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?

'Drink and Think' on economic growth at the Torch, Monday

The Torch, Wembley Park

                                      BRENT CAMPAIGN AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE
 
                  Join us for our next "Drink and Think" 
             Evening on Monday October 1st, 7.30 - 10.30

These are informal gatherings when we discuss issues of relevance to climate change and the environment. The "Drink" doesn't have to be alcoholic and the "Think" can be on any topic you wish to raise.

The starting topic for this session is "Where do we stand on economic growth". Everyone welcome.

               Function Room, The Torch, Wembley Park, 
          Bridge Road, Wembley (corner with Forty Lane)

Jubilee and Metropolitan Line (Wembley Park) - cross road outside station and turn left to the corner. Or buses 83, 182, 297 to Wembley Park Station or 245 to Brent Town Hall (south bound) or Wembley ASDA (north bound) and proceed to junction with Bridge Road.

Enter via front entrance and bear left past snooker tables or find Function Room entrance round the back of the pub near car park. Traditional pub food menu if you want to eat.

Does Labour support Adonis's academies policy?

During the Brent Education Debate, when Melissa Benn was expressing optimism about Labour's Policy Review producing a better policy on academies and free schools, and some faith that Stephen Twigg was clarifying his position, I said, "What about Lord Adonis?"

I thought I should explain.  Andrew Adonis, former Labour schools minister,  wrote an article in the New Statesman on September 14th LINK entitled Beyond Our Berlin Wall about the division between state and private education. His ideas are a long way from the support for the public sector and an accountable local schools network that were being expressed in our debate.

Adonis states:

It is academies that are systematically eradicating failing comprehensives, And academies - as independent state schools - are the vehicles by which private schools can become systematically engaged in establishing and running state-funded schools.

Explaining  how private schools should sponsor academies, he says:

I don't just mean advice and assistance, the loan of playing fields and the odd teacher or joint activity... I mean the private school or foundation taking complete responsibility for the governance and leadership of an academy or academies and staking their reputation on their success, as they do on the success of their fee-paying schools.

Taking for granted the superiority and success of academies and free schools, Adonis ignores fundamental issues such as selection, funding and small class sizes, as well as democratic accountability The day after the debate I took a class of children from a local private primary school to Fryent Country Park. There were 17 in the class; last year there were just 12. In contrast both community primary schools visiting that week had classes of 30. Is Adonis proposing that private school sponsored academies should have funding and class sizes to match their sponsors?

The New Statesman had a special reader offer of Adonis's new book, "Education, Education, Education", signed and with a "personalised inscription" at a special reduced rate of £8 (rrp £12.99). Somehow it seems to sum up Labour's confused position.

How councillors can REALLY fight back against the Coalition

Following on from the discussion with Muhammed Butt at Brent Trades Council and discussions within Green Left over Brighton Council and cuts, I thought it would be helpful to publish the Independent article  LINK by Owen Jones in full here:

Imagine coming into politics to shut down youth clubs, take money from poor people and make the lives of elderly people harder and lonelier. It’s unlikely that any councillors stuck a rosette on their lapel with these ambitions, but it is not an unfair description of their job these days. With the Communities and Local Government’s council budget being slashed by 28 per cent by 2014, the state is not just being rolled back by this radical Tory government at the national level; it’s being stripped away locally, too.

Last week, I spoke to several Labour councillors in Southampton. Although they felt they had managed the first round of cuts without inflicting excessive hardship – indeed, they have offered to reverse pay cuts imposed by the previous Tory administration – over the next few years, jobs, services and people will be hit. “ Intolerable” was a term one councillor used to describe the situation. But they had no intention of spending the next few years resigned to acting as the local Labour custodians of Tory policy, merely attempting to minimise the damage inflicted on their communities by cuts they did not agree with it. Instead, they wanted to fight back.

What was suggested was a strategy that could pose a new threat to the Government’s whole austerity agenda. Councillors right across Britain would convene a conference to decide on a national strategy for taking on the unfolding disastrous cuts to local government. Rather than spending the next few years managing the misery locally, councillors across the country could co-ordinate a response that would challenge these cuts. It would not simply be out of principle; after all, it is local councillors who face being blamed for policies imposed by a government they oppose.

In part, such a strategy would need to drive home the impact of these cuts. Many people struggle to understand what services are actually provided locally; they only notice them when they depend on them and they abruptly disappear. Often, many will suggest libraries as the most likely victim, and indeed up to one in five face being shut down because of cuts. In Brent, for example, six libraries – or half the total number in the borough – face the chop.

But the impact is far, far greater than local libraries. The anti-cuts website False Economy have been collating examples, and the picture is frightening. Bristol City Council is closing eight of its care homes, sacking 130 workers and leaving almost 200 vulnerable elderly people having to find somewhere else to live. In York, the cost of attending day care for disabled people has been hiked by a stunning 263 per cent. In Northamptonshire and Bolton, street lamps are being dimmed or switched off, leaving women particularly at risk. In austerity Britain, the lights are literally going out.
Lunch clubs can alleviate the loneliness many elderly people face, but they are being slashed, too. In communities like Anglesey, teaching assistants face the sack, and funding for local authority social care across Britain dropped by more than 6 per cent in a year. Back in July, a legal challenge to North Somerset Council’s decision to decimate youth services with a 71 per cent cut was dismissed. Such cuts are happening across the country. Expect thousands more bored teenagers to flood on to our streets.

