| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Colchester Sixth Form College
7. Bob Russell (Colchester): If he will visit the Colchester sixth form college to discuss funding for the college. [121701]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Skills (Mr. Ivan Lewis): Sadly, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will not be able to accept the hon. Gentleman's kind invitation. However, the hon. Gentleman should not despair, because my hon. Friend the Minister for Lifelong Learning, Further and Higher Education hopes to be able to visit the college in the autumn and would welcome the opportunity to discuss the increase in funding for further education over the next three years and the college's development plan for that period.
Bob Russell : I warmly welcome that response. When the Minister visits the college, will he explain why a sixth form college that puts in a new building gets only a 30 per cent. building grant, while sixth forms in a school get a 100 per cent. grant? Also, why is it that, in the seventh year of a Labour Government, students who attend one of the 100 or so sixth form colleges across the country receive, on average, 25 per cent. less funding than sixth form students in schools? Why is there such an unlevel playing field between students at sixth form colleges and those who attend sixth form in a school?
Mr. Lewis: I thought that the hon. Gentleman was going to thank me for the £370,000 grant recently awarded to the college to help build its new information technology and education block, or for the 19 per cent. real-terms increase in funding for the college sector over the next three years, or for the 7 per cent. real-terms increase in funding for full-time equivalent students over the same period. Where was the hon. Gentleman when we have spoken in the House, as we have done frequently, about the most ambitious investment and reform package for further education for a generation, which has the clear objective of closing the funding gap between 16 to 19-year-olds educated in schools and those educated in college settings? As to the question of VAT, that is a matter that Customs and Excise is currently considering.
Pupil Testing
8. Ann Winterton (Congleton): What plans he has to extend testing of school children throughout England to those aged 14. [121702]
The Secretary of State for Education and Skills (Mr. Charles Clarke): None.
Ann Winterton : I sense something of a U-turn here, because there have been authoritative reports in the newspapers that such testing might be introduced. Will the Secretary of State give the House an unequivocal assurance that the Government have no plans to scrap GCSEs or to have examinations for 14-year-olds? Will he say that clearly today, because such plans would adversely affect pupils and would not guarantee an improvement in the quality of learning in schools?
Mr. Clarke: The report in The Times to which the hon. Lady refers was, in fact, completely incorrect, which is why I answered "None" just now. For her information, there are examinations at the age of 14. They are called key stage 3 examinations, and they will continue. We have no plans to scrap GCSEs, but we do have plans carefully to consider the report of a commission chaired by Mike Tomlinson on the whole of 14-to-19 education, and to come to a series of views about where we should go. Mr. Tomlinson's committee will be producing initial thoughts later this year, and a final report at the turn of next year which everyone can consider and discuss in those circumstances.
Specialist Schools
10. Ms Julia Drown (South Swindon): What criteria he uses to assess applications for re-designations of schools as specialist schools. [121704]
The Minister for School Standards (Mr. David Miliband): Specialist schools applying for re-designation are assessed against rigorous criteria. These consist of: first, progress in relation to the objectives of the programme and the targets set by the school; secondly, improvement in academic performance both in specialist subjects and across the whole school; thirdly, the quality of the specialist school development plans for the next four years.
Ms Drown : Will my hon. Friend consider widening the assessment criteria to take into account educational and wider community benefits? Churchfields school in my constituency partly serves one of the most deprived areas in the south-west and was widely welcomed as a specialist school. The school has turned itself around and come out of special measures. It has achieved a 50 per cent. increase in academic standards and one need only look at the performing arts to see the huge talent that it is developing, yet it has been told that it cannot continue as a specialist school.
Surely schools that are obviously benefiting from specialist school status—so widely welcomed in the community—should not have that status taken away. Will the Minister look again at the criteria to make sure
that schools such as this can continue the success that they have so obviously developed from being specialist schools?
Mr. Miliband: My hon. Friend has spoken and written to me about the case of Churchfields school. I can assure the House that I do not decide; an independent panel looks carefully at every case and makes recommendations about re-designation. My hon. Friend will agree that the re-designation process has to be fair and objective. I know that Churchfields has appealed against the decision of the independent panel. The appeal will be considered in the new academic year to take account of its results this year. I look forward to the school making significant progress during that time.
