| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Grammar Schools
4. Mr. Dunn: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment how many pupils are currently being educated in grammar schools. [29095]
The Secretary of State for Education and Employment (Mrs. Gillian Shephard): Approximately 125,000 pupils are being taught in maintained grammar schools in England.
Mr. Dunn: Is my right hon. Friend aware that many Conservative Members wish that the figure were 10 times that number? Many of us cannot forget that, in terms of educational provision, the inner city has become a nightmare for many of our young people because of the control and ideology of the Labour party. Labour has denied many young people a chance to have a real education in the inner city; that is why it is not fit to govern.
Mrs. Shephard: As my hon. Friend knows, I intend to publish a White Paper in June which, among other things, will propose increased selection for those schools where parents, governors and heads wish it. In that way, we shall enable schools to build on their strengths, to establish distinctive identities and to increase choice and diversity. The hon. Member for Halifax (Mrs. Mahon) said it all: whatever happened to choice? We know what would happen to choice if the Labour party ever formed a Government: it would be abolished.
Mr. Hardy: Will the Minister confirm the Government's support for comprehensive schools? Is she aware that, over the years, many thousands of youngsters from comprehensive schools have gone on to considerable achievement? Those students would have been unable to pursue such opportunities had selection continued. Is she aware that the Government appear to be moving backwards, and against the comprehensive principle, in support of the selection principle, which has served this country badly?
Mrs. Shephard: The Government believe in a broad spectrum of schools in the maintained sector, and that is what our policies have achieved. We have grant-maintained schools, LEA schools, grammar schools, non-selective schools, specialist schools and colleges, city technology colleges and Church schools. Labour Members seem to be opposed to such diversity. It seems that they would seek to march forward to the 1960s and impose only one kind of school on everyone--but for a few of their Front-Bench team.
Sir Patrick Cormack: How many pupils are currently being taught English grammar? Would not the level of spoken and written English in this country go up appreciably if the old grammar school standards applied throughout the country?
Mrs. Shephard: All pupils in our schools are currently being taught English grammar. Their achievement is regularly inspected and examined. They are tested at the ages of seven, 11 and 14. I know that my hon. Friend has high standards in these matters. He always expresses himself admirably. It will take a little time before all our pupils reach his standard, but we intend to get there.
Nursery Voucher Scheme
5. Mr. Win Griffiths: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what proportion of providers participating in the pilot phase of the nursery voucher scheme have not previously accepted four-year-olds. [29096]
Mr. Robin Squire: Forty private and voluntary sector providers did not have four-year-olds on roll at the time of applying to join the nursery voucher scheme but had the capacity to provide for them.
Mr. Griffiths: The Minister has not told me what proportion of providers that is--I will assume that it is minute. Does it not show that the nursery voucher scheme is a vast waste of money on administration and bureaucracy? In relation to the pilot schemes, more than 25 per cent. more places could have been provided if the money had been given to local authorities.
Mr. Squire: I cannot give the hon. Gentleman the exact proportion that he seeks because I do not have that information. There are new providers in the private and voluntary sector, and I should have thought that he would welcome that, particularly as he knows--he is a member of the relevant Standing Committee--that checks are being built in to ensure high standards. As for his comment about money being wasted on bureaucracy, he should also know from his Standing Committee
membership that, of the £20 million that is estimated to cover the operation, administration and inspection of the scheme next year, the vast proportion will be spent on inspection. I should have thought that he would join me in welcoming the fact that all providers will be inspected.
Mr. Congdon: Does my hon. Friend agree that the nursery voucher scheme is the only means of ensuring a diversity of choice for parents in nursery provision? Does he agree that without the scheme, the only choice parents would have would be between LEA provision and nothing?
Mr. Squire: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. He will know that we are awaiting precise details of any Opposition proposals. Despite the passage of legislation through the House, we still await that information. There is no doubt that the voucher gives parents a greater say than does the present system, and it should be welcomed on that ground alone.
Teacher Training (Science Graduates)
6. Mr. Gunnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment what plans she has to increase the number of applications from science graduates for training for teaching; and if she will make a statement. [29097]
The Minister of State, Department for Education and Employment (Mr. Eric Forth): We have introduced a priority subject recruitment scheme, being run by the Teacher Training Agency, which should attract more good students to train as teachers in key subjects such as science. The TTA's other promotional activities also place particular emphasis on science.
Mr. Gunnell: Does the Minister believe that the Teacher Training Agency will reach its target of training 3,700 science graduates as teachers this year? Does he believe that there will be more science teachers in the classroom next year, taking into account those who will be promoted out of the classroom, retire, change careers or leave the profession because of disillusionment? Are we not facing a crisis in science teaching in schools, which is due in part to disillusionment with the Government as a result of their lowering teachers' status over the years?
Mr. Forth: That hysterical outburst--[Laughter.]--is uncharacteristic of the hon. Gentleman. I am told that there are 46 vacancies nationwide for physics, chemistry, biology and other science teachers, which does not suggest a crisis of the proportions implied by the hon. Gentleman. However, the Department and I share his concern to do everything that we can to guarantee the future supply of science teachers and to strengthen the teaching of science in schools. The Teacher Training Agency is doing several different things in that area. For example, it is considering how it might develop the licensed teacher scheme to attract mature applicants to science teaching. I hope that the hon. Gentleman agrees that that is an imaginative approach that could bear fruit. The School Teachers Review Body will also examine the question of the supply of science teachers when undertaking its annual consideration of pay skills. Those
and the other measures that have been implemented will ensure that there is no worsening of the current position of only 46 vacancies nationwide.
Mr. Butcher: The problem is that most of the time that graduates spend in teacher training college is a complete waste. Although we have introduced measures to test pupils and the level of output in schools, should we not also consider introducing a core curriculum for teachers, particularly for junior and infant trainee teachers, in numeracy and literacy? Graduates should be taught not simply what to teach, but how to teach it. Recent studies have highlighted tragic levels of illiteracy among young people in our inner cities which are caused by poor teachers who do not know how to teach--and who have not been trained to teach--reading.
Mr. Forth: My hon. Friend, characteristically, puts his finger on a very important point. An important part of the remit of the Teacher Training Agency, working with the Office for Standards in Education--which is helping us increasingly to understand some of the problems that my hon. Friend has highlighted--is to provide the information that we need to quantify the nature of the problem and to go ahead and deal with it.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right; we must ensure that teachers and those who are in teacher training have the tools that they need to do the job properly. As well as helping us to identify problems in schools and with pupils in the classroom, Ofsted is working to identify the needs of teachers. The Teacher Training Agency can then bring about the necessary improvements in that area.
Mr. Bryan Davies:
I ask the Minister, calmly and without hysteria, whether he agrees that, to safeguard the number of teachers of science in the future, we must take seriously the Dearing proposals to broaden the post-16 curriculum. We must ensure that more students continue to study science beyond the age of 16 and are well prepared to enter higher education to study that subject.
Mr. Forth:
I agree completely with the hon. Gentleman's constructive point. The whole thrust for some years--starting with the national curriculum--has been to ensure that all pupils not only gain a grasp of science, but develop an enthusiasm for it from an early age. We hope and expect that more children will want to continue their science studies in secondary school and beyond. The basic curriculum, Sir Ron Dearing's work to develop it post-16 and developments beyond that are designed to achieve that objective, among others. I am happy to share the objectives that the hon. Gentleman sketched.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |