Headteachers' review of the education policies of the three main parties

Ahead of tonight's Education Question Time at 6.30pm tonight at Queens Park Community School it is worth reading the National Association of Headteachers review of the three main parties education policies. It is a great pity that they do not consider the Green Party's views.

New reports comparing the general election manifestos from the Institute for Fiscal Studies and the Education Policy Institute are published today. 

Commenting on these reports, Russell Hobby, general secretary of school leaders’ union NAHT said:

Education continues to be an important issue for voters in this election. Anyone with the best interests of children and young people at heart will be glad to see that all the major parties have devoted space to education in their manifestos. 

There are clear differences in policy and priority for the parties, so there’s plenty for parents, teachers and school leaders to think about. Older pupils, who may be voting for the first time, will also have a view.

Thanks to continued pressure by parents and schools, there is now cross-party recognition that school budgets are at breaking point. This is not a moment too soon because our research shows that seven out of ten school leaders believe their budgets will be untenable by the 2019/20 academic year. However, there are elements in all of the manifestos that will leave voters wondering how proposals will be funded and whether they will achieve the benefits to pupils that the parties claim.

NAHT had been focussing on five key priorities which we believe all parties should sign up to:

• To fund education fully and fairly, reversing the £3bn real terms cuts that schools are facing and providing enough money to make the new national funding formula a success.

• To put forward a national strategy for teacher recruitment and retention that recognises teachers as high-status professionals and guarantees enough teachers for every school.

• To adopt fair methods to hold schools to account, recognising that test and exam results are only part of the picture when judging a pupil’s success or a school’s effectiveness.

• To value a broad range of subjects in the school day so that pupils’ opportunities are not limited and they are properly prepared for adult life.

• To make sure that schools are supported by health and social care services to allow schools to fulfil their role to promote pupil wellbeing rather than making up for cuts to other services.

So far over 150 parliamentary candidates have signed up including Tim Farron, Leader of the Liberal Democrats, Angela Rayner, Shadow Secretary of State for Education, and Natalie Bennett, former leader of the Green Party. Ed Miliband, the former Labour leader has also signed up. To date, no Conservative candidates have signed up. The list of signatories is continually being updated, and can be found here. 

Funding

Mr Hobby said: “Funding is still the number one issue in education, without sufficient cash, schools will always struggle to implement any new or established policies. The rest of the debate about education begins and ends with that fact. It is welcome, for instance, that both Labour and the Liberal Democrats have proposed to address the current reductions in real terms funding for post-16 education, which have left the 16 to 18 phase relatively underfunded compared to secondary school education. It is time for the whole education system to be given the investment it so desperately needs.”

Recruitment

Mr Hobby said: “Disappointingly, there is not much from any of the parties on how to solve the teacher recruitment crisis. Both Labour and the Liberal Democrats have pledged to abolish the 1 per cent public sector pay cap, which would certainly help, but the Conservatives have not made any commitments to remove the cap, which is likely to cause teacher pay to continue to decline in real and relative terms, making it a less attractive career choice. Guaranteeing enough high quality teachers for every school is a sufficiently complicated and important enough requirement to demand that the government takes overall responsibility for it by implementing a national strategy.”

Accountability

Mr Hobby said: “Whilst there are some areas of concern, England’s schools are overwhelmingly of a high quality. School leaders have earned the right to fair methods to hold schools to account, recognising that test and exam results are only part of the picture when judging a pupil’s success or a school’s effectiveness. Narrow, high stakes accountability causes activity damage. The Conservatives’ plans to increase accountability at Key Stage 3, demonstrate an unwillingness to build a fair system and will dismay many school leaders. Reducing the target for participation in the English Baccalaureate from 90 per cent to 75 per cent merely proves how arbitrary that target was and we will continue to campaign to see this dropped altogether. 

“Whilst all three parties are pledging to reform assessment in primary schools, Labour have made an explicit commitment to abolish any baseline assessments. As the EPI says, the development of a new baseline assessment does need to be handled with care, but it is disappointing that Labour have ruled out further examination of its possibilities, given its potential to provide a measure of pupil progress over the entire course of primary school. We would urge all three parties to build on the significant impact that our ‘Redressing the Balance’ report has had on the assessment and accountability debate.”

Mental Health

Mr Hobby said: “There is cross-party consensus of the need to make significant changes to children and young people’s mental health services, which is welcome. Although recognition must be given to the increasing contribution that schools are making to support the mental health needs of pupils, there can be no expectation on any school to provide health and social care services funded from the school budget. NAHT does not believe that it is fair for schools to be held to account for mental wellbeing when their efforts are so dependent on the quality and availability of other services that young people need.”

