It is pleasing that St Olave’s Grammar School in Orpington
has backed down in the face of legal action and has allowed pupils threatened
with exclusion to complete their A-level studies (see footnote 1). However,
the incident is really a symptom of the terrible mess that successive
Conservative, New Labour and Coalition governments have made of education since
1979.
The fundamental problem is the right wing view that
educational excellence will be achieved if schools compete with each other for
pupils in an educational market place. Proponents of this view hold that instead of a
system of schools managed by the elected local Council and providing a
range of types of education appropriate to the needs of every pupil, consumers
of school places (i.e. parents) must choose amongst competing schools, judging
them on the basis of supposedly objective criteria, especially external exam
results, that are then assembled into league tables.
What is needed is a return to the 1960s ideal of a
comprehensive system. Some of the
measures that would be needed in order to achieve this are set out below (not
in any particular order).
- Re-establish elected Local Education Authorities (LEAs) to manage the system of schools in their area, including
-
Providing a suitable school place for every
child whose parents reside in their area, including children with disabilities
or other “special needs”
-
Managing school admissions on a
non-discriminatory basis
-
Employing and paying teachers and other school
staff
-
Providing advice and support to teachers and
school managers
- LEAs to be composed exclusively of elected Councillors, with no special privileges for religious or other groups (2)
- All schools to have a duty to promote the best interests of their pupils so that they achieve their full potential – both academic and vocational
- Ofsted to be replaced by a small national monitoring unit (cf HMI), with responsibility for drawing up a national curriculum, and most of its resources re-allocated to LEAs
- State-funded schools to have a duty to co-operate with other schools in their area
- Academies and “free schools”, including religious “voluntary aided” and “voluntary controlled” schools, to be brought fully within the responsibility of the LEA
- A-levels, GCEs and vocational education to be reformed as recommended in 2005 in the Tomlinson Report (but rejected by the Blair government), and the post-16 curriculum to be broadened to avoid early academic specialisation. University entrance requirements to reflect this broader curriculum.
- Religious worship to be prohibited in state-funded schools and non-denominational religious education to be made compulsory. State schools to be prohibited from discriminating on religious grounds in the admission of pupils and the employment of teachers and other staff.
- Universities to be prohibited from admitting a grossly disproportionate number (e.g. >15%) of undergraduate students from independent or private schools
- The relevant central government departments to be re-organised to form a single integrated Education Department, focussing exclusively on education (both academic and vocational) and including all education from nursery to adult, and separate from employment, “business”, families, children’s social services and other non-educational functions
There obviously will be huge opposition from vested interests,
especially the churches and the private companies that have been established to
own and run schools – not to mention private, fee-charging schools.
A particular issue will be the actual ownership of schools,
especially religious schools. In many
cases the land is owned by the diocese although the buildings and equipment have
been wholly or mainly paid for by the state, which also pays for the running
costs, including staff salaries. I think
a reasonable argument can be mounted that what the state has given it can also
take away. If all else fails, Parliament
can authorise compulsory purchase, subject to appropriate monetary compensation
(to comply with the Human Rights Act).
This programme would be unlikely to be achieved within a
single Parliament, and a staged approach will be necessary. The key reforms will probably be the
abolition of SAT tests and the prohibition of publication of league tables (as
this will remove the market signals that the present system depends on). The biggest obstacle will be the
religious establishment. To take this on perhaps
we need a latter day King Henry VIII.
However, the current educational market situation has resulted
from a succession of small steps over about 35 years. Its replacement should be achievable in less
than half that time – though at my age I am unlikely to live to see it.
[2] A
problem with this is that Council Committees have been stripped of their
powers, and replaced by Cabinets and elected mayors. A reversal of this retrograde “reform” would probably
also be needed.
[3]
This was implied in the Labour Party’s 1997 election manifesto, but the
commitment was diluted and eventually dropped
[4]
The devolved administration in Wales has already done this, and Scotland has
never had them.
[5]
This proposal was included in the Labour Party election manifesto in 2017
Further reading:
For a short and readable history of English education see this online summary:
http://www.educationengland.org.uk/index.html
Further reading:
For a short and readable history of English education see this online summary:
http://www.educationengland.org.uk/index.html
© 2017 Robin Paice
A brief comment on my own article. Somebody pointed out to me that I had said nothing about school governors, and I agree that this is an omission. Trouble is, I am not sure what I think about governors.
ReplyDeleteAs it happens I have served on two school governing bodies, and I didn't think that either was very effective as they mainly considered minor details and disciplinary matters while being excluded from major policy. I am not in favour of increasing the role of parent governors as their children are only there for a few years and they do not represent the whole community.
The major players should be the representatives of the local authority (that makes the policy and provides the funds) and the headteacher (who implements policy and manages the staff). The roles of parents, pupils, and teaching and admin staff are primarily consultative - perhaps analagous to an old-fashioned works council. I see no role for religious bodies or other private interests.