A welcome education manifesto from Rescue Our Schools

The Rescue Our Schools LINK campaigning group has published a manifesto which should be of interest to parents and teachers. It brings together many issues which have become prominent in later years. It has much in common with Green Party education policy:

It’s time for a new vision for education fit for the 21^st Century

Young people in 21^st Century Britain need the skills to ensure they can thrive in an increasingly automated world. We need an education system that encourages them to think creatively, critically and confidently,  and nurtures a more cohesive society. Rescue Our Schools believes we must overturn many of the education strategies successive governments have adopted.

Here is our Six Point Plan for a 21^st Century Education System:

1. INVEST IN ALL OUR FUTURES
2. PROVIDE INCLUSIVE EDUCATION FOR ALL
3. PROMOTE EDUCATION OVER EXAM FACTORIES
4. DEVELOP CREATIVITY IN ALL ITS FORMS
5. LET EXPERT EVIDENCE INFORM POLICY
6. ENSURE LOCAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ALL SCHOOLS

        1 . INVEST IN ALL OUR FUTURES

• All children have the right to the best possible education we can provide. A successful education system should reduce inequalities and promote fulfilment. Better educated, more fulfilled children become better educated, more fulfilled adults. This benefits the individual, society and the economy in the long term.
• There must be enough money in the new funding formula so no school or child loses out.
• Teachers and school leaders must be valued as highly skilled professionals. Their workload should ensure a healthy work-life balance. A well-motivated workforce benefits everyone.
• Schools should be encouraged to collaborate and share resources in order to work in the best interests of pupils and the local community. Making schools compete in an artificial market creates winners and losers. No child benefits from being in a losing school.
• Local Authorities must have sufficient funding to retain expertise and provide schools with the support and challenge they need to thrive.
• Learning isn’t limited to school. Our vision is for an education system that provides free, universal access to learning from early years onwards.

2. PROVIDE INCLUSIVE EDUCATION FOR ALL

• Parents and carers want good schools for everyone, not just some. The world’s most successful education systems have no selection and there’s no evidence it improves standards or life chances.
• Children with special education needs deserve the same opportunities as other children. Specialist SEN provision should match local need, taking into account the views of parents and professionals. Children with disabilities or difficulties in mainstream schooling have a right to additional support in the classroom and their funding for this must be ring-fenced.
• Good early years support narrows the educational equality gap; it should be properly funded and supported, and available to all.

3. PROMOTE EDUCATION OVER EXAM FACTORIES

• Pupil assessments must be for their benefit. Linking assessment to school accountability puts inappropriate pressure on staff – which in turn can be passed on to parents and pupils. League tables based on SATS and GCSE results say nothing more than how good schools are at getting children to pass exams.
• We need a truly independent review of primary assessment and its purpose in our children’s education. SATs are damaging primary school children and teachers, narrowing the curriculum and forcing schools to teach to the test. The government’s proposal for “baseline” tests on four year olds will be a judgement on parenting, without reducing inequality.
• We need a secondary level assessment system that allows students to demonstrate all their talents, not just academic. A General Certificate of Secondary Education should be a general assessment of what a pupil has achieved during their time in education. Other more successful education systems do this; so should we.
• School Inspections should consider the quality and breadth of students’ understanding across many areas, how well schools support emotional and physical wellbeing, and staff retention. Judging schools only on test results is harmful for everyone involved.

4. DEVELOP CREATIVITY IN ALL ITS FORMS

• Children need time to learn how to learn. Evidence shows that effective, play-based, early years education helps children acquire vital life skills such as how to communicate and work in groups.
• Children need a broad ranging, engaging and balanced curriculum. Make space for creative and vocational subjects as well as sport. Research shows these help children’s wellbeing and learning across all subjects. High-stakes testing is pushing out music, art, drama, sport and more creative approaches to learning. Let’s give schools genuine freedom to innovate.

