Memorandum submitted by the Local Government
Association (T16)
1. INTRODUCTION
1.2 The Local Government Association welcomes
the opportunity to comment on the Committee's consultation examining
the role played by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs (Defra) in addressing the particular difficulties of meeting
educational needs in rural areas.
1.3 The Association represents all local
authorities in England and Wales and our vision is for thriving,
vibrant rural communities, where people can achieve their aspirations
towards sharing a common goal of improved public services, strong
voluntary and community sector, healthier economic well-being
and an enhanced and attractive landscape and environment.
1.4 In this response the LGA would like
to draw the Committee's attention to two major issues the LGA
believes are critical to the success of education in rural areas—ICT
and transport.
1.5 The response then addresses the three
main terms of reference as identified by the Committee, including
examples of best practice in local authorities aiming to deliver
the vision set out above through education.
2. ICT AND TRANSPORT
IN RURAL
AREAS
2.1 The Education Act 2002 gave teachers
and LEAs a number of new duties and powers. One of the new duties
was to safeguard and promote the welfare of children, which local
authorities have been making great strides to implement.
2.3 LEAs and teachers were also given another
new power under the Act, the power to innovate. While local authorities
are constantly tackling difficult education issues with innovative
solutions, the LGA welcomed this explicit new power.
2.4 However, much innovation today centres
on ICT and access to it. The Government's target of 2005 for extensiveness
and competitiveness of broadband availability was welcomed by
the LGA. But to ensure rural LEAs and schools have the same ability
to innovate as their urban counterparts they need to be able to
access the same services.
2.5 If we are to think of education in the
future, as the LGA is about to embark upon in detail, then enabling
rural schools to reach other schools "virtually" is
key.
2.6 It is particularly critical if schools
are to take forward the new Government agenda of becoming extended
schools—the hub of the local community—and providing
a comprehensive service to their communities such as banking and
post offices under the school "roof".
2.7 The LGA asks the Committee to consider
how the pace of implementing an ICT strategy for schools could
be speeded up and to seek additional funding for LEAs to promote
ICT in their local areas.
2.8 The second major obstacle the LGA would
like to identify as a barrier to learning for people of all ages
in rural areas is public transport.
2.9 The LGA acknowledges that the Countryside
Agency has implemented some rural transport initiatives including
a scheme to help young people to get to school and to access leisure
facilities.
2.10 But the fact remains that poor public
transport is a key factor of exclusion in rural areas and that
it is a key factor in young people in rural areas often being
deterred from further education, vocational training and jobs.
2.11 A study carried out two years ago by
London University's Institute of Education "Young people
and transport in rural areas" surveyed over 700 15-24 year
olds in Somerset and Dorset.
2.12 Over 40% of the 15 and 16 years olds
said that transport issues influenced their decisions about post-16
education. Many were put off public transport by high fares and
poor publicity about services as they often faced fare structures
which reflected an era when most started work at 14.
2.13 Those entering employment and training
were restricted in where and when they worked, as employers were
reluctant to negotiate flexible working hours to fit the working
day around public transport timetables.
2.14 Tackling the issue of home to school
transport is becoming increasingly important which is why the
LGA has proposed to set up a Commission looking into this issue.
3.1 STRUCTURES
AND ARRANGEMENTS
PUT IN
PLACE BY
DEFRA TO
ENSURE NEEDS
OF RURAL
AREAS ARE
TAKEN INTO
ACCOUNT IN
DECISIONS RELATING
TO SCHOOLS
MADE BY
THE DFES
AND BY
LOCAL AUTHORITIES;
AND THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF
"RURAL PROOFING"
EDUCATION POLICY
3.2 The LGA is aware that Defra and its
agencies have undertaken initiatives aimed at tackling the specific
problems facing those studying in rural areas.
3.3 In its response to the Report of the
Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food by the Government
Defra highlighted a need to encourage schools and LEAs to allow
young people to experience the "outdoor classroom".
3.4 Page 99, recommendation 88 stated: "Local
education authorities should try to ensure that all school children
get the chance to visit working farms at least once. The Department
for Education and Skills should explore whether a national voucher
scheme or similar system is needed to enable this to happen".
3.5 The LGA is also aware of Defra's review
of learning opportunities to improve rural businesses and welcomed
the opportunity to have LGA representatives on both the programme
board and steering group for the project.
3.6 LANTRA, the sector skills for land-based
industries, identified shortfalls in education and training to
meet the wide and varied needs of their industry so it is vital
these type of reviews are undertaken and that more local access
to skills and training required by local rural businesses is made
a priority as it could be at the heart of rural regeneration and
would make better use of current resources, to the mutual benefit
of businesses and schools.
3.7 The Environment Agency has also initiated
valuable schemes tackling education in rural areas and provides
educational resources to teachers and pupils which can be downloaded
from the dedicated "kids" page on the Environment Agency
website.
