Butt the PR man for Wembley Market

While the maelstrom continued over racism, bullying and harassment at Brent Council, leader Muhammed Butt on Twitter  yesterday concentrated on the real priority:

GCSE affair "morally repugnant" senior examiner

The legal action undertaken by Brent Council, other local authorities and many schools,  seeking a judicial review of the GCSE marking fiasco has received unexpected backing from a senior figure in AQA, the examination board.. This report from the BBC:

A senior exam board figure has resigned over the shifting of English GCSE grade boundaries which left thousands of pupils with lower grades than expected. Stephen McKenzie quit the exam board AQA on Wednesday after 16 years as a GCSE English moderator. In his resignation letter Mr McKenzie said the grade boundary shift was "the worst decision ever made by AQA". He said the AQA board’s handling of GCSE boundary changes was "morally repugnant"  He told BBC News: "I could not go on working for them - to be frank AQA English has fallen apart." 

 Mr McKenzie's resignation came as the exam boards and the exam regulator Ofqual were given more time to consider a legal challenge from teaching unions, schools and local authorities asking them to regrade English GCSE papers.  The alliance has written formally to Ofqual and the exam boards AQA and Edexcel challenging the refusal to regrade GCSE English papers in England. They are threatening to seek a judicial review after thousands of pupils scored lower-than-expected results when grade boundaries were raised midway through the year. 

In his resignation letter Mr McKenzie called the handling of the affair "morally repugnant" and "disingenuous". He said that claims that teachers had marked controlled assessments too generously were based on "paltry evidence" and called the moderation of the qualification "poor, stressed and chaotic". He added that AQA had reneged on guidance to schools about the standard needed to achieve a C grade and said that this had hit the most vulnerable part of the student population hardest.

 "We have in this whole sorry business the classic social disaster scenario; mismanagement succeeded by chaos, hurt innocents succeeded by collusion between official bodies to suppress the reality of the disaster.  The various AQA English specifications have as their spine texts - To Kill a Mockingbird, Of Mice and Men, The Crucible, An Inspector Calls - where ordinary but principled people stand up for social justice at whatever cost. If I see anyone at AQA English do this any time soon, I will reconsider my decision not to work for them. Otherwise I mourn the passing of a once fine institution."

In his letter Mr McKenzie quotes emails from a senior English assessor at AQA who states that the changes to grade boundaries between January and June did "massive damage" and "instantly hit the most vulnerable" pupils. In particular the assessor's emails focus on the raising of the grade C boundary on the lower tier English 

Mr McKenzie, vice principal of Morley Academy in Leeds, says this paper is marketed at the students who would have had to work the hardest to achieve a C or better and who needed the grade to enter apprenticeships, employment or further education. 

Earlier this month letters between another exam board, Edexcel and the regulator Ofqual, were leaked to the Times Educational Supplement. These showed that Ofqual ordered the board to make grade boundary changes against its will just two weeks before the results were published. 

The TES says the Mr McKenzie's resignation letter and the emails reveal "that assessors from AQA, the board with the biggest market share in GCSE English, were just as concerned as their Edexcel counterparts about the grading changes". AQA said it was unable to comment because of pending legal action over GCSE English.

Who would you back,  the principled Stephen McKenzie or Michael Gove?

School financial mismanagement under scrutiny tomorrow

Following the controversy at Copland High School over allegedly illegal bonus payments, Brent Council has tightened up its audit arrangements. The 'Copland Six' are still to stand trial but meanwhile several other head teachers and other staff have been suspended while the possibility of financial management irregularities are investigated. Some have faced disciplinary action leading to dismissal.  There has been publicity about these events in local newspapers and the Evening Standard and the Times Educational Supplement.

Some commentary has suggested that this is a particular problem in Brent while others have suggested that the problem occurs elsewhere but because of Brent's experience it has been better at uncovering it. Generally there is a concern that as schools become more independent of local councils, being set up as 'free' schools or when they convert to academy status, that there may be more occurrences.The report from the Director of Finance and Corporate Services and the Director Children's Services which will be considered on Thursday by the Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee states that Copland, as a foundation school, had made its own audit arrangements, rather than be visited by the local authority team, until 2009: 'The significant additions (to pay) were not picked up during any of the external audits conducted annually at the school.'

Although there may be deliberate attempts as fraud it may also be the case that some of the occurrences are the result of inexperience or incompetence on the part of headteachers and governing bodies. Although the local authority offers financial training to headteachers they do not have a business management background and their main task remains the management of teaching and learning.

