Education Bill [Lords] |
|
Mr. Stephen Twigg: The hon. Gentleman spoke in support of the clause. The clause is important. We do not anticipate the power being used by LEAs to conduct routine school inspections on standards. That is not their role; it is Ofsted’s. However, he is absolutely right to remind the Committee that LEAs have a number of important roles. In some ways, because of the agenda in “Every Child Matters”, it is an increasingly important role on questions of child protection, the inclusion of children and on some of the behavioural issues to which he referred. The clause ensures that the authority has the power to go to a school and to exercise its functions. I take the opportunity to reaffirm the important role that LEAs have to play. Question put and agreed to. Clause 51 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 52 and 53 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 7 Inspection of child minding, day care and nursery education Question proposed, That this schedule be the Seventh schedule to the Bill. Angela Watkinson: I would like to tease one or two answers out of the Minister. With respect to child minding, I wonder to what degree the record of children minded by an individual child minder is taken into consideration. Some child minders have great experience and have been doing it for a long time. Having visited some, I know that the length of time that a child stays with a child minder is a good indication of the service being provided, as is the fact that siblings follow on. A less satisfactory child minder may be noted for a quicker turnover of children. I would like to establish that that is taken into consideration. The National Day Nurseries Association and the National Campaign for Real Nursery Education have said in discussions that the old nursery nurse qualification awarded by the National Nursery Examining Board was far more effective, and that students with that qualification were much better prepared for looking after young children than students leaving sixth form and other colleges with NVQs in child minding. They also say that the standard of the old NNEB qualification suited their purposes much better. It should be borne in mind that the scope of the NVQ may not be wide enough or may not incorporate sufficient information about, say, child development to fit students for the roles in nurseries that they hope to play. Column Number: 40 The Minister reassured us that parents of children in nurseries and other child minding settings would receive a copy of the inspector’s report. Problems accelerate faster with very young children than they do with older children. The damage that can be done to a very young child if there are problems in a child minding setting can be serious and have long-lasting effects. The details of the report and the inspector’s findings are therefore of paramount importance in early years settings. Dr. Pugh: The schedule is important because child minding is an important aspect of many people’s lives. There have been some horrific stories of child minding being done badly. We have all seen television broadcasts that show that services can be poor if they are not inspected properly. Parents can be the last people to know exactly how bad those services are. Therefore, they need some guarantee or warranty from the inspection service to show that the service that they are using is of good quality. It is self-evident that not everyone should be allowed to take up child minding. We would not, for example, give King Herod a licence. However, I have from time to time as a constituency MP come across cases in which people have invested significantly in child minding ventures. They have had plans for the future and have had every intention of performing a good, professional and caring service. However, occasionally, they have had difficulties because of what inspectors said and have believed that the verdict was partial. There needs to be a very good assessment and a very good result, but there also needs to be an appropriate, reasonable and robust appeal mechanism to deal with occasions when the assessment is disputed and people believe that the service that they provide has been unfairly criticised. I am not asking for any latitude for people who provide a bad service, but we want to ensure fairness for those people who believe that they provide a good service but who may not, at first blush, impress inspectors. Mr. Stephen Twigg: To be fair to the Committee, I shall write to the hon. Lady, to the hon. Gentleman and to other Committee members to ensure that I respond fully to the legitimate points that they have made. The Government seek through the legislation to strengthen the consistency of practice in inspection, but the hon. Lady and hon. Gentleman have raised a set of issues with regard to very young children and the position of child minders in particular, and I want to do justice to those points by considering them fully with colleagues in my Department. Question put and agreed to. Schedule 7 agreed to. Clause 54 Inspection of independent schools Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill. Column Number: 41 Dr. Pugh: It is an extraordinarily short clause, which states:
I apologise to the Minister; I may not have read those words with the attention that they deserve. Independent schools always have a particular view of how they should function. It is often at variance with the standard state education. One thinks of the difficulties that Summerhill school had with the inspection regime. There is clearly a balance to be achieved between recognising that independent schools are indeed independent and are often chosen by parents because they want a particular genre of education not available in the state system, and ensuring that independent schools provide a good education. Without going into the detail of the amendments, will the Minister assure me that the flexibility and independence of independent schools is not in any way modified by any of the amendments in schedule 8? 11.15 amMr. Stephen Twigg: I am happy to give the hon. Gentleman the assurance that he seeks. The changes set out in the clause are essentially technical. In practice, since the possibility of registered inspectors being used in the independent sector came in, registered inspectors have not been used. That situation has not occurred. All the inspections that have been carried out have continued to be undertaken by Ofsted. The removal of the power for inspection by registered inspectors will, therefore, have no practical effect. Question put and agreed to. Clause 54 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 8 agreed to. Clauses 55 to 61 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Schedule 9 Further amendments relating to school inspection Mr. Stephen Twigg: I beg to move amendment No. 36, in schedule 9, page 100, line 26, at end insert
The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss Government amendments Nos. 38, 39, 32, 33 and 35. Column Number: 42 Mr. Twigg: Government amendment No. 35 simply removes the other place’s privilege amendment. The remaining amendments in the group are technical and consequential on the repeal of the register of early years inspectors in England. Amendment agreed to. Schedule 9, as amended, agreed to. Clauses 62 and 63 ordered to stand part of the Bill. New Clause 4 Complaints Procedures
Brought up, and read the First time. Angela Watkinson: I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. The Chairman: With this it will be convenient to discuss new clause 7—Complaints procedures (Wales)—
Column Number: 43 Angela Watkinson: New clause 4 relates to England. New clause 7 is an identical clause that refers to complaints procedures in Wales. The new clauses are designed to protect schools, head teachers and others involved in the inspection process from what they feel to be an unfair result. As we all know, occasionally, there is a clash of personalities between the management of the school and the Ofsted team. Head teachers of schools in my constituency have commented to me that their Ofsted inspectors were wonderful. They came in, they did not interfere with the school, they said hello and good morning to people. Unfortunately, some Ofsted team members do not have the interpersonal skills that smooth the passage of an inspection and put people at ease. The problem may be something as trivial as that. It may be a serious complaint or some dissatisfaction that arises from the inspection. The new clauses provide a mechanism for appeal against what the school may consider an unjustified or unfair outcome. Dr. Pugh: I support the new clause. I should make it clear that I need not declare an interest. In God knows how many years of teaching, I was not once inspected by anyone. I managed to be in the right place at the right time, so I bear no grudge myself. They never got me. I have no axe to grind, but I know of inspections that have gone awry in one way or another: for example, whole-school inspections in which people felt that the inspection got off to a bad start and deteriorated further, and inspections of individual departments. A competent and well-staffed language department was inspected by a fairly professional inspector. They had different views on how language should be taught and exactly what the procedures should be to provide children with a better education in French, German and so on. As a result of what one might call an ideological clash between the inspector and the staff, a satisfactory inspection did not take place. As the whole-school inspection was regarded as something of
Such situations always strike me as slightly unfortunate. Some inspectors enter the world of inspection as fellow professionals and partners in education. They have the aim of producing a better, more coherent curriculum or better pupil performance. Unfortunately, there are other inspectors—they are a rarity—who relish their new power as an opportunity to wreak professional havoc on their peers. One would hope that such people were identified fairly early and eliminated from the inspector cohort, but serious injustices occur from time to time. In some cases, people on whom the most adverse judgments are passed are, in fact, some of the most dedicated professionals. I know many teachers. Some of the people who fret most about inspections, who become most nervous under their influence and who are likely to under-perform are the most committed, dedicated and worried about failure. Some people can sail through, adopting a slightly more casual approach. The general thrust of the new clause is right. We must give teachers, who ultimately are the people being inspected, an assurance that we are mindful of such concerns. If such a provision is not included anywhere else in the Bill, the new clause will be a useful adjunct. Mr. Touhig: The new clauses seek to establish procedures for schools or others in England and Wales with an interest in a school inspection to complain to an independent adjudicator. There is already an independent complaints adjudicator for Ofsted. The adjudicator is appointed by the Secretary of State. It being twenty-five minutes past Eleven o’clock, the Chairman adjourned the Committee without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order. Adjourned till this day at half-past Two o’clock. |
| |
| ©Parliamentary copyright 2005 | Prepared 23 March 2005 |