3.8 More recently, the LGA understands rural
proofing at the national level is being seen as a major way of
ensuring rural needs are addressed within national policies and
programmes.
3.9 A number of education policies now have
a rural dimension, such as learndirect and Connexions, and when
piloting a new scheme the DfES often includes at least one rural
authority to be a pilot. But this is different to "rural
proofing" policy.
3.10 The Countryside Agency in its report
to the Government "Rural Proofing in 2001-02" outlines
a number of policies it believes Defra has made an impact upon,
such as Sure Start, Skills for Life and Local Learning Partnerships.
3.11 The LGA would agree that from the outset
some policies, such as Sure Start, have been developed in co-operation
with rural advocates, including rural local education authorities,
and modifications have been made to ensure the model suits rural
circumstances.
3.12 But as the report itself highlights,
while significant progress had been made by Government Departments
on rural proofing, there is still "a long way to go".
3.13 Indeed, there are significantly more
examples of Government policy not being rural proofed, Education
Action Zones being one.
3.14 The LGA believes it is important schools
in rural areas work collaboratively together and local authorities
are more than willing to explore more innovative ways for small
schools to do this. But it is also important that these initiatives
are properly funded, as it is rare for rural communities to trigger
the additional resources made available to city areas for partnership
initiatives.
3.15 EAZs were set up in 1998 with funding
of £750,000 plus matched funding of up to £250,000 per
year. But it took a further three years for the "rural equivalent"
of EAZs to be set up—Excellence Clusters—and to be
able to bid for a similar, albeit smaller, funding scheme.
3.16 Prior to the Comprehensive Spending
Review (CSR) Excellence Clusters benefited from three core strands:
extended opportunities for gifted and talented pupils, the provision
of learning mentors and learning support units. A fourth strand
of funding was also available to target particular local issues,
as identified by the schools in each Cluster. The CSR introduced
a "menu" of six to seven strands for Clusters to choose
from to suit their local needs, which the LGA welcomed.
3.17 The six Excellence Clusters established
in 2001 have proved successful in raising standards and the Government
is continuing to build on this initiative. But more importantly
perhaps, testimonies from teachers in schools benefiting from
this funding stream claim they have been able to enrich the curriculum
with schemes less engineered towards raising standards, which
have helped to alter the perception of school by many previously
disaffected pupils.
3.18 It could also be argued the recent
teacher's workload document has not been rural proofed. The Government
has not yet made clear how the one billion pound investment to
deliver changes in the school workforce will be implemented and
particularly how small primary schools in rural areas will benefit
from the changes.
3.19 While rural proofing central Government
policies is important, it is even more crucial to ensure they
are locally adaptable. It is a little early to assess the actual
outcomes of the effectiveness of rural proofing the LGA believes
education policies must address rural needs from conception to
implementation and that continued "rural proofing" is
one way of ensuring this.
3.20 But if a decision needs to be taken
locally, such as closing down a small school where the demography
has vastly changed, it is important not to inhibit this practice
by dictating local authorities maintain a certain number of schools
in each area.
3.21 The LGA asks the Committee to bear
in mind that future policy relating to rural education needs to
be flexible and locally adaptable to ensure funds are spent according
to need, not according to some Whitehall impression based on a
few statistics.
4.1 PROGRESS
IN IMPLEMENTING
THE PROVISIONS
OF THE
RURAL WHITE
PAPER RELATING
TO SUPPORTING
LOCAL SCHOOLS;
AND PROGRESS
IN ENSURING
THAT RURAL
SCHOOLS REMAIN
OPEN AND
ABLE TO
DELIVER HIGH
QUALITY EDUCATION
4.2 Many local authorities will be impacted
upon by the Rural White Paper and are currently considering the
implications for their local area.
4.3 The additional funds made available
under the Administrative Support Fund for Small Schools has already
been embraced by many LEAs, enabling small schools in their area
to pilot innovative ways of working collaboratively.
4.4 Dorset is a good example of an authority
which had already addressed the particular need for small schools
in its area to work more closely, but which benefited hugely from
extra funding.
4.5 Dorset has a long history of small schools
working together and was awarded two Educational Support Grants
to enable two clusters of small schools to be set up following
the last round of small school closures in Dorset in the early
1980's.
4.6 A Small Schools Co-ordinator and an
Administrator were then appointed to support the countrywide cluster
network and a raft of initiatives soon followed.
4.7 However, Dorset had been unable to embrace
all its small schools until the introduction of the Small School
Support Fund.
4.8 Traditionally, small schools in Dorset
were identified as those with fewer than 100 pupils, although
due to a rise in numbers more schools had been included in the
cluster network. Over 60 schools were part of the existing network.