Students with Special Needs

Mr Hobby said: “In terms of the way the education system works for every student, regardless of who they are, both Labour and the Liberal Democrats have also outlined strategies in their manifestos specifically directed towards the needs of pupils with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND). With a significant gap in attainment scores for SEND and non-SEND pupils, they risk being left behind. These commitments are therefore welcome. In contrast, the Conservatives have made no reference to the needs of pupils with SEND in their manifesto, which is extremely disappointing.”

Narrowing the Gap

Mr Hobby concluded: “All the main parties state that they want to improve things for pupils who come from less well-off families but their chosen methods are very different. Much has been made of the two most high profile Conservative Party priorities; the end of Universal Infant Free School Meals and the return of selective education. Ending the school meals entitlement for infants after only three years and without a proper evaluation of the project takes a much too short term view of the issue. Almost a million children will be affected, so we believe the entitlement should be retained. It is likely that ending the universal entitlement will reduce economies of scale and further damage school budgets. 

“The plans to offer free breakfasts instead have not been costed properly and do not include additional funding in order to meet upfront costs, increased demand and the need for additional staffing. Labour and Liberal Democrat plans to expand free school meals to all primary students are noble but will only work if funding is sufficient and the all the practicalities of simultaneously feeding a greater number of pupils have been taken into account.

“NAHT does not support any plans to expand grammar schools. As the EPI states in its report today, pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds are seriously under-represented in grammar schools and additional selective schools have no significant net positive or negative impact on pupil attainment - instead they modestly redistribute educational attainment towards the small number who gain entry to grammar schools and away from the much larger proportion of children who do not. Pupils from black and minority ethnic families are particularly ill served by grammar schools, which cannot be a good thing for social mobility of cohesion.”

You can read our summary of the main parties’ manifestos here. 

(Note it is a pity the NAHT did not include the radical Green Party policy for education here)

EDUCATION - INVEST, DON'T CUT March & Rally Nov 17th

The cuts being implemented by the Conservative Government put education at risk. Increased funding is desperately needed to safeguard our children’s education. We are asking the Government to change course and invest, not cut.

What the NUT wants:

• School funding – Extra money in the system to support reform of the funding system – and more money for all schools to fund higher costs and the impact of inflation.
• Post 16 funding – Restoration of cuts already made – and real support for sixth form colleges.
• Send and early years funding – fair funding for these vital areas of education
• Funding in Wales – an end to the funding gap.

Invest Don’t Cut Education Funding Rallies

The rallies are an opportunity to make policy makers listen to our concerns about the impact of education funding cuts, and act on our demands to increase education funding. Spread the word and encourage colleagues, friends, family and neighbours to attend and support our aims.

London NUT March and Rally - Thursday 17 November 2016
Assemble for March: 17:00, Whitehall, (Opposite Downing Street)
Rally: 18:30, Emmanuel Centre, Marsham Street, SW1P 3DW

Education the focus for campaigning this weekend

The National Union of Teachers will be out in force this weekend campaigning for the best education for all children and arguing for investment in schools and measures to reduce child poverty and inequality.

Saturday also sees a Labour offensive against the government's proposals on grammer schools with journalist Owen Jones and Tulip Saddiq  Mp for Hampstead and Kilburn due to campaign at Kilburn tube station from 11am on Saturday.

Support Comprehensive Education - Thursday September 22nd - Fair Education Alliance

From Fair Education Alliance

Join us on Thursday September 22nd  for a gathering to show our collective support for comprehensive education and our opposition to the creation of new grammar schools.

This will be a positive rally that will involve a number of inspirational speakers, a chance to find out what happens next and the opportunity to share any ideas you have to try and win the argument in public and in parliament. It should also be great opportunity to meet others who share your concerns about the Green Paper.

We have an incredible line up of speakers. Confirmed speakers include:

Fiona Millar, Writer and Founder of Local Schools Network
Becky Allen, Director of Education Datalab
Joanne Bartley, Kent parent and chair of Kent Education Network
David Weston, Founder and Chief Executive of the Teacher Development Trust
Laura McInerney, Editor of Schools Week
Melissa Benn, Writer and current Chair of Comprehensive Future
Katrina Black, Regional Director - Europe, Teach For All
Louka Travlos, Impact Strategy, National Citizens Service
Ndidi Okezie, Executive Director – Delivery, Teach First

The event kicks off at 7pm at King Solomon Academy, Penfold St, London NW1 6RX

This event is free but you must sign up for a ticket to secure a place. Please sign up HERE:

So what happens to the rest if all Brent secondary schools select the most 'academically able'?

Theresa May wants all secondary schools to be able to select. Here in Brent with no local authority secondary schools, that could mean multi-academy chains, stand alone academies and free schools fighting to select the most 'academically able' leaving those deemed 'not academic' along with special needs children and those in the first stages of learning English where exactly?

The NUT has been quick off the mark with this EduFacts special on Grammar Schools:

• Prime Minister Theresa May has expressed support for more places to be made available in academically selective state schools.¹Secretary of State for Education Justine Greening has said that she is ‘open minded’ about a return to a grammar school system.²
• The creation of more grammar schools would have to lead to the creation of more secondary modern schools, or the de facto conversion of comprehensive schools in areas where new grammar schools were built or where existing grammar schools opened on new sites. Comprehensive schools in areas where existing grammar schools are expanding have already expressed concerns about the impact that this will have on the “intake profiles and therefore the ethos” of their schools.³
• 23% of the public want existing grammar schools to be scrapped and a further 17% want existing grammar schools to be allowed to remain, but do not want grammar school expansion or the creation of new grammar schools. As only 38% of people support more grammar school places via new schools or the expansion of existing school a higher proportion of the public oppose the creation of more grammar school places than those who support a growth in selective state education.⁴
• Those in favour of grammar schools argue that selective state education allows academic pupils from more disadvantaged backgrounds to secure better academic success and helps to close the attainment gap between richer and less well-off pupils. However, the evidence shows that this is not the case.
• Less than 3% of all pupils going to grammar schools are entitled to free school meals (FSM), against an average of 18% in other schools in the areas where they are located. For example, in 2016 Kent County Council reported that 2.8% of pupils attending grammar schools were eligible for FSM, compared to 13.4% in non-selective Kent secondary schools.⁵
• Socio-economically disadvantaged students, who are eligible for FSM or who live in poor neighbourhoods, are much less likely to enrol in a grammar school even if they score highly on key stage two (KS2) tests.⁶ For example, among Kent children who achieved Level 5+ in Reading, Writing and Maths at Key Stage 2 in 2015, 51.4% claiming FSM were attending a grammar school compared to 72.7% of non-claiming children.⁷
• Nationally, over four times as many children are admitted to grammar schools from outside the state sector – largely fee-paying preparatory schools which account for 6% of pupils aged 10 – than children entitled to FSM.⁸
• Pupils, irrespective of their background, have a lower chance of attending a grammar school if they attend primary schools with greater proportions of pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds, with special educational needs or with English as an additional language. Nationally, almost a quarter of state school pupils receive private or home tuition, rising to 40% in London.⁹ Children from more affluent homes that can afford the fees of up to £50 an hour for private tutoring will be at a significant advantage when sitting the 11+ grammar school entrance test. Local campaigners in Buckinghamshire found that, although over £1 million had been spent on developing a test that would minimise the impact of additional coaching, the new test made no difference to the large gap between the pass rates of pupils from poor and wealthy areas, with the worst results seen among FSM pupils.¹⁰
• It has been suggested that new grammar schools would be located in low and middle income areas, thus boosting the chances of academic children living in those areas.¹¹ However, the location of a grammar school in a more disadvantaged area does not mean that children living in close proximity to the school will have the chance to attend. Stand-alone grammar schools often draw large numbers of their pupils from outside their local authority. In 2013, for example, two-thirds of pupils at grammar schools in Stoke-on-Trent and Kingston-upon-Thames lived in a different authority area.¹² In Buckinghamshire more children living outside the county pass the 11+ than local children, with children travelling distances of up to 13km to attend the county’s grammar schools.¹³
• Giving a grammar school in a low and middle income area a small catchment area would not solve this problem. Proximity to a desirable school has an impact on house prices, with a premium of up to 12% on the cost of property within the catchment area of the highest performing schools.¹⁴
• Selective education systems are also linked with greater inequality in social outcomes later in life.¹⁵ Grammar schools do not raise educational standards for the majority of children. Although pupils who pass the 11+ and are admitted to grammar schools generally achieve well, this is at the expense of the majority of children who do not get a grammar school place. The evidence shows that the attainment of pupils at secondary moderns is lower than that of comprehensive schools. ¹⁶

¹ Tim Ross Grammar School supporters optimistic’ 18-year ban will be lifted by Theresa May's new government The Telegraph 16 July 2016. Accessed on 16 August 2016 here.

² BBC News Justine Greening 'open minded' about new grammar schools in England  17 July 2016 accessed on 16 August 2016 here.

³ Rednock School letter to Stroud High School 29 January 2015 here and Archway School letter to Marling School 26 February 2015 here.

⁴ YouGov poll published 15 August 2016. Accessed here.

⁵ Kent County Council Grammar Schools and Social Mobility Commission (June 2016) p. 10 here.

⁶The Sutton Trust Poor Grammar: Entry to Grammar Schools for Disadvantaged Pupils in England (November 2013) p. 5 here.

⁷ Kent County Council Grammar Schools and Social Mobility Commission (June 2016) p. 10

⁸ The Sutton Trust Poor Grammar p. 5

⁹ The Sutton Trust Poor Grammar p. 5

¹⁰ John Dickens Questions over £1m ‘tutor-proof’ 11-plus tests Schools Week 27 November 2015. Accessed on 16 August 2016 here..

¹¹Richard Vaughn Exclusive: new grammar schools plan 'unlikely' to go nationwide The TES 13 August 2016. Accessed on 16 August 2016 here.

¹² The Sutton Trust Poor Grammar p. 5

¹³ David King Critics hit out at number of non-Bucks children passing 11-plus and ‘huge’ distances pupils travel to grammars The Bucks Herald 18 December 2015. Accessed on 16 August 2016 here.

¹⁴ Steven Gibbons Valuing Schools Through House Prices Centre Piece (Autumn 2012) p. 2 here.

¹⁵ OECD Equations and Inequalities – Making Mathematics Accessible to All (2016) p. 90 here.

¹⁶ Freddie Whittaker Fact-check: Do the arguments for new grammar schools stack up? Schools Week 25 July 2016. Accessed on 16 August 2016 here.

As always Michael Rosen is well worth reading on the subject HERE and the Local Schools Network has published a well argued piece by Janet Downs HERE.

My Green Left colleague Mike Shaughnessy has written about the issue on the London Green Left blog LINK,

A petition against the expansion of Grammar schoolc can be found HERE

Twitter has been busy since the announcement and it is clear the Prime Minister has a battle on her hands

 

Rescue Our Schools: Focus on free schools and grammar schools

From Rescue Our Schools

Rescue Our Schools - Families & communities standing up for state education

Dear Supporters,

For this, our 5th newsletter, we have decided to focus on Free Schools.

Did you know that local authorities are no longer permitted to open new schools maintained by them?
All new schools must either be academies (often set up by chains or MATs) or so-called "Free Schools". It seems they are costing us tax payers rather a lot...

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/2bn-fund-revealed-for-dfe-free-school-property-company/

Free Schools

Free schools have been hitting the headlines again, and not for good reasons. Last week the founder and former head of Kings Science Academy Bradford (one of the first wave of free schools in 2011), along with two staff, was convicted of fraudulently obtaining £150,000 from grants relating to the set up of the school. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-36943526

Then it was revealed that the Michaela Free School  have a policy of putting pupils into lunchtime isolation if their parents have not paid their (compulsory) lunch bill. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3713583/Superhead-claimed-Britain-s-education-broken-puts-pupils-detention-lunch-restricts-food-parents-failed-pay-school-meals.html

Add to these clear examples of poor practice growing concerns about how much these additional free schools cost and that the whole programme is not living up to the claims that were made for it.

If there is a free school planned in your area, please look carefully at what is proposed, whether it is really needed, and what impact it might have on existing schools. Rescue Our Schools would like more focus on meeting the needs of existing schools than on extending choice for some at the expense of the system overall.

For more information about free schools and some of the problems associated with them, have a look at the Local Schools Network (www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk) or SchoolsWeek (www.schoolsweek.co.uk )

Will it be back-to-academy rather than back-to-school for your kids?

One of our followers has written a piece for our website about how she feels following the conversion of her children's primary school to an academy.

http://www.rescueourschools.co.uk/news/2016/8/9/my-kids-school-is-converting-so-how-does-this-make-me-feel

If you have a state education story that you'd like to share with us and/or our followers, please do drop us a line: info@rescueourschools.co.uk.

Grammar Schools

By all accounts our new Prime Minister, Teresa May, is now considering lifting the long-standing ban on new grammar schools. This is a controversial issue, already triggering much debate. Read Rescue Our School's press release on the subject here: http://www.rescueourschools.co.uk/

What do you think? Do you agree with us that selection means rejection for most pupils? We'd love to hear from you.

Calling all fundraisers and creatives !

Rescue Our Schools is looking for an experienced fundraiser and creatives to volunteer to help raise money so that we can launch some exciting new projects.

Please get in touch if you'd like to join our team! info@rescueourschools.co.uk

Keep spreading the word

We are keen for as many people as possible to know about what's happening to our state education system. If you are on social media, our Facebook and Twitter feeds are full of updates. Why not sign up, like our page or follow us? And if you have already, maybe you could ask your friends to do the same and subscribe to these newsletters? Or you could spark up a conversation with other parents you know? The more people who know about the peril are schools are in, the better.