Mr. David Cameron (Witney): Will the Minister recognise the sense of disappointment often felt by heads, teachers, governors and parents when a school's application for specialist status is rejected? Will he look again at the application by Carterton community college in my constituency, a school without a sixth form which serves the local population around RAF Brize Norton and has a transient population? The headmaster is doing an excellent job in terms of discipline and results. The school applied for specialist status and was very disappointed not to get it. I hope that he will be able to look at the case again.
Mr. Miliband: I can do better than the hon. Gentleman hopes, in the following sense: our commitment is to work with the schools to help prepare them for specialist status so that they are in a position to make the most of it. I cannot revisit the decision to reject the application, but I am committed to working with the school to make sure that the application next time is of a sufficient standard to get through.
Jonathan Shaw (Chatham and Aylesford): Does my hon. Friend agree that schools are far less likely to be rejected under this Government's specialist schools policy than under the previous Government, because we are putting in the money? When considering the specialist schools round, will he look carefully at Aylesford school in my constituency, which will share £60 million of private finance initiative new buildings, including a school in Ashford, about which I am sure the hon. Member for Ashford (Mr. Green) will be pleased? Will he look carefully at this school? The buildings are dilapidated, the staff are working very hard, the results are improving and it deserves to get the green light.
Mr. Miliband: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for getting me back on message. When we came to office, there were only 100 specialist schools. There are now 900 and we predict that that will rise to about 2,000 by 2006. He will agree that they are making a substantial contribution to the rising standards across the country. I will look seriously at individual cases as they come through, but every judgment is made on an objective and independent basis.
Dr. Vincent Cable (Twickenham): What steps is the Minister taking to reduce the bureaucracy and red tape surrounding specialist school applications? One of my local schools, Hampton community college, which is
desperately short of staff—especially senior staff—had to set aside three of its five most senior teachers for a term to make a bid that subsequently failed.
Mr. Miliband: That is an important and good point and I can provide some reassurance to the hon. Gentleman. The 250-page form is being reduced to a 50-page form in the new round, making a significant difference to the bureaucracy associated with the application for specialist status.
Teachers' Pay
12. Mrs. Joan Humble (Blackpool, North and Fleetwood): What the increase in average pay for teachers has been since 1997. [121706]
The Minister for School Standards (Mr. David Miliband): The average salary for full-time regular teachers in the maintained schools sector in England and Wales rose from £22,900 in March 1997 to £27,200 in March 2001, the last year for which information is available. This represents an increase of 18.7 per cent. in cash terms, and 7 per cent. in real terms.
Mrs. Humble : I thank the Minister for that announcement. He will undoubtedly agree that that welcome increase has contributed to the large rise in the number of teachers—an extra 25,000 or so since 1997. But will he reassure me that he will examine the work load agreement with teachers and use it, together with increased salaries, to help to recruit, and above all to retain, teachers?
Mr. Miliband: My hon. Friend makes a really important point. The Government said in their evidence to the School Teachers Review Body last year that outside London, teacher salaries were in our view competitive. Indeed, current recruitment rates bear that out: there are 4,000 more teachers this year than last year. The top priority for teachers in terms of recruitment and retention is work load, and the work load agreement that we have introduced—in conjunction with support staff unions, head teacher unions and the majority of teaching unions—represents a first and historic attempt genuinely to change teachers' working conditions over the next three years. I believe that that will happen, and that the agreement will have the impact on retention that my hon. Friend hopes for.
Michael Fabricant (Lichfield): Does the Minister realise that although the school achievement awards seem a good idea per se in order to reward teachers for good service and for having special skills, they create real difficulties for head teachers in meeting their budgets? In Staffordshire, which passes on 106 per cent. of the amount allocated to education by the Government, schools are having real difficulty in providing a fair and equitable distribution of awards to teachers. What steps can this Minister take to ensure that schools not only in Staffordshire but in other parts of England and Wales are not pressured in such a way that they are unable to pass on these awards?
Mr. Miliband: If I understood the hon. Gentleman's question correctly, there are two parts to it. First, he will be reassured to know that school achievement awards are funded centrally, so there is no question of the money coming out of schools' budgets. Secondly, there is clear guidance on how the money should be allocated between staff, and he is of course right to point out that it is for the whole school team, not just for teachers.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |