---

Autism

Mr. Willis: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills, pursuant to his answer on 3 December 2001, Official Report, column 77W, on autistic spectrum disorders, what the change in the number of children diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorders has been since 1980; and if she will increase funding for children with SEN, with specific reference to autistic spectrum disorders. [32915]

Mr. Ivan Lewis: The Department does not collect education data on the number of pupils with autistic spectrum disorders, though we are examining whether data on different types of special educational needs could be collected, probably from January 2004. The Medical Research Council's recently completed review of the epidemiology and causes of autism notes that in recent years there has been a widespread perception that the number of people with autism coming to clinical attention has greatly increased. It states that the apparent increase in prevalence of autism is likely to have resulted from better diagnosis and clearer definition as well as increased awareness. Direct comparisons are, however, complicated by the different definitions and methodologies used in research studies in the past.

Funding is not made available for specific categories of special educational need. Rather, funding is allocated and distributed via local education authorities (LEAs), who have a duty to provide appropriately for all children in their area. This includes the duty to identify children's individual special educational needs and to deliver the most appropriate provision to meet those needs.

Overall funding for education, including for pupils with special educational needs, is increasing. Details of provisional 2002–03 Education Standard Spending (ESS) allocations for each LEA were announced in December, with an overall increase of more than £1.3 billion compared to the current year. Alongside this we have also made £91 million of supported expenditure available for special educational needs in next year's Standards Fund (2002–03), an increase from the £82 million available this year. The fund can be used for a range of activities including training for staff in special educational needs. By 2003–04 average recurrent funding per pupil will have increased by over £760 in real terms since 1997–98.

Departmental Secondments (Energy Industry)

Tom Brake: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many staff were seconded between (a) BP, (b) Shell, (c) Enron, (d) Exxon-Mobil, (e) Conoco, (f) Texaco and (g) TotalFinaElf and her Department in (i) 1999–2000, (ii) 2000–01 and (iii) April 2001 to the latest date for which figures are available. [33206]

Mr. Ivan Lewis: There have been no staff seconded between BP, Shell, Enron, Exxon-Mobil, Conoco Texaco or TotalFinaElf and this Department in any of the periods described.

Classroom Assistants

Mr. Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many classroom assistants were employed in (a) primary schools and (b) secondary schools on (i) 31 December 1997 and (ii) 31 December 2001. [33034]

8 Feb 2002 : Column 1218W

Mr. Timms: The available information is shown in the table.

Full time equivalent number of teaching assistants^(9),(10) in maintained primary and secondary schools⁽¹¹⁾, England (January each year)

	1997	1998	2001
Primary(11)	39,751	42,727	63,176
Secondary(11)	7,821	8,973	15,467

⁽⁹⁾ Includes both full-time and the full-time equivalent of part-time non-teaching staff.

⁽¹⁰⁾ Includes nursery assistants, special needs support staff, minority ethnic pupil support staff and non-teaching assistants.

⁽¹¹⁾ Includes middle schools as deemed.

Source:

Annual Schools' Census

Budgets

Mr. Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what percentage of (a) secondary school and (b) sixth-form college budgets are accounted for by the Standards Fund in 2001–02. [33036]

Mr. Timms: Two separate Standards Fund are in operation: one paid by the Government to local education authorities, most of which is passed on by them to schools; the other administered by the learning and skills council and is paid to further education institutions.

School budget statements for 2001–02 indicate that the Standards Fund represents 6.9 per cent. of secondary school budgets.

The largest element of funding for sixth form colleges is from the learning and skills council's participation funding. In addition, they receive grant from the Standards Fund managed by the learning and skills council. It is estimated that the Standards Fund will account for 4.8 per cent. of these two funding streams in 2001–02. Sixth-form colleges may receive other funding in their budgets, but details of these are not available centrally.

Examination Marking

Mr. Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many requests for re-marks in England and Wales of (a) A-level, (b) A-S level and (c) GCSE papers in 2001 were refused because of the loss of the relevant exam scripts; and what the corresponding (i) A-level and (ii) GCSE figures were for the previous four years. [33103]

Mr. Ivan Lewis: Awarding bodies do not refuse requests for re-marks where scripts are lost. If a script cannot be found after an exhaustive search, the awarding body will make a special award based on careful consideration of the other assessment evidence of the candidate's performance. The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority does not as part of its monitoring exercise collect figures on the incidence of such cases.

