since the 1970s . The current proposals are already a huge change compared with funding under the last coalition government.

 

So we are looking at: 

• 8% real term reduction in per pupil funding for mainstream schools 2014-2020
• UK mainstream schools needing to make savings of £3bn
• 60.6% of academies saying they have overspent their budget 

What about the improved National Funding Formula?

The National Funding Formula is the system by which schools are funded. Previously, this money would go to the Local Authority who would decide how to divide up the cash. Now schools are being funded directly. The government say that the National Funding Formal needed to be revised as funds were not fairly shared out.

 

It is true that the National Funding Formula needs an overhaul. There is a postcode lottery and there are many places around the UK where schools are simply not getting enough money. However, the funding disparities are not as bad as has been claimed with statistics showing that funding has, largely, followed area costs and child poverty levels. Even so, the new NFF means that nearly every area is seeing their funding levelled down rather than levelled up.

 

Put together this means that 98.5% of schools, and 100% of colleges, are set to have per pupil funding cut in real terms.

This means:

• £339 average loss per primary pupil 
• £477 average loss per secondary pupil

The cuts are not evenly spread and are regressive with the poorest areas receiving the highest cuts 

• £447 average loss per primary pupil 
• £658 average loss per secondary pupil 

In Waltham Forest, cuts will look like this:

•  £20,185,760 loss in funding by 2019 
• £538 average loss per pupil
• 541 fewer teachers 

The cuts are universal with no school spared. Academies & Free schools are among the worst hit:

• West London Free Schools                                                          £1,016 per pupil
• Mossbourne Academy                                                                  £965 per pupil
• Ark Schools                                                                                   £701 per pupil 
• Harris                                                                                             £671 per pupil 
• Oasis                                                                                              £609 per pupil

 

And Conservative areas are being hit too. Even the last Chancellor, George Osborne, has met with Education Secretary, Justine Greening, to share his concerns about the cuts. She must be worried herself as schools in her own constituency of Putney are looking at cuts of between £655-£834 per pupil.

 

Even the claim of an “NFF Floor” which was meant to guarantee that no school would lose more than 3% of their funding doesn’t hold water. This ‘guarantee’ is akin to safeguarding, so the floor will stay at same level until the NFF authorises an increase. In effect, this will mean 5,300 schools receiving flat cash funding for years up to 2025 and beyond.

Spin

The Department for Education will tell anyone who listens that the numbers on the School Cuts website are speculation and spin.  They need to be reminded that these figures are the government’s own figures and that these calculations have been endorsed by reliable independent bodies. Additionally, the website is endorsed by the NUT, the ATL, the GMB, Unite, NAHT and Unison.

 

The sources are: 

• Schools funding allocation for 2015/16 from the Department for Education
• National Funding Formula consultation data from the Department for Education
• National Audit Office estimate of school costs 

Furthermore, the calculations have been upheld by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.

Who else is worried?

Parents all over the countries are getting organised under the Fair Funding for All banner. There have been huge public meetings and demonstrations all over the UK such from Haringey to Cheshire, from Lambeth to Shrewsbury.

Schools in previously better-funded areas have been able to make real improvements in the quality of their provision. This has only been achieved because schools have been able to invest in staff, resources, training and infrastructure. Without that money, we will see standards and conditions rolling backwards. 

We want all schools to have the necessary money to make these improvements. And a country that is the fifth richest in the world should be able to find the necessary money.

 

You can find out more about the Fair Funding for All campaign here

What we need to do

There are indications are that government is starting to backtrack on NFF at least but this is not time to take our foot off the pedal. We need to press harder.

Now is the time to increase the pressure

1) Use the www.schoolcuts.org.uk website to find out how your local school will be hit.

Share the figures on Facebook and Twitter 

Talk to other parents about them 

Sign the petition via the site

Email your MP via the site

 

2) Respond to the government’s consultation before 22nd March.  The government is consulting on its new formula for distributing school funds and it’s vital that lots of us respond.

 

Here’s how to do it:

• Visit https://consult.education.gov.uk/funding-policy-unit/schools-national-funding-formula2/consultation/intro/ and enter your details 
•  Go to question 1 and tick ‘no’ (There are 19 questions in total but you don’t have to answer them all. It’s most important that you answer the first.)
•  Fill in any other bits you want and submit the response
•  If you would like further guidance on completing the consultation, have a look at the guide on the website http://www.fairfundingforallschools.org/resource.html 
•  Sign the petition - https://www.change.org/p/stop-school-funding-cuts-all-our-children-deserve-a-great-education

3) Write a letter or E-mail to your MP

 

 You can find a template letter to use and more information about this on the resources page of the Fair Funding For All Schools website (http://www.fairfundingforallschools.org/resource.html)

 4) Start a campaign at your school 

 

Parents in the Fair Funding Campaign have been setting themselves up as school reps and working with other parents to raise awareness.

• Talk to other parents 
• Talk to the Headteacher 
• Ask if s/he will write a letter to Justine Greening 
• Will she let you organize a meeting for parents in the school 
• Contact us and let us know what is happening and how we can help
• 
  

5) Join the campaign on Social Media

Join the conversation online, help us to reach other parents, and keep up to date with campaign developments by joining our Facebook group  

Some Twitter accounts to follow are

 

@Fairfundschools

@HaringeyParents 

@NoSchoolCuts

@FairFundLambeth 

@FairFundCheshE 

@OurSchoolsLBWF

@RedbridgeRAA

Help raise the profile of the campaign by tweeting about it using  

#schoolsjustwannahavefunds

The voices of parents matter and have real power. Let’s work together to build a campaign to stop these cuts. With our allies, we are a formidable force.

 

Many thanks to @FairFundSchools and @FairFundLambeth for their links and resources

 

Infected by the GERM: Baseline testing

Guest blog by Kiri Tunks, a teacher and National Union of Teachers activist in London. Kiri is currently standing for the post of NUT vice president. Re-posted with permission from the Counterfire website LINK

Globally, education is under assault from governments and multi-national corporations who see it as a legitimate and lucrative business opportunity with an estimated market value of $4.4tn or more.

This assault, termed by Finnish educator Pasi Sahlberg^[1] 'the Global Education Reform Movement' or GERM, has created a model of education that puts profit before pupils while masquerading as the saviour of education for all. It claims competition between students, teachers and schools drives up standards and that ‘testing’ is the only way schools can be accountable to parents and taxpayers. A worldwide movement, it is reducing education to what can be measured and made profitable.

The drive to improve results has resulted in almost constant testing of our children with ‘practice’ tests a routine feature of the UK school experience. This means less time for learning and discovery and an inevitable narrowing of what children learn as they are taught to the test.

Now, the government wants children starting in Reception to be ‘assessed’ using one of six possible tests (chosen by the school) to give them a baseline level in English & numeracy. Within the first six weeks of starting school, each child will sit with a teacher for a 15-30 minute test and answer questions to establish their ‘ability’. This data will then be used to project progress targets for the child at KS2, KS3, KS4 and beyond. Typically, such data is not treated as aspirational but is instead translated into ‘Target Minimum Grades’: not a guide then but an expectation.

Parents should be concerned at the increased push to formalise learning for very young children when good practice in other countries sees formal schooling start as late as 7. There are those who say these tests won’t harm the children and that the psychological impact is over-played. There is much evidence and expertise^[2] in the field that suggests otherwise but time will tell.

The government argues that this assessment will give a clear picture of every child’s ability as they start school. Such an assertion assumes several things.

It assumes the data from the tests is reliable. But how can this data be reliable when we will be testing children of significantly different ages (a potential difference of 11 months)? How can it be reliable when schools are choosing which test to use from six different commercial providers? How can the results of a test from one provider be moderated with those from another?

It also assumes that teachers don’t already gather useful information on a child’s ability and development. They do. Teachers use the comprehensive EYFS profile document which covers 17 areas of development as opposed to just English & numeracy.

Then there is the assumption that assessment need only cover literacy & numeracy and that such an assessment is a good predictor of ability or progress across all disciplines or skills

The government also suggests that this assessment will reduce workload for teachers (even though many teachers are being told they need to do both the EYFS and the Baseline test). But even proposing the replacement of the EYFS profile with a one-off test is a cynical ploy. It may appear to reduce workload but it will bring with it a whole new set of problems.

What if your students don’t make the ‘expected progress’? Already, under PRP, have to justify progress to maintain or improve their pay or prove their competency. Now, this data will be used to challenge all teachers, across a child’s entire school life, on their progress. It will be used to hold teachers’ pay down. No account will be taken of other contributory factors. There can be no ‘excuses’ for failure.

This test is being ‘trialled’ from September 2015 and will be ‘optional’ from 2016 so it looks like schools have a choice. However, all primary schools are judged on their performance at the end of Key Stage 2. Schools using the baseline test will need to show that ‘pupils make sufficient progress’ from their starting point.

Schools who choose not to use the test will have to meet an ‘attainment floor target’ of 85% (compared to 65% now). Schools who fail will be forced to become sponsored academies.

The truth is, the industrial scale of testing which is becoming the norm in our schools, does not benefit students. The government is quite clear that these tests are about assessing ‘school effectiveness’. More and more, teachers are under pressure to teach a ‘pre-determined content domain’ which means that students are only taught what is prescribed. Any idea we once had of learning being a journey of discovery is under serious attack.

The GERM is not interested in schools because it cares about children. It sees schools as a potential for profit and teachers and their unions are a huge obstacle to its plans. Our job as activists is to make sure parents and communities understand that testing and accountability is a smoke-screen for privatisation; that attacks on teachers’ pay and conditions are not about dealing with failure but about ridding schools of challenging and expensive pedagogy; that not everything worth learning can be measured in a test; and that instead of giving them more say in their child’s future they are handing over their learning to what pleases the market.

The National Union of Teachers has committed itself to campaigning against these tests within the UK but also building campaigns with teacher unions from other countries against global providers like Pearson. In light of the election result we are going to have to redouble our efforts. We need to talk to parents about our concerns but also about the broader question of what education is for and the kinds of schools our children deserve. The imposition of these tests goes way beyond the question of how we measure a child’s progress. It questions the very nature of what kind of education we want for our society.

Notes

[1] GERM that kills schools, Pasi Sahlberg, June 2012, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdgS--9Zg_0

[2] Early Years Education – NUT Edufacts http://www.teachers.org.uk/edufacts/early-years