Question 135-141 (Mr Chaytor):  In the context of efficiency savings, the meaning of the terms cashable, non-cashable, recyclable and non-recyclable.

  The Department has drawn an important distinction between cashable, where the resource freed up is money, and recyclable, where the resource freed up is productive time, to exemplify how the programme is making a difference to the frontline.

  The definitions of the terms as they are used in the Department are as follows:

—  CASHABLE efficiencies release financial resources whilst maintaining outputs and output quality, thereby enabling the resources that are released to be diverted to other services;

—  NON-CASHABLE efficiency gains occur when productivity or output quality increases, either for the same resource inputs or a proportionately smaller increase in resource inputs in a way that does not release financial resources that can be deployed elsewhere;

—  RECYCLABLE efficiencies release resource (although not necessarily financial) whilst maintaining output quality, thereby enabling the resources that are released to be diverted to other services. Clearly if the resource released is not financial it can only be diverted within the system it has been released e.g. teachers time freed up within a school; and

—  NON-RECYCLABLE efficiency gains occur when output quality or quantity increases either without reductions in resources or with a proportionately smaller increase in resource inputs in a way that does not release resources that can be deployed elsewhere.

  This means, for instance, that better procurement practices represent a cashable gain as the same products are being bought at reduced costs thereby liberating cash that can be redeployed elsewhere. However, teacher time saved in schools through workforce reform represents a non-cashable efficiency gain as teacher time rather than actual money is freed up and thereby available to be redeployed. This therefore represents a recyclable gain. Reducing drop-out rates in higher education represents a non-cashable and non-recyclable gain as successfully reducing drop out rates increases course completion rates for no extra cost but clearly will not free up any money or time resources for redistribution elsewhere.

Question 142-143 (Mr Chaytor):  How the Office of Government Commerce (OGC) and the National Audit Office (NAO) monitor the efficiency savings

The OGC's stated objectives for the Efficiency Programme are:

—  to ensure that annual efficiency gains of £21.5 billion and net civil service headcount reductions of 70,000 are achieved by March 2008, and that there are relocations of public sector posts from London and the South East of at least 20,000 by 2010; and

—  to ensure that the annual efficiency gains of £21.5 billion are sustainable, as part of improving the public sector's capability to be efficient.

  The OGC does not deliver these targets directly but influences delivery by departments and others through:

—  Reporting to Ministers and other stakeholders, notably through John Oughton's six monthly reports to the Prime Minister and Chancellor; and

—  Ensuring areas of concern are identified, challenged, prioritised and solved by working collaboratively with Departments.

  The Department works collaboratively with the OGC on the components of the programme and reports to the OGC on a quarterly basis on progress against trajectory. There are public reports on progress in the Pre Budget Report and the Budget. The Department also reports progress on the efficiency programme in the Departmental Report and the Autumn Performance Report.

The Role of the NAO

  The NAO is conducting a series of reports for Parliament on the progress of the Government's efficiency programme. The first report was published in February 2006 (HC 802 Session 2005-06). It examined how departments were delivering and measuring efficiency savings, how the OGC are coordinating the overall programme and what could be learned from organisations outside the UK public sector which have undergone efficiency initiatives.

  The second report, to be published in early 2007, will primarily focus on the robustness of reported efficiency savings and headcount reductions. As in the first report, the Department for Education and Skills is in the sample of departments being reviewed. We will work with the NAO to implement their recommendations.

Question 147 (Chairman):  Examples of efficiency savings

  In the Committee's hearing on 12 October 2005, David Normington described the efficiency savings being made by bulk purchasing school insurance (Q81) and by reducing the use of supply teachers (Q83). In our May 2006 response to the Committee's report we describe the possible efficiencies from improved school transport arrangements (Recommendation 9) and in our supplementary memorandum following the 14 June hearing with David Bell we provided some ICT examples of efficiencies (Q118).

  We are now providing two further examples of how the efficiency programme is making a difference to the frontline in children's services and the procurement efficiency gains made by local authorities. These have been reported in the Annual Efficiency Statements of the local authorities concerned and have been audited by the Audit Commission.

  THE CITY OF YORK COUNCIL has undertaken a review of their Placement Strategy to try and identify patterns and trends in order to reduce the number of children placed in the independent fostering sector. The strategy has produced savings of £300,000 per annum by reducing the dependence on independent fostering placements by 50% and reducing the overall care population by over 10%. The unit cost for a placement in York is just over £200 compared with £1,200 for an independent agency carer.

  ESSEX COUNTY COUNCIL is moving toward best practice in commissioning. The Council have particularly focussed on improving service quality while reducing costs.

  By establishing an "Admissions Panel" with a specialist in procurement as a core member, Essex has been able to ensure, for example: that block purchasing represents value for money; that they know where the best contracts are and which placements they should not use; and have put in place individual contracts for specific children. The Council have achieved some £750,000 savings per annum due to engaging and negotiating with providers to bring down costs and a further £239,000 since April 2005 in cost avoidance in residential care provision.

Question 184 (Mr Wilson):  The introduction of synthetic phonics

  The final report of the Rose review of the Teaching of Early Reading, published in March 2006, stressed that greater attention to speaking and learning skills, "high quality phonic work" and "quality first teaching" which minimises the risk of children falling behind are all key to raising standards in early reading.

Defining phonic work

  Jim Rose considered that, above all, phonics should be taught on a systematic basis: that is following a programme that teaches children letter-sound correspondences (the alphabetic code) in a clearly defined sequence which is taught discretely, regularly, and consistently. Jim's report highlights that, based on research and other evidence, there is an overwhelming case for systematic phonics, and that this is greatly enhanced by the approach commonly understood to be synthetic phonics. (The main defining feature of this is to teach children to read by blending together the individual phonemes (sounds) in words in the order in which they occur).

  When giving evidence to the Committee on 30 January, Jim noted that positive results will be achieved by using a systematic programme but that "I am suggesting that you will get even better results if you go for a synthetic one [programme] because it is more direct, it offers a better bite on writing as well as reading, and, quite honestly, it is a sharper tool for children to use [. . .]". Jim's final report does, therefore, not rule out other forms of systematic phonics, such as analytic phonics, rather he concludes that based on evidence he considered, a synthetic approach offers the best route for beginner readers to learn to read.

  Jim's report describes the sum of a systematic approach to teaching phonics, enhanced by synthetic phonics, as "high quality phonic work" and it is this term he uses throughout his report. The term also embraces other features of best practice, such as using multi-sensory approaches which utilise to a full range of activities to reinforce the learning and engage children. In other words, the report confirms that a synthetic phonics approach, while key to an effective phonics programme, is not the only defining characteristic.

  The Department's response to the Committee's recommendations, contained in the Government response published on 21 July 2005 explained that we believed that the most effective and timely way to clarify best practice was to draw on a comprehensive range of evidence gathered by Jim Rose's review which included a bespoke HMI survey of what works in practice. We explained that we would combine this with further evidence from practice from the Primary National Strategy's pilots in early years settings and schools which explored new approaches to securing effective phonics teaching.

  In his own evidence to Committee, Jim did not agree that trials of the kind suggested by the Committee were necessary for identifying best practice in view of the fact that there is plenty of evidence to be gathered from what works in the classroom. The recommendations from the review, and the lessons from the pilot about how best to implement them, form the bedrock for the strengthened early reading support we are offering settings and schools from the autumn term.

Good practice goes wider than Clackmannanshire

  The Committee's Report Teaching Children to Read, published on 5 April 2005, gave prominence to evidence from Clackmannanshire so Jim also gave Clackmannanshire careful consideration in his review. However, while much of the commentary at the time centred on the merits of the research, Jim was keen that lessons from practice should form a significant part of the evidence for his review. He therefore visited Clackmannanshire to observe the teaching first hand. While Jim judged that the evidence seen there supported the case for synthetic phonics, this formed only part of the evidence on which he based his conclusions. For example, his report confirms that work of comparable quality was seen by HMI in English schools. In his evidence to the Committee, Jim said that the broad range of evidence he saw from practice was compelling. His report states that the principles of a systematic approach using synthetic phonics "featured consistently in the best work seen including the visits undertaken by HMI for the review".

The need to purchase commercial reading programmes

  In the hearing it was suggested that as a consequence of adopting a "synthetic phonics" approach, schools will be obliged to purchase commercial schemes which will entail significant costs.

  We are committed to implementing all the recommendations from the Rose Review through a comprehensive and strengthened programme of support for early years settings and schools. We will achieve this through introducing a revised literacy framework, the new Early Years Foundation Stage, training and robust local support structures to build and spread early reading expertise through the system. As part of the support provided, the Primary National Strategy will be encouraging settings and schools to consider to what extent phonics programmes they use match the principles of high quality phonic work as defined by Jim Rose's review.

  While schools will be free to choose a commercial programme if they wish they equally can draw on the extensive materials and training that will be offered by the Strategy, or use their own programmes for phonic work. To help settings and schools further in choosing a phonics programme we will help schools identify programmes which meet criteria based on the principles of high quality phonic work. We will also make available in the spring term a new phonics programme available free to schools through the Primary National Strategy which will meet these criteria and replace the Primary National Strategy's current materials, "Playing with Sounds".

Teacher training

  Also mentioned in the hearing was the Committee's recommendation that initial teacher training should ensure that prospective teachers receive high quality training in early reading. The review's recommendations support strongly your conclusion that this is fundamental to raising standards in early reading. Jim Rose noted that there are inconsistencies in present training standards and recommended a series of steps for the Training and Development Agency for Schools (TDA) to strengthen the quality of training for staff working at all levels. The Department and the TDA accepted this recommendation. The Primary National Strategy and the Department is currently working with the TDA on implementing the steps through a new programme of work. A major part of this will be ensuring that training providers understand the principles of high quality phonic work as reflected in the revised literacy framework and the Early Years Foundation Stage, and ensure that these are reflected in initial training and professional development for practitioners and school support staff.

Question 188 (Chairman):  Ensuring teachers are up-to-date with modern innovations in ICT

  This Department is committed to transforming learning and teaching through the use of ICT in education. ICT is a key component among the tools available to teachers to deliver stimulating and enjoyable lessons and to process and share information about pupils, thereby improving outcomes for children and young people.

  We fully recognise the need to support and equip teachers to exploit the potential that technologies offer for their practice. To sustain the momentum in integrating ICT into teaching across the curriculum, we provide a range of training and support packages for school leaders and both trainee and qualified teachers. These include—

—  Strategic Leadership of ICT (SLICT)—A comprehensive training programme delivered by the National College for School Leadership (NCSL) for school leaders to build their knowledge and understanding of key issues in ICT and to use technology to enhance and extend learning in and out of schools. To date over 10,000 school leaders have received training from NCSL in the strategic use of ICT.

—  Practical Support Pack (PSP)—A website containing over three hundred professional development modules for teachers linked to curriculum topics. In addition the Pack contains an extensive library of ICT skills guidance materials and a library of video case studies exemplifying effective ICT use in the classroom. The website attracts around 10,000 visitors per month.

—  ICT Across the Curriculum (ICTAC)—A pack of guidance materials for teachers designed to promote