Mr. Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many re-marked (a) A-level, (b) A-S level and (c) GCSE papers there were in England and Wales during 2001 by subject; if he will list each figure as a percentage of the overall number of relevant subject papers; and if he will list the corresponding (i) A-level and (ii) GCSE figures for the previous four years. [33104]

8 Feb 2002 : Column 1219W

Mr. Ivan Lewis: Figures are not normally collated by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority at subject level as quality assurance focuses on qualification type and awarding body performance.

Mr. Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the average length of time taken by exam boards limits in England and Wales during 2001 was to re-mark (a) an A-level script, (b) an A-S level script and (c) a GCSE script; and what the corresponding (i) A-level and (ii) GCSE figures were for the previous four years. [33102]

Mr. Ivan Lewis: The Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) has been collecting data since 1999 on the percentage of re-marks completed by the awarding bodies within the agreed target periods. Reports for 1999 and 2000 are available on the QCA website. The report for 2001 will be published on 25 March 2002.

QCA does not collect information on exactly how many days any particular re-mark took. In the table, the percentage of remarks completed within the target time is given for 1999 and 2000 by all awarding bodies offering GCSEs in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland:

Percentage

	A/AS-level	GCSE
1999	82	68
2000	95	93

Mr. Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many pupils in England and Wales were subject to the remarking of (a) A-level, (b) AS-level and (c) GCSE papers in 2001; what the total of these figures is as a percentage of the total number of pupils; and what the corresponding (i) A-level and (ii) GCSE figures were for the previous four years. [33105]

Mr. Ivan Lewis: Data are only collected with respect to candidates. The data for 2001 are currently being collated by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority and will be included in the authority's annual report to be published on 25 March. Figures have been collated only since 1999; the figures for 1999 and 2000 are set out as follows.

	2000	1999
A-level
Number of candidates subject to remarks	29,640	25,983
Percentage of candidates subject to remarks	3.8	3.3
AS-level
Number of candidates subject to remarks	1,149	1,005
Percentage of candidates subject to remarks	1.5	1
GCSE
Number of candidates subject to remarks	57,772	26,371
Percentage of candidates subject to remarks	1	0.5

Mr. Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many re-marked (a) A-level, (b) AS-level and (c) GCSE papers in England and Wales during 2001 resulted in upgrades; what percentage these figures were of the total number of papers; and what the corresponding (i) A-level and (ii) GCSE figures were for the previous four years. [33108]

8 Feb 2002 : Column 1220W

Mr. Ivan Lewis: Data for 2001 are currently being collated by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority and will be included in the Authority's annual report to be published on 25 March 2002. Figures have been collated only since 1999; the figures for 1999 and 2000 are set out as follows.

	2000	1999
A-level
Number of remarks resulting in an upward grade change	4,644	3.476
Percentage of total number of papers	0.6	0.4
GCSE
Number of remarks resulting in an upward grade change	6,601	2,960
Percentage of total number of papers	0.1	0.06

Mr. Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many schools in England and Wales asked for (a) A-level, (b) AS-level and (c) GCSE papers to be re-marked in 2001; and what the corresponding (i) A-level and (ii) GCSE figures were for the previous four years. [33109]

Mr. Ivan Lewis: The monitoring of progress and outcomes of a remark is at candidate level rather than school or college level. It is not possible within the current systems to collate information about individual candidates across awarding bodies to produce cumulative data for schools.

Mr. Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many of the re-marked (a) A-level, (b) AS-level and (c) GCSE papers in England and Wales during 2001 were upgraded by two or more grades; what the total of these figures is as a percentage of the total number of re-marked papers; and what the corresponding (i) A-level and (ii) GCSE figures were for the previous four years. [33107]

Mr. Ivan Lewis: Information on remarks resulting in upgrades by two grades or more is not available. The data collated by the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority focus on the number of grade changes made by the awarding bodies rather than the degree of change.

---