Twitter: @RescueSchools

Theresa May’s grammar school plan would brand many children as failures - Green Party

Back to the future with the Tories

Theresa May’s plans to allow new grammar schools would create an unfair education system which leaves too many young children branded as failures, the Green Party has warned.

There is clear evidence LINK that selective schools primarily benefit the already advantaged, while failing to serve the needs of those who most need support and assistance.

The Green Party is committed to fighting inequality and believes the Prime Minister’s plans to lift the ban on grammar schools, reported in the Sunday Telegraph LINK, would create a more divisive education system.

Vix Lowthion, Green Party spokesperson for Education, said grammar schools do not increase social mobility.

She said:

Selection based on academic performance in 11 plus style tests will not be based on raw ability but on which pupils are coached to pass these tests.

And coaching costs money and time and that only certain families will have.

Research by the Sutton Trust LINK found less than 3% of children at grammar schools are entitled to free school meals, while in contrast almost 13% did not have state-school backgrounds, coming mostly from independent schools.

Ms Lowthion, a secondary school teacher on the Isle of Wight, added:

Selective schools would condemn the vast majority of our 11-year-olds to feeling like they are academic failures before their high school career has even begun.

Grammar schools are not the solution. High expectations and the best education for every single child is what education policy must be.

The Green Party wants to see current grammar schools integrated into the comprehensive structure to make a fairer education system.

Natalie Bennett, Green Party leader, said schools should prepare children for more than just exams, and joined calls for May to rethink the plans.

This is not a positive sign of the direction of education policy. We had hoped to see an end to Gove’s era of ministerial whim and outdated ideas of the purpose of education, when the ideology of privatisation dominated.

I speak in many schools, universities and colleges, and I know that young people feel failed by a system that prepares them for exams, not life, and that is being increasingly scarred by cuts to funding for essential provision.

Selection by ability to pay?

Shortly after the Brent Education Debate I was passing the Ark Academy and overheard a parent, application form in hand, saying to his partner, "It is the nearest we can get to sending him to a grammar school." That speaks volumes about how the academies are really seen, despite assurances that they will cater for the whole community.

There are now more secondary school students at the Ark but none have been there long enough to produce any exam results on which parents could base their secondary choice. Apart from the impression of modern resources and facilities, what else do parents base their choices on?

Anecdotally, the lure of 'discipline' seems to figure high with parents. The academy reinforces that with strict rules and long hours. The television screen in the school's reception area portrays all the various hair styles that are not allowed, which when I saw it seemed mainly aimed at Afro-Caribbean children.

Needless to say the children I have spoken to don't always share their parents belief in the 'tough love' approach. I have a worry, with academies in general and free schools, that some sponsors have an underlying mission to discipline and 'civilise' working class and ethnic minority students.

Actual examination results in Ark schools are a mixed bag. In 4 of the 5 Ark schools with a GCSE intake the percentage of pupils gaining 5 A*-C grades this year has fallen since 2011.  Burlington Danes is down from 75% to 64%, Walworth from 69%to 62% and St Alban's from 68% to 50%. Only Charter has increased from 39% to 49%. Of course this is in the context of the marking controversy where I welcome Brent Council's decision to join in the legal challenge.

I have been approached by parents with children in the primary department of Wembley Ark Academy with concerns about the expenses involved in sending their children to Ark. One parent said, "I know the actual schooling is free but we are expected to spend a lot on outings and this can mount up when you have several children at the school."  Many community primary schools subsidise outings as they recognise  that they contribute to a well-rounded education and should be open to all children.

The  Wembley and Willesden Observer this week (Parents find uniforms a cost too far, page 5) quotes Judy Watson whose 11 year old twins joined Ark at the beginning of this year on the high cost of school uniform:

I had to buy a blazer for each of them, which was about £60, and a sweatshirt, they had to have bags with the school logo on and a tracksuit for PE s well. They are running the school like a private school and not every parent can afford it.

She contrasted this with the reasonably priced uniform at primary school and the ability to buy low-priced essential from supermarkets.  I have covered the case for generic uniforms before on this blog LINK

The grammar school system was a selective system based on the 11+ examination. My mother always bitterly regretted that despite passing the 11+ she was not allowed to go on to grammar school because her family couldn't afford the uniform. Selection by 'ability' was also affected by 'ability to pay'.

In a time of austerity don't schools have a  duty to make sure that 'ability to pay' is not a factor in school choice?