4 Development of Government policy
48 In this section we explore the evolution of
successive Governments' policies on diversity in an attempt to
answer the question "How did we get to where we are today?"
As outlined above, Government initiatives have given rise to
a wide range of different school types. While we recognise this
range, for the purposes of this report we focus on the specialist
schools initiative.
49 Since 1997 the Labour Government has made
much of its intention to design and build policy on the basis
of evidence and research.[44]
It is the aim of this inquiry to investigate the extent to which
the Government has made appropriate use of the evidence in the
development and pursuit of its policy of diversity of provision
in secondary education.
50 Government has claimed great successes for
its policy of diversity and based these claims on the evidence
offered by research. The 2001 White Paper Schools Achieving
Success stated "specialist schools are a key part of
our proposals for a more diverse system because of their proven
success in raising standards."[45]
Establishing the extent to which these claims have been proven
has been a central theme of this inquiry.
The 1997 inheritance
51 The 1997 Labour Government inherited from
the preceding Conservative administration a specialist schools
programme[46]
built on the language of choice and diversity, a vocabulary which
has long outlived the policy framework contained in the 1992 White
Paper of the same name.[47]
Up to the time of the 1997 election the specialist schools programme
had been a flagship Conservative policy and an embodiment of Conservative
aspirations for secondary education, combining promises of raised
achievement, with significant investment from business, institutional
autonomy, competition between providers and choice for consumers.
Specialist schools re-launched,
diversity discovered
52 In 1997 the new Labour Government was faced
with a choice: to abandon the specialist model or make it its
own. The new administration embraced the philosophy of diversity
of provision. The specialist schools programme was re-launched
with a target of 450 more specialist schools by the end of the
Parliament,[48]
creating a paradoxical combination of policy statements emphasising
"standards, not structures"[49]
and policy actions emphasising structural change as the gateway
to increased resource and raising standards. The re-launched specialist
schools programme refined the mission of schools within the programme
to incorporate a community dimension and to share their resources
with partner schools.
53 In 2001 the Government reaffirmed its commitment to the programme
in its White Paper, Schools Achieving Success[50]
by headlining the encouraging research undertaken by Professor
David Jesson on behalf of the Technology Colleges Trust, and by
announcing the expansion of the programme to 1,500 schools by
2005 and the addition of four new specialisms in science, in engineering,
in business and in enterprise and in maths and computing.
Choice and diversity
54 The 2001 White Paper and other departmental
publications at the time made much of the value of diversity and
the necessary link between diversity and choice, in the battle
to improve standards of attainment. The then Secretary of State,
Rt. Hon. Estelle Morris MP told the Social Market Foundation that
"this greater diversity is good for pupils and parents and
will ensure there is more choice and innovation in the school
system."[51]
Such claims for the power of choice and diversity persist today.
Announcing the Government's most recent expansion of the specialist
schools programme the Secretary of State declared that "…specialist
schools lie at the heart of our drive to raise standards and offer
more choice in secondary schools."[52]
This and previous Governments' emphasis on choice has resulted
in a significant mismatch of expectations. Government rhetoric
on choice has, perhaps inevitably, not been matched by
reality in the application of parental preference used
to allocate school places.
55 In practice, parents have found that the reality
of school diversity and choice can act to limit rather than expand
their options for their children's education. The existence of
single sex, faith and specialist schools is a positive and welcome
choice for those who want them and who are able to secure places
for their children, while for those who do not, such schools can
limit choice. We saw an example of this in Birmingham, where the
existence of what we were told is the largest girls school in
Europe presented a welcome option for parents and children who
wanted it, but the resultant gender imbalance in surrounding schools
diminished choice for those who wished to send their children
to co-educational schools with an even gender balance.[53]
56 While much emphasis has been placed on choice
as a positive feature in Government publications and Ministerial
speeches, in practice parental choice is limited by geography[54]
and the haphazard manner of specialist school development and
distribution. Professor Gorard told us "in most of the…country
where you live determines whom you go to school with and the education,
parental occupation, income, background of the parents of other
students in the school."[55]
This means that, in practical terms, the creation of a range of
specialist schools produces relatively little diversity and therefore
choice, anywhere except in relatively few large town or cities
with well developed public transport systems.
57 The Campaign for State Education, in written
evidence to the Committee, asserted that diversity had reduced
choice.[56]
This view was supported by Professor Ron Glatter of the Open University.
He argued that although the diversity agenda had produced many
different variations in secondary schooling, in practice families
found their choices restricted to a small subset of these. In
cases where pupils may not be eligible for a place at one or more
of their local schools, for reasons of faith or selection, for
example, the real extent of parental preference was limited. Professor
Glatter told us "in most areas, even urban ones… many
parents see their realistic choice as limited to two or three
schools at most, and so in a diverse system…diversity could
be perceived by families as in fact constraining rather than enhancing
choice. The key point is that choice and diversity do not go together.
They are different ideas."[57]
58 We found that in addition to geography and
the distribution of schools, the extent of real choice is limited
by economic and social factors, including the ability to travel
and negotiate the system of school admissions. Dr Philip Woods
of The Open University explained "There is also a difference
in terms of the capacity for people to travel around who do not
have their own resources or the flexibility in their work patterns
to travel and take a child further… Also…the issue of
cultural capital… being a factor in the ability to negotiate
the system: to know where you can go, to know who to ask if you
do not know something and so on."[58]
59 The ability to travel is key to the ability
to exercise choice in relation to schooling. LEAs are responsible
for transport policy at the local level and often do not extend
to supporting travel to the schools of choice, but rather to the
nearest appropriate school. We were told that the Government has
no plans to develop its school transport policy,[59]
thus perpetuating the division between those who have the resources
to fund school transport—and thereby school choice—and
those who do not.
60 The extent to which there is a demand for
diversity is unclear. The Department for Education and Skills
argued in evidence to the Committee that evidence of demand is
demonstrated by oversubscription statistics returned by schools
within the diversity programme,[60]
although this criterion would apply equally to all oversubscribed
schools. As the Department acknowledges, there is a danger in
confusing demand for diversity with demand for good schools. Professor
Gorard told the Committee:
"People see them as being better schools and
the reason the advocates of these schools move very quickly from
talking about these schools as schools in their own right, with
these characteristics which are desirable, to schools which appear
to be better than neighbouring schools suggests there is not much
appeal in their sui generis status as either faith-based
or specialist schools. People are saying these schools are better
because they are actually better schools."[61]
61 It is true that in many, if not most, areas
of the country, the practical extent of choice is limited by distance
and the distribution of schools. This is particularly the case
in rural areas and small towns where there may be no practical
alternative but for children to attend the local school. It is
perhaps in response to these realities that the Government's emphasis
on choice has receded in policy terms. Ron Jacobs, head of the
Specialist Schools Unit at the DfES, acknowledged that the extent
to which the Government's diversity strategy delivered real choice
varied across the country[62]
and told us that "the Government now says less about choice
than it did five years ago."[63]
Indeed, the Secretary of State said in evidence to the Committee
that "there is no doubt whatsoever that the most important
areas of choice that need to be established within the education
system are within schools rather than between schools."[64]
62 This apparent retreat on choice, while inconsistently
articulated, suggests that the Government has acknowledged that
it is the quality of all schools rather than choice between schools
that parents and pupils most desire.[65]
As Ray Shostak, Director of Children, Schools and Families for
Hertfordshire Local Education Authority put it:
"what Hertfordshire parents say to me is that
what they want is a high quality local school…. it is public
service and people have a right to get to a high quality local
school and not have to, as it were, shop around for it."[66]
63 We are concerned about the serious mismatch
between the Government's rhetoric on the relationship between
choice and diversity and the reality. Research is required into
the impact of choice and diversity policy on different regions
and different social groups in order that Government policies
on diversity and school transport may be refined to mitigate its
negative effects.
Diversity and faith
64 Schools achieving success,
the 2001 White Paper that heralded the Government's expansion
of its diversity policy, welcomed new providers into the maintained
sector. It specifically highlighted providers in the faith sector
and measures to remove barriers to the development of more faith
schools:
"We wish to welcome faith schools, with their
distinctive ethos and character into the maintained sector where
there is clear local agreement. Guidance to School Organisation
Committees will require them to give proposals from faith groups
the same consideration as those from others, including LEAs."[67]
65 The motivation for the expansion of faith-based
schooling appears to come from two directions. First is the belief
that in a multicultural and multi-faith society it is only fair
that the benefits of state-funded, faith-based education should
not be limited to the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches. In
evidence to the Committee, Professor Tim Brighouse said: "I
suspect there will be more Muslim aided secondary schools…if
we are to have faith secondary schools it is desirable that there
should be."[68]
66 The second motivating force, the belief that
faith schools obtain higher standards, is more problematic. Evidence
from the National Foundation for Educational Research[69]
(NFER) suggests that not only is the performance premium for faith
schools not significant, but that it may be derived from a combination
of school practices, for example entering all pupils for an additional
GCSE.[70]
According to NFER, this undermines the notion that the faith formula,
more widely applied, would give rise to improved attainment. Dr
Sandie Schagen, Principal Research Officer at the National Foundation
for Educational Research told us:
"On the basis of our research, looking exclusively
at achievement, there is not any evidence at all to suggest really
that increasing the number of faith schools will improve the level
of achievement….Our finding is that basically, when you apply
value-added analysis, that advantage all but disappears, which
suggests that the difference is based on intake. Interestingly,
you can hypothesise that if they do have better ethos and better
behaviour and so on that would lead to better achievement, but
we did not find any evidence that that is so."[71]
Of course it may that parents are seeking not higher
standards, but a different ethos to that of most schools.
67 At present, faith schools in England are predominantly
those supported by the Roman Catholic and Anglican churches. It
is therefore likely that any demand for significant expansion
of faith schooling is likely to originate from other groups and
to have the potential to create a school system divided not only
on religious lines but also by ethnicity.[72]
68 The expansion of faith based education has
been enthusiastically and publicly supported by the Prime Minister,[73]
although concerns expressed from other quarters appear to have
had the effect of reducing the priority given to this initiative.
More recent announcements from the Department for Education and
Skills and comments on education by the Prime Minister have seen
the prominence of the faith sector recede in relation to other
initiatives.
69 We welcome the Government's more balanced
approach to the promotion of faith schools and urge extreme caution
in any future expansion of the faith sector. Tensions in Northern
Ireland between the the two communities illustrate the problems
that segregated schools can exacerbate. Future developments in
this area should guard against the creation of ethnically segregated
schooling.
Diversity Pathfinders
70 In Schools achieving success the Government
signalled its intention to establish a small group of pathfinder
projects to find ways of spreading the benefits of diversity and
specialisation to a set of schools working cooperatively.
71 In June of 2001, Local Education Authorities
which were already actively developing plans for greater school
diversity were invited to submit proposals to be part of a project
expected to demonstrate how the benefits of diversity in secondary
education could be maximised to improve standards of teaching
and learning across the whole system. Six LEAs were selected late
last year and began implementing their plans in January. The projects
were expected to run until April 2005.
72 The six pathfinders are: Cornwall, Portsmouth,
Newham, Hertfordshire, Birmingham and Middlesbrough. Two other
LEAs, Warwickshire and North Tyneside, have been invited to be
'associate pathfinders'. They receive no pathfinder funding but
are included in the evaluation of the project being undertaken
by the Institute of Education, University of London and The Open
University. Project funding ranges between £263,000 for Middlesbrough
and £490,000 for Hertfordshire.
73 The key aims of the project are:
- To facilitate close, practical, working links
between secondary schools to ensure that the benefits of resources
and expertise gained through the diversity programmes can be effectively
shared in local communities of schools;
- To develop LEA-wide strategic plans, in close
collaboration with headteachers and heads of departments in secondary
schools, to expand the range and number of specialist schools
in such a way that the benefits of the diversity created will
extend to all students
- In addition to these two project-wide aims, each
pathfinder has other aims designed to meet the particular needs
of its regions.
74 The Committee took evidence from the team
responsible for the Diversity Pathfinder project in the Department
for Education and Skills, the external evaluation team and a representative
from one of the participating LEAs.
75 The theme of the project, to develop collaboration
and cooperation between schools, offers a welcome counterbalance
both to the haphazard distribution of specialist schools and to
the concentration of specialist resources in a relatively small
number of schools. Margaret-Anne Barnett, team leader on school
diversity policy for the DfES, explained:
"If you are going to increase diversity, if
you are going to have more specialist schools and you want them
to genuinely benefit as many students as possible, then it seems
logical to have a good spread of different specialisms in local
areas and to have schools working together in order that every
child attending his or her local school can benefit not just from
the specialism in their own school and subjects in their own school
but the specialist expertise in schools around them."[74]
76 This emphasis on coordination and collaboration
in diversity policy was not a feature of the early days of the
specialist schools programme. At the outset, LEAs had no role
in the designation process and specialist schools were not required
to extend their good practice or resources beyond their own walls.
Ron Jacobs told the Committee that this new direction had its
origins in the Excellence in Cities initiative which first gave
a role to local education authorities in coordinating bids for
specialist status and ensuring appropriate distribution of specialisms
and associated resources.[75]
77 Cooperation between secondary schools in
terms of sharing good practice, resources and developing strong
community links, is desirable in itself and likely to be an important
means of raising pupil achievement in participating schools. However,
as is the case in other areas covered in this report, more evidence
is required to establish the impact of collaborative models.
Specialist status for all
Expanding the number of schools
78 On 28 November 2002 the Secretary of State
for Education and Skills, Rt. Hon Charles Clarke MP announced
that the cap on the number of schools able to gain specialist
status was to be lifted, enabling access to specialist status
and additional funding for all schools that were able to meet
the criteria.[76]
The Department's press notice stated:
"Specialist schools are at the heart of the
Government's drive to raise standards in secondary education and
to move beyond the old one-size-fits-all-system. Expanding the
specialist school scheme will not mean a compromise in standards
- excellence will be spread, not diluted. Specialism means schools
working with their pupils to raise levels of achievement across
the curriculum."[77]
79 Later on the same day, the Secretary of State
told the Kent Headteachers' Conference:
"I want as many schools to become specialist
as possible. If your local school is a specialist school, it is
more likely to be a good school - one which not only achieves
more highly, but which offers greater choice to pupils within
a broad and balanced curriculum. This is why specialist schools
lie at the heart of our drive to raise standards and offer more
choice in secondary schools."[78]
80 Having assumed its post-1997 identity as a
strategy for school improvement, the now universal specialist
schools programme has become an important lever for institutional
reform, using the process of specialist school designation as
the mechanism by which individual schools trade reform and modernisation
for increased public investment.
81 The (one-off) capital cost of grants to designate
as specialist all existing maintained mainstream secondary schools
that are not yet specialist would be £216 million. The annual
cost of additional recurrent funding for the specialist schools
programme if all existing maintained mainstream secondary schools
were specialist schools is estimated at £358 million. The
£3 million fund, granted to the Specialist Schools Trust
to assist schools seeking designation as specialist to raise sponsorship,
is not included in these sums.[79]
Increasing the number of specialisms
82 Following the announcement regarding the removal
of the cap on funding for specialist schools, the Department announced
the creation of new specialisms in the humanities (geography and
history). The creation of a new 'rural dimension' was also announced,
enabling rural schools to reflect the needs and interests of their
communities in their chosen specialism.[80]
83 This expansion of the range of specialisms
has addressed some of the concerns expressed in evidence to the
Committee, for example by the Royal Geographical Society,[81]
while leaving unanswered the question as to why the range of specialisms
has unfolded in this particular order.
84 The announcement falls short of the bids made
by the National Union of Teachers, the Campaign for State Education
and the Secondary Heads Association[82]
for schools to be able to define their own specialism within the
specialist schools scheme.
85 In the announcement on 28 November 2002 and
in the Department's strategy document A New Specialist System:
Transforming Secondary Education, the Government's vision
of a universal specialist system became clear, supported by an
emphatic restatement of the view that school diversity drives
up standards of achievement.[83]
Such claims for diversity present their own dilemmas. Specialist
schools are, in curriculum terms, much like any other in the maintained
sector; they are bound to deliver the full National Curriculum
to all their pupils, except where this has been specifically disapplied.
Confusingly, however, their publicity often emphasises their difference:
the profile of the specialism, specialist resources, activities
and staff. To play down the unique selling point of subject specialisation
may be a risk in a competitive market and call into question the
additional funding for the development of subject specialisms,
while to overplay it risks discouraging parents and pupils who
seek a good general education.
86 This dilemma is a product of the specialist
schools policy itself and reveals the tension between the origins
of the initiative in the City Technology Colleges, with an explicit
aim to encourage more young people into science and technology,
and the Labour Government's reinvention of the policy as a school
improvement initiative. It is clear that this tension between
specialist and generalist education needs to be resolved if specialist
schools are to become the dominant model in the maintained sector.
44 HC 177-ii, Q 124. Back
45
Schools Achieving Success, Cm 5230, para 5.9. Back
46
Including 181 operational specialist schools Ev 93. There were
also grant maintained schools, a category which was abolished
by the School Standards and Framework Act 1998. Back
47
Choice and Diversity: a new framework for schools - education
white paper 1992. Back
48
Ev 37 Back
49
Excellence in Schools, DfEE, 1997, p. 5 (reference from
Ev 129). Back
50
Cm 5230. Back
51
Professionalism and Trust: the future of teachers and teaching,
speech by Rt Hon Estelle Morris, Secretary of State for Education
and Skills, given to the Social Market Foundation, 12 November
2001. Back
52
DfES Press notice 2002/0228. Back
53
Education and Skills Committee, Second Report of Session 2002-03,
Secondary Education: visits to Birmingham and Auckland,
HC 486, para 15. Back
54
Q 18 Back
55
Q 44 Back
56
Ev 176 Back
57
Q 287 Back
58
Q 288 Back
59
Q 280 Back
60
Ev 141 Back
61
Q 22 Back
62
Q 279 Back
63
Q 281 Back
64
Education and Skills Committee, Minutes of Evidence, Session 2002-03.
Work of the Department for Education and Skills, HC 177-i,
Q 8. Back
65
Q 261 Back
66
Q 258 Back
67
Cm 5230, para 5.30. Back
68
Education and Skills Committee, Second Report of Session 2002-03,
Secondary Education: visits to Birmingham and Auckland,
HC 486, Qq 275-276. Back
69
Memorandum from Ian and Sandie Schagen (DP02) [not printed]. Back
70
Ibid. Back
71
Q 215 Back
72
Ev 2 Back
73
"Blair ensures triumph of faith", Times Educational
Supplement, 1 March 2002, p 11. Back
74
Q 243 Back
75
Q 245 Back
76
HC Deb, 28 November 2002, col 442. Back
77
DfES Press Notice 2003/0018, 28 November 2002. Back
78
DfES Press Notice 2003/0018, 28 November 2002. Back
79
Source: unpublished correspondence from the DfES 02/05/03. Back
80
A New Specialist System: Transforming Secondary Education,
DfES, February 2003, p 20. Back
81
Ev 183 Back
82
Ev 187, 180, 160 Back
83
A New Specialist System: Transforming Secondary Education,
DfES, February 2003, p 11. Back
| 