5. LET EXPERT EVIDENCE INFORM POLICY

• 21^st Century education policy-making must be evidence-based, not dominated by the ideology or school experiences of government ministers.
• Rescue Our Schools is calling for an independent, expert-led review of all education provision from early childhood to early adulthood. Its goal would be to recommend the best possible curriculum, assessment and structures for the 21^st
• Education and mental health experts should join forces with regular national surveys to find out what is causing the rapid rise in wellbeing issues among children and young people, including the possible impact of high stakes testing and ‘boot camp’ schooling.

6. ENSURE LOCAL ACCOUNTABILITY FOR SCHOOLS

• Parents and carers need to know who to turn to when things aren’t right. Lines of accountability within schools must be clearly set out.
• Schools should be rooted in their communities. Parents and communities should be empowered, through governing bodies, to influence change when it is needed.
• There is no evidence that the academy structure improves educational or financial performance. Government should stop wasting millions handing over schools to multi-academy trusts which are not accountable to families or local communities.
• Local Authorities should be given back the ability to plan school places, opening and maintaining new schools when and where they are required. The Free Schools programme should be abolished.

How polluted is your child's school playground? Find out here.

Client Earth has published an interactive map showing the proximity of schools to polluted roads and the level of exposure children will experience.

Go to LINK for the interactive map.  The site includes a link to your MP so you can raise the issue with her or him.

Client Earth said:

Across the country, children are exposed to illegal and harmful levels of air pollution while on their way to and at school.

In the UK, pupils at almost 1,000 schools are exposed to NO₂ levels that endanger their health and will shape their future wellbeing.

Traffic pollution contains nitrogen dioxide, NO₂, as well as microscopic soot particles – known as “particulate matter” (PM) – which are known to be especially harmful to health. These can be inhaled deep into the lungs and even enter the bloodstream.

While the UK meets legal limits of PM these are more than double the recommended guideline levels by the World Health Organisation (WHO).

We need the UK government to take urgent action to meet legal limits of NO₂ in the shortest time possible.

It also needs to take action to reduce levels of PM. It should adopt legal limits for PM that match the safer WHO guideline levels to better safeguard our health.

Our government is failing our children. But you can force it to act.

London headteachers fear for the future of high quality education in the face of budget cuts

From London Councils
 

London is experiencing a school funding crisis that is damaging the quality of education schools can provide, research commissioned by London Councils has revealed. Headteachers face huge challenges in coping with reducing budgets, recruiting and retaining teachers, and managing teachers’ workload so that they can deliver the best quality education for our schoolchildren.

Talking Heads, a survey of nearly 400 London head teachers and senior school leaders, lays bare the negative impact of insufficient funding on teacher and teaching assistant numbers, curriculum options, learning resources such as IT equipment and textbooks, and the upkeep of school buildings.

Another key challenge addressed by the report is recruitment and retention of high quality teachers. London headteachers are finding it increasingly hard to recruit and retain teaching staff due to the challenges of the profession as well as high living costs and house prices. Primary schools are struggling to fill classroom teacher vacancies, while secondary schools are struggling most with recruiting subject leaders.

Cllr Peter John OBE, Deputy Chair of London Councils and Executive member with responsibility for education, said:

Our research paints a bleak picture of the financial challenges threatening the future of London’s education system from the perspective of the head teachers and school leaders who have worked to transform the capital’s schools into the best in the country.

Headteachers fear that young Londoners will not be able to receive a top-quality education in the years ahead due to increased costs and inadequate funding for schools.

The UK is on course to leave the European Union in 2019 and ensuring young people have the skills to succeed and contribute to the growth of the economy has never been more important.

We’re calling on Government to recognise that schools are facing significant additional cost pressures, and to protect school funding in real terms to address these pressures. This would give head teachers the freedom to focus on helping children to realise their potential at school so they respond positively to the challenges and opportunities that spring from Brexit.

Download the report HERE

How schools can take part in clear air action week June 23rd-July 2nd

The NUT nationally has just agreed to endorse the clean air schools pack produced by Friends of the Earth and Muslim Aid  LINK  (or read embedded version below)  that provides lessons plans, assemblies and much more.

Just about every school in London is near enough to a main road to be in breach of EU clean air regulations. This has a significant impact on health. 

The government was taken to court to force it to publish its plans to cut air pollution during the election. Their response was so weak (devolving the responsibility to local authorities with no significant national initiatives) that they are being taken to court again.

Information on the GLA plan to clean up London's air can be see HERE.

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)

Brent Education Question Time will tackle a vital election issue

I welcome the holding of Education Question Time at Queens Park Community School on May 26th. Education ought to be a central issue in this General Election with schools in Brent and elsewhere facing a substantial cut in funding which could lead to the cutting of teacher and teaching assistant posts, increases in class sizes, reduced resources and the narrowing of the curriculum.

This is not all - government policies and soaring house prices have caused a crisis in the recruitment and retention of teachers and schools are having to advertise for new headteachers several times over. The stress of high stakes testing not only hits teachers but also pupils with the mental health of our young people a particular concern.

It is significant that the Brent Central meeting has been organised by parent campaigners, teaching and support staff, all speaking with one voice about their concerns.

Beyond the immediate crisis are issues to do with nature of education itself: whether the government 'reforms' to the curriculum and examination system, are of any relevance to the rapidly changing technological world that our children are growing up in as well as the context of accelerating climate change and over-consumption. Does memorising for examinations contribute anything to the creativity, flexibility, teamwork and resilience that will be required in the 2030s and 40s?

You can find out how much each of our local schools stands to lose at this website LINK

Fair Funding for All Schools - Get Your Voice Heard

Community organisation sets up school patrols after recent killings

This is an interesting development after the recent deaths of young people amidst much concern in the community about the need for action.

Fair funding for all schools - meeting March 29th Cricklewood

Parents and pupils are joining with teachers and governors to protest about the forthcoming cuts to school budgets which are being implemented through changes in the National Funding Formula for schools. Government sources have denied reports from Tory back bench MPs that they are about to postpone the changes so all the more reason to maintain the pressure.

www.fairfundingforallschools.org

Pupils, parents and staff  from Kenmont Primary held a protest against the cuts earlier this week. Despite the school  being in the borough of Hammersmith and Fulham many of Kenmont's pupils come from the Brent side of the Harrow Road.

Brent Council Tax to rise 3.99% in EACH of the next 3 years and borrowing to increase

In a report LINK going before Cabinet on February 13th Brent's Chief Finance Officer is recommending a Council Tax of 3.99% over eachof the next 3 financial years:

In October 2016, Cabinet agreed to consult on a 3.99% increase in Council Tax (2% Adult Social Care precept plus 1.99% for general purpose). Some additional savings of £4.4m were also consulted upon. Following that, in December 2016, as part of the provisional local government finance settlement, central government recognised the immediate pressures in the care market. It has therefore allowed local authorities to bring forward up to 2% of the precept for 2019/20, by increasing 2017/18 and 2018/19 council tax by an additional 1%, in return for a corresponding reduction in the precept for 2019/20. Brent could therefore increase Council Tax by up to 4.99% in each of 2017/18 and 2018/19, but if it exercised this flexibility then the maximum allowable increase in 2019/20 would be 1.99%.

 After due consideration the recommendation of this report is that the budget should be constructed on the basis of a council tax increase of 3.99% in each of the next three years. This is what was consulted upon and so is clearer for residents. The additional flexibility announced in December 2016 is also of relatively minor financial benefit to the council, and has negligible long term impact from 2019/20 onwards. By increasing the council tax in this way the impact of stark and ongoing reductions to local government funding since 2010 will be partly mitigated.

The report has been issued before the budget consultation with the public has been completed and a report on the consultation will be tabled before the Cabinet meets.  Clearly this leaves little room for any change as a result of the consultation. 

In fact consultation responses have been low with 57 on line (with no clear pattern of responses) at the time the report was written and these attendances at Brent Connects meetings:

The report goes on:

Although demography, in this context, is typically discussed as a cost pressure it also results in additional income. As a consequence of this, and of the planning and regeneration policies adopted by the council, the council tax base (i.e. the number of properties on which council tax is paid) is growing significantly year on year. This increases the council tax payable to the council, and helps the council finance the various pressures caused by population growth.The council is required to balance its budget in this year as in all years. 

In order to balance its budget the council has developed an approach that will help it meet the goals of the Borough Plan and Brent 2020 Vision, comprising:

Increases in council tax to minimise the requirement to reduce services; 

Innovative capital investment to reduce costs in key services, such as temporary accommodation;

Planning for growth in services facing major demographic pressure for example adult social care;

and Investing in key services for the Brent community, e.g. community safety.

The  report states that if the 3% Adult Social Care Council Tax increase is not approved Adult Social Care in 2017-18 will have to be cut by £2.1m.  This is in addition to further cuts in the overall council budget required of £2.3m in 2017-18 and £2.1m in 2018-19.

The Council hopes to achieve  £5.6m through a civic enterprise project to increase income from Council assets (you have probably see the posters encouraging people to get married at the Civic Centre) and £8m from improving commissioning and procurement services. The Council is hoping to sell its procurement services to schools.

It is clear that increasing the number of properties in the borough is seen as one way of increasing Council Tax income, even if they are not affordable for ordinary Brent residents on an average income. Population growth increases income for charged services such as parking.

The Council has a big capital investment programme and it is planned to increase borrowing to finance the projects. Expenditure was £111.7m less than expected this year due to a variety of delivery delays and the balance will be carried forward. The Council is planning to increase the amount it raises and increase the authorised limit:

It is important to stress that the authorised limit – the maximum amount that the council may borrow – has for a number of years been several hundred millions pounds above the level of actual borrowing – last year it was set at £400m above the level of actual borrowing. It is proposed to increase that by £100m to £500m, in light of the Council’s investment strategy, while recognising that the Council has been prudent with its estimate of the additional resources that may finance capital spend. Potentially, the additional growth would cost up to an additional £3m to service annually, should the borrowing become necessary, and if this was not offset by additional income or savings. The calculation noted above merely follows from the strength of the council’s balance sheet, as it is largely prescribed by statute and regulation. 


(Bracketed red offsets borrowing requirement)

One area of interest is the school budget where the report notes that:

As at 31 March 2016, Brent’s maintained schools held £24.8m in balances, a relatively high figure, prudently held in view of upcoming school funding reforms. [Cllr Warren attacked the level of school balances at the last Full Council Meeting]

Overall DSG (Dedicated Schools Grant)  funding has increased for 2017/18 due to growing pupil numbers, however on a per pupil level it remains a cash flat settlement, with the main schools block funded on 41,879 pupils at £5,522 per pupil totalling £231.3m. The other blocks support early years provision, funded at £23.4m, and high needs provision which includes all special schools, funded at £52.7m. Total DSG funding for 2017/18 is £307.4m.  

A number of schools are expanding and as a result overall pupil numbers have increased by over 500 in Brent. The two secondary schools experiencing rapid growth of 58 and 116 pupils have gained £238K and £675K, whilst 26 primary schools experienced growth in pupil numbers with an average gain of £125K. Reductions in funding are also in line with decreasing pupil numbers, for example two secondary schools have significant drops of 25 and 54, which results in funding reductions of £260K and £441K respectively. In the primary phase, 30 schools had a fall in pupil numbers resulting in an average reduction of £44k.

After the expansions of recent years a reduction in pupil numbers in a number of schools is significant, particular when the potential impact of Brexit on immigration numbers is taken into account.  The major factor affecting school budgets is of course the reductions involved when the government introduces a new National Funding Formula.

Conrad Hall, Chief Finance Officer, commenting on the overall Brent budget states:

In considering the budget report, the following key considerations should be highlighted in particular.:

The extent to which the overspends in 2016/17 are structural, that is, that they will or may recur in 2017/18, is a particular risk. Any element of these overspends that may be structural will, if not addressed during 2017/18, require further savings to be agreed next year to offset this. Whilst plans are in place to address this the scale of risk is significant.

Delivering the saving programme agreed in February 2016 will present substantial management challenges, particularly around procurement and civic enterprise savings. Again, considerable management attention has been and is being devoted to ensure that these can be delivered, but it is important to stress again the inherent risks in delivering such a large and complex programme. 
 

That said, the budget now proposed is realistic and affordable, albeit challenging. The increases in council tax set out, if agreed in this and subsequent years, will generate significant additional revenue over time, minimising the number of difficult new decisions about funding for specific services to be proposed. If agreed, this budget would provide for affordable services in 2017/18 and 2018/19, but a further gap of nearly £13m remains in 2019/20. Building on the outcome based reviews and other initiatives to start to close this gap quickly will be an important future consideration.

1. 
   

Upcoming Pupil Census raises vital issues for schools and parents

'Against Borders for Children' will be holding a conference on January 14th to discuss the government's use of the annual school census to create a 'hostile environment' for migrants by requesting birth and nationality information from parents.

This is a particular issue for Brent schools where many children are from a migrant background and where families, after Brexit and a rise in hostility, are anxious about the future.

ABC is a coalition of parents, teachers, schools and campaigners. This is what they say about their campaign:

Our aim is to reverse the Department of Education’s (DfE) policy, effective from September 2016, to collect country of birth and nationality information on 8 million children in England in order to ‘create a hostile environment’ for migrant children in schools.

This new immigration data will be collected through the School Census and then permanently stored on the National Pupil Database. These censuses happen every year and every academic term respectively. The next happens in Spring 2017.

Providing this data is optional and does not affect school funding.

This means parents and schools can legally work together to withhold this information from DfE.

Education officials have an agreement to share the personal details of up to 1,500 schoolchildren a month with the Home Office, The Guardian reports.

The agreement, which has been in place since June 2015, is outlined in a memorandum of understanding between the Department for Education (DfE) and the Home Office. This step is a diluted form of Theresa May’s 2015 stated goal of having schools check passports before accepting new pupils and withdrawing and deprioritising places for migrant children.

As well as using the data to target individual children and families, we are concerned that members of the public, journalists, government departments, and other organisations will also be able to access schools’ immigration numbers. With a huge rise in racist hate crime since the Brexit vote, we fear for the safety of schoolchildren nationwide.

So we are organising a national boycott until the Department of Education reverses this policy and commits to safeguarding children from the stigma of anti-immigrant rhetoric and the violence that accompanies it.

Update: The campaign has won a concession to exclude collecting nationality data in the Early Years census that concerns toddlers.

What you can do:

If you are a parent, you can learn more about how to protect your child’s data.
If you are a teacher, learn how you can get involved.
For more questions, please contact us.

Supporting organisations

Over 20 organisations signed our letter to Justine Greening, calling on the Secretary of State for Education to reverse the policy and to commit to protecting all children from stigma, xenophobia, and violence. They are:

• Zita Holbourne, Co-Founder / National Co-Chair, Black Activists Rising Against Cuts
• Sabir Zazai, Chair of Trustees, City of Sanctuary
• The Children’s Society
• Jen Persson, Coordinator, defenddigitalme
• Remi Joseph-Salisbury,  Founding Member, Critical Race and Ethnicities Network
• Nick Dearden, Director, Global Justice Now
• Liz Fekete, Director, Institute of Race Relations
• Rizwan Hussain, Founder and Director, Jawaab
• Saira Grant, Chief Executive, Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants
• Carolina Gottardo, Director, Latin American Women’s Rights Service
• Bella Sankey, Director of Policy, Liberty
• Stephanie O’Connor, Chair, London Campaign Against Police and State Violence
• Wayne Myslik, Director, Migrants Resource Centre
• Don Flynn, Director, Migrants’ Rights Network
• Malia Bouattia, President, National Union of Students
• Jim Killock, Executive Director, Open Rights Group
• Gus Hosein, Executive Director, Privacy International
• Jabeer Butt, Deputy Chief Executive, Race Equality Foundation
• Rita Chadha, Chief Executive, RAMFEL
• Maurice Wren, Chief Executive, Refugee Council
• Lisa Matthews, Coordinator, Right to Remain
• Pragna Patel, Director, Southall Black Sisters
• Suresh Grover, Director, The Monitoring Group

ABC have published resources for parents and schools, including model letters refusing data, on their website HERE

The human rights organisation Liberty said:

Foreign worker lists? This is a foreign children list

It bears a striking resemblance to the Home Secretary’s recent suggestion that companies will be forced to reveal the number of non-UK workers they employ which was widely decried as toxic and xenophobic.

However, the schools policy goes even further, establishing a national register of non-national children linked to their name, address, and other sensitive personal data.

This register will be accessible by multiple third parties with opaque and minimal oversight.

Border controls in our classrooms

This is a dangerous expansion of border control powers into children’s school lives. We now know that Theresa May's Home Office had plans to 'deprioritise' children of illegal immigrants on lists for school places.

With high levels of hate crime reported since the Brexit referendum, measures such as these risk victimising children in schools, a place where they should feel free and safe to learn and grow – rather than be a source of information on their parents or a target for immigration enforcement.

Already there have been reports of non-white children being asked to produce immigration documents at school.

The National Union of Teachers has published advice for members and guidelines for a school policy on the issue that can be put to governing bodies 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

How much will your school's budget be cut by 2020 - figures here

At yesterday's meeting for governors Gail Tolley, Brent Strategic Director for Children and Families, said the most pressing issue for Brent schools in the future would not be multi-academy trusts or grammar schools but budget cuts and the new funding formula.

Below I publish a spreadsheet from School Cuts with projected budgets for 2020 showing the extent of the expected cuts. Coupled with current problems in recruiting and retaining both class teachers and senior staff this represents a major challenge to maintain current educational standards.

The basis of the calculations can be found HERE

Click on bottom right for full size workbook. Search facility is top right in full size workbook: (...)

London parents overwhelmingly support councils' role in school standards and provision

From London Councils

Parents across the capital believe that a joint effort from headteachers, governors, central government and London boroughs is essential to keeping standards high at London schools, according to an exclusive YouGov poll commissioned by London Councils.

YouGov’s Ask The Parents survey questioned London parents about how important various players in the educational landscape are. The poll revealed that the majority of parents believe that headteachers, governors, London boroughs and central government all have an important role.

Cllr Peter John OBE, Deputy Chair of London Councils and Executive member with responsibility for education, said:

Understandably, the vast majority of parents see headteachers as being the most important players in ensuring the quality of education remains high. But a large proportion of mums and dads in London also see the government, boroughs and governors as having a vital role. 

In particular it is positive that 79 per cent of parents surveyed believe that London boroughs help to drive up standards in local schools. This number has risen by 5 per cent since last year’s poll. 

This suggests that parents across the capital believe that the success of the London model of education is linked to headteachers, boroughs, central government and school governors working together to ensure children gain the skills to excel in adult life. This model has delivered enormous improvements in London’s schools over the last 20 years.

The challenge for everyone with a stake in London’s education system is to drive further improvements. This is vitally important given the competitive London jobs market, which demands more and more from school leavers. This will involve working together to mitigate the impact of expected reductions to school budgets in London as a result of the new National Funding Formula.

YouGov’s poll for London Councils also found that:

• The majority of parents think London boroughs should have the power to influence and intervene in underperforming state, academy and free schools.
• 82 per cent of parents surveyed agree that London boroughs should be able to influence schools in their area to find more places or expand.
• The vast majority of parents (75 per cent) agree that London boroughs should have the final say in the location of new schools within their authority boundary. Only 11 per cent disagree with this.
• Most parents think London boroughs should scrutinise school accounts, with 79 per cent of those surveyed saying that boroughs should oversee the accounts of maintained schools. 72 per cent of parents polled felt boroughs should scrutinise academy accounts and 73 per cent said boroughs should have a role in overseeing free school accounts.
• 71 per cent of parents asked feel that the UK government should increase the amount of money it spends on education and schools.
• Almost two thirds of parents (65 per cent) agree that free schools should be set up in areas of basic need (i.e. looking at shortfalls between future demand for school places compared with existing capacity).