We don’t hear much of the Big Society these days, but local authority cuts to charities make Cameron’s flagship project even more farcical. Women’s refuges faced a drop in funding of nearly a third last year, leading the charity Women’s Aid to reveal that it had turned away 230 women a day. In a country in which two women are killed by their partner or ex-partner a week, lives are at risk.

In Liverpool, local authority funding for the voluntary sector has been reduced by £18m, or nearly half. According to New Philanthropy Capital, six in ten charities face being hit by local council cuts; and, overall, charities face losing up to £5.5bn because of local and national cuts, says the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations.

By the next election, councils across Britain will have been stripped to the bone. Amy O’Callaghan, a Labour councillor in Luton elected in 2010, says they originally anticipated local cuts of £22m but – thanks to changes in benefits and business-rate restrictions – it has soared to £48m in the past three months. That will mean the council will not even have enough money to pay for statutory services. “So as the situation stands, we won’t even carry out what we’re legally accountable to do come 2015,” O’Callaghan says.
A newly published report for the Resolution Foundation reveals a typical low-income family faces a shocking 15 per cent drop in real income by the end of the decade. Just one reason – among many – is the Government’s attack on council tax benefit. Up to six million people have either all their council tax paid, or are offered a partial rebate; but funding has been cut by 10 per cent, with councils left to decide who suffers. With the elderly protected, and councils unwilling to withdraw it from already hammered disabled people, low-paid workers and working-age unemployed people face a drop in council tax benefits of up to 44 per cent.

Those councillors in Southampton are right – this situation is intolerable. But fighting back is not straightforward. Some anti-cuts activists argue that Labour and Green councillors should simply refuse to implement cuts, and set budgets based on people’s actual needs. But councillors respond that they would not be martyred, as in the past, through imprisonment or being made personally liable for funds. Instead, the Department for Communities and Local Government – led by Eric Pickles – would simply intervene and impose cuts with different priorities. Labour-run Islington Council, for example, might then lose policies it is rightly proud of, such as free school meals and the London Living Wage.

But that does not mean inaction. Labour councillors – with other potential allies, such as the Greens – must meet and decide a national strategy. After all, they derive their mandates from opposing Tory policies. They are uniquely rooted in their communities. Whether it be planning co-ordinated days of action in their boroughs – or even more radical actions – they are specially placed to mount a challenge to national cuts.

With the failure of austerity sucking growth out of the economy as borrowing surges, it would be impossible to ignore them. The choice facing our councillors is clear: face having to take responsibility for kicking people who are poor, disabled, old or young – or join together and fight back.

What is Brent Labour's response?

Brent libraries recognise Grunwick struggle on Saturday

Jayaben Desai  outside Grunwicks in Chapter Road (now flats)

 Back in 2010 LINK I called for Brent children to be taught about the Grunwick dispute as part of local black and women's history.

I am delighted to see that Word Up! which now incorporates Black History Month has a talk on Saturday at Ealing Road Library entitled 'Striking Women' which is a talk on 'Asian Women in British Labour history from Grunwick to the Gate Gourmet dispute. There is a talk and Question and Answer session from 3.30pm to 4.30pm.

There is also an exhibition which will run until 7th October.  I haven't seen it so I am not sure if it includes the powerful video on Grunwick made by Brent Trades Council. It ought to.

I am still critical LINK of the incorporation of Black History Month into the general seasonal Word Up! festival and concerned that it will lose its political edge. I am pleased to see this recognition of a vital event in UK history and I hope schools will organise trips to the exhibition and follow it up in the classroom.

Schools are also, by invitation only, able to attend along with adults a dramatisation of the story of Ellen Craft who escaped slavery by dressing up as a white man. The performance is on Tuesday 23rd October  from 11.15am until 12.15pm.

There is a Family Black History Fun Day on Thursday 1st November 11am until 4pm at Harlesden Library plus and on Saturday November 3rd, Thamizh, a day of Tamil Culture will be held at Willesden Green library from 10am until 8pm.

Other events can ve found on the brochure below. (It is a large file so may take a while to load on slower computers). It can also be viewed as a slide show HERE

Let's have a 'healthy' Harlesden debate on Saturday

 I had to try for ages to find out what time the Question and Answer session was at the 'Shaping a Healthier Future Roadshow' to be be held in Harlesden on Saturday.

Finally we were told that although the consultation was from 10am until 4pm that the Q&A would be from 11-12. There were problems about the timing of the Q&A at the Wembley roadshow and it began late.

Now expensive advertisements from NHS North West London have appeared in the local papers and guess what? They just have the 10am-4pm timing with no mention of the Q&A and its timing.

The Q&A is of course the only time the public get to hear alternative views about the proposals which include the closure of Central Middlesex A&E. Perhaps they really want to keep it to cosy 1:1s where the PR people have more chance of pulling wool over people's eyes.

Get there at 11am and let's have a public debate!

Harlesden Methodist Church, 11am, Saturday September 29th.

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?

Record fine for flouting Brent planning laws