Two main issues have emerged which the report says the Council has addressed:

Senior Leadership Pay: a key issue that had been identified through the audit process relates to schools complying with the statutory requirements regarding the setting of pay levels for Headteachers and other Senior Leadership posts. The regulations are complex but nevertheless compliance with them is a statutory requirement and a comprehensive action plan was put in place by the Council to both support and challenge schools to ensure compliance. A great deal of progress has been successfully made as set out in Appendix C which shows the detailed action undertaken by the Council. Further on-going work is necessary to ensure continued
compliance with the regulations.

Leasing: In 2010, the Council identified that a number of schools had entered into very unfavourable leasing arrangements with large finance companies for the hire of equipment such as photocopiers. The Council is of the view that these leases should be treated as being void from the outset, as the schools in question did not have the legal power (‘vires’) to enter into them. If the leases were enforceable, they would have a negative impact on the schools’ financial positions. There are various grounds as to why the Council argues the leases should be considered void. The Council has taken the following action in order to protect the public funds exposed to these purported leases:

• Sent a number of letters and uploaded intranet postings clarifying the importance of complying with the leasing requirements set out in the Council’s Financial Regulations.
• Arranged for Council officers to meet with school officers where appropriate in order to discuss leasing issues.
• Hosted a number of presentations at Governor, Headteacher and Bursar meetings, clarifying the requirements of a lawful lease and offering support to schools that may have ostensibly entered into leases which are void in law, in order to encourage schools to obtain legal advice.
• Referred schools to the Council’s internal and external solicitors who are able to advise the schools (the content of the advice is confidential and subject to legal privilege).
• Obtained advice from a QC (the content of which is confidential and subject to legal privilege).
• Facilitated court action: A number of schools have stopped paying the sums purportedly due under these purported leases. As a result, one finance company has issued legal proceedings against two separate schools for amounts allegedly due. The Council’s solicitors have been instructed by the two schools to defend these claims. The schools are counter-claiming for restitution of the sums paid under the purported leases. The cases are on-going.
• Released guidance to all schools setting out the framework agreements
available, in order to help schools purchase or lease equipment at favourable rates.
• Hosted regular leasing / procurement training sessions with school bursars.

Using a traffic light system of Assurance about Audut Outcomes for audits in 2011-12 the report gives 7 primary schools a green light (substantial), 9 an amber (limited) and 4 a red (nil). The report gives a long list of issues that have been identified 'in the majority of schools' over the last two years. These cover Governance, Procurement, Unofficial Funds, Budgeting, Income and Banking.

The Head of Audit's opinion reported to the Audit Committee for 2010-11 sums up some of the issues:

I also remain concerned about the apparent lack of financial control within a significant minority of the council’s schools and the general approach to internal audit findings. Whilst schools are responsible for their own budgets, they are required to adhere to both legal requirements and to financial regulations issued by the council. These ensure public money is properly spent and accounted for. A number of schools are demonstrating a lack of compliance with basic procurement regulations. This is placing schools at risk of failing to achieve value for money and at risk of potential legal challenge where EU procurement regulations apply.

In addition, a number of schools are failing to adhere to the national rules concerning teacher’s pay, specifically in relation to head teacher pay being outside the prescribed bandings determined by the school size. Although, in certain circumstances schools are permitted to pay above the maximum group range, I consider that in a number of cases these circumstances may not apply and school governing bodies may be paying above the ranges set out within the national conditions document to facilitate incremental increases in pay once the natural pay cap, relative to the size of school, has been reached. This is further exacerbated by Governing Bodies not always being diligent in their recording of the reasons for granting permission to exceed to cap thus placing the school at risk of challenge.

In response to the issue of headteacher (and thus deputy headteacher) pay being outside the criteria published in the School Teachers Pay and Conditions Document (STPCD)  the Children and Families Department in October 2011 asked chairs of governors to return headteacher pay information. The report states that 'many schools failed to respond to this request in a reasonable timescale and it is only now that a full picture is emerging' and schools are being supported and challenged to ensure compliance with the STPCD.

Clearly this report raises important issues about probity, accountability and governance and deserves thorough discussion tomorrow.

The meeting takes place at 7pm in Committee Rooms 1 and 2 at Brent Town Hall on Thursday  July 19th Agenda: HERE

Declaration of interest: I am chair of governors at two primary schools and a former primary headteacher - all in Brent. I do not have a Swiss bank account!