The advice from the then Department for Education and Employment
(DfEE) on 17 December 1999 suggested that allocations could be
made to all maintained nursery, primary, special schools and PRUs
of under 200 and secondary schools under 600. After consulting
schools Dorset took the brave step of embracing all schools of
these sizes.
4.9 The funding was divided into two parts
as requested by the DfEE, with the majority of the funds being
devolved to schools to relieve the administrative and management
pressures on small schools.
4.10 The funding was distributed equally
to all eligible primary, special and secondary schools. £199,913
was allocated to the eligible primary, PRUs and special schools
irrespective of their size to be used on innovative, collaborative
cluster initiatives. £15,000 was retained by the LEA to fund
consultations and to co-ordinate, manage and evaluate projects
and develop a website to reflect/share this good practice.
4.11 The recognition that schools under
200 could be considered small meant that another twenty schools
were now newly eligible for funding. These schools were very eager
to be part of a cluster as they had good knowledge of how supportive
this had been to the school improvement agenda. This resulted
in four new clusters being formed and other schools joining existing
clusters. There are now 17 clusters varying in size from three
to 13 schools. The funding (£2,000 per school) is held jointly
by each cluster and has and is being spent on innovate collaborative
projects, not on the re-sourcing of individual schools.
4.12 Using established practice, each cluster
annually produces a fully costed and detailed strategic improvement
plan to be implemented at the beginning of each academic year.
Clusters have really valued the rollover of standards funds to
the end of the summer term. It makes much better sense to be able
to judge the success of a project over the course of a school
year rather than a financial one.
4.13 The process for the formulation of
the plan is the same as in previous years: examine areas for improvement
in the context of own school; meet together to find common ground;
agreement based on staff needs, the national agenda and the continued
sharing of best practice to raise standards.
4.14 For the most part the cluster link
teacher (CLT) manages the project and evaluates success and areas
for further improvement. The LEA representative meets with CLTs
twice yearly and attends cluster planning and review meetings,
training days, workshops, exhibitions of work and visits to classrooms.
This culminates in the LEA representative producing an end of
year evaluation report.
4.15 These reports are available to all
officers of the LEA and schools and celebrate the continued excellent
cluster work that enthuses, motivates and excites children and
teachers in our schools.
4.16 The Administrative Support Fund for
Small Schools is recognised as a vital lifeline for small schools
in two ways: administration and collaboration. The allocation
to all eligible schools has allowed a greater flexibility in making
internal administrative and management decisions that best suit
them; extra secretarial hours, more administrative support, supply
time to release Head Teachers and others to monitor more effectively,
purchase of improved ICT equipment and the employment of technicians
to help to reduce the stresses and strains of people working in
small schools.
4.17 Being part of a cluster has not taken
away the autonomy of individual schools. All small schools, bar
one, participate in collaborate projects recognising the value
of this sharing very positively. Clusters have been able to pursue
curriculum development and enrichment in a way that an individual
small school would find impossible because finances would not
allow it.
4.18 One example of this is a project that
involved five rural schools in the Wimborne area. They linked
with the National Gallery who provided inset for all the teachers
in London on the "Take-one Picture" project. The schools
then embarked on a year's cross-curricular project using the training
to underpin their work. This involved children with teachers,
parents, local artists and artisans. The culmination of the project
resulted in the cluster being selected to exhibit their work in
London, one of only five establishments chosen.
4.19 High quality support in delivering
high quality education resulted in high quality standards. This
was shared with other clusters as best practice and others have
now embarked on similar projects.
5.1 BEST PRACTICE
5.2 Dorset is a good example of how local
authorities use Government funding streams effectively but it
is vital to point out that Dorset, like many others, began helping
small schools to work together before the Small School Fund was
available.
5.3 Indeed, many rural local authorities
up and down the country have come up with a variety of initiatives
addressing education issues in their area and that of Lincolnshire
and Derbyshire are described below.
LINCOLNSHIRE
5.4 Lincolnshire's Rural Academy is a good
example of a locally determined initiative, which has proved highly
successful.
5.5 The LGA's Six Commitments were identified
in summer 2001 as areas where councils can commit to making a
difference for their communities and develop new ways of working
to deliver the outcomes that local people deserve. These issues—education,
environment, transport, older people, supporting children and
employment—are priorities for central and local government
alike.
5.6 Since the launch of the six commitments
central and local government have agreed a shared set of priorities
for local government using the six commitments as a starting point.
Although the Schools for the Community commitment does not relate
directly to one of the shared priorities it does impact upon all
the shared priorities.
5.7 The Schools for the Community commitment
aims to promote schools as a community resource where people can
access a range of services such as banking, health, housing advice,
leisure and culture.
5.8 Lincolnshire County Council is one of
seven pathfinder councils selected by the LGA to work on the Schools
for the Community commitment. The "Rural Academy" in
Lincolnshire covers the rural Action Zone of South Holland, which
has particular issues relating to sparsity and rurality in educational
terms. "Rural Academy" in Lincolnshire is located within
the Rural Action Zone of South Holland and its key aim is to extend
opportunities for lifelong learning through the use of information
and communications technology (ICT). It is hoped that extending
lifelong learning will address the need to build self-confidence
and esteem of the community in South Holland.
5.9 Fast stream information technology is
being used to link eight senior schools, one primary school and
one special school to each other. Synergy and resources from the
eight senior schools will be used to develop the Academy, the
first of its kind in the Country.
5.10 Using fast stream information and communications
technology, these secondary schools will eventually be linked
to two FE Colleges, two universities, 43 primary schools, two
special schools and homes and businesses to create an extensive
network of learning. Access will also be provided to health, cultural
and Connexions services.
5.11 Specific projects include developing
new approaches to learning through the use of new multimedia communication
and projection units, and to use this new technology to engage
learners more actively within lessons.
5.12 The "Rural Academy" is also
supporting modern foreign languages teaching through imaginative
use of ICT to facilitate contact for learners with a range of
native speakers; to share best practice in teaching foreign languages
and to facilitate teachers continuing professional development
through modern foreign languages; and to improve foreign language
skills in the workplace through workplace conversations with GCSE
and A Level pupils and their teachers.
5.13 One of the Rural Academy's aims is
to support adults and children learning together, through building
links and sharing resources between family learning schools; and
to using video conferencing as a means to deliver master-class
sessions with interaction between participants situated in different
venues.
5.14 As a result of being selected as a
Pathfinder Project by the LGA the Rural Academy has been given
a fantastic profile at a national level. This has engendered a
substantial amount of interest from other LEAs and representatives
from a number of LEAs have visited Lincolnshire's "Rural
Academy" to see it working in action.
5.15 In addition Lincolnshire along with
our other six pathfinders has been selected by the DfES to become
one of a limited number of "extended school" pathfinder
areas in 2002-03. The purpose of the pathfinders will be to look
at how schools develop community and family services on school
premises that meet the needs of pupils, their families and the
wider community.
DERBYSHIRE
5.16 Another council that has developed
an entirely different approach addressing access and transport
issues in a rural area is Derbyshire.
5.17 The North East Derbyshire mobile projects
has been in operation since 1993, with two converted buses providing
advice, information and learning at various locations around the
ex-pit villages.
5.18 Barry Northedge has been Director of
this Derbyshire County Council community education project since
its inception and believes fieldwork in the local area is crucial.
5.19 Rather than asking students to comment
on a discussion paper, which did not have input from students,
project workers went to where students hung out, listened to what
they wanted and tried to arrive at joint solutions. The Council
then set up a non-threatening session to develop contacts and
confidence.
5.20 Advice and information given to students
included not only education and training but also welfare rights.
Educational work covered a wide range of courses, including basic
skills (word and number power), IT courses, volunteer youth work
training, confidence-building and job-search skills.
5.21 Nine reasons cited by Barry Northedge
for the specific success of the mobile project are:
— Users find the bus a safe, comfortable
place.
— The bus can go anywhere and wherever
the bus can go, the course can be run.
— If interest wanes in one place, or
the job is done, it is easy to move on to the next venue.
— The novelty appeals to people.
— Being in touch with local people
and local concerns, ideally placed to recognise and respond to
new needs.
— Flexibility in the range of courses
offered.
— Ability to pick up students en route
to destination.
— Much cheaper than a fixed centre.
— The buses are in demand—best
reference there is!
6.1 CONCLUSION
6.2 As outlined above, the LGA is aware
of Defra's input into some education initiatives that needed to
be more aware of their impact on rural and particularly sparsely
populated areas. But this is no substitute for "rural proofing"
Government policy.
6.3 It must also be remembered that local
authorities are best placed to decide what is best for their local
community and have already developed a number of schemes addressing
distinct issues for their local area. These should not be duplicated.
6.4 To enable these initiatives to continue,
and for similar schemes to be set up, the LGA is keen to ensure
proper funding is given to local authorities to help with set
up costs and to ensure the continuation of schemes.
6.5 It is also important to spread best
practice and to fund other local authorities so they may adapt
these schemes to fit their needs.
6.6 More importantly, the LGA urges the
Committee to address the two key concerns the LGA has raised as
barriers to learning in rural areas—access to ICT and improvement
in transport. Lincolnshire is clearly a good example of how utilising
ICT in a rural area can have huge benefits for those living and
studying in rural areas.
6.7 Future Government policies should always
consider the flexibility of delivery at the local level to allow
for differing conditions and circumstances as well as being "rural
proofed".
20 January 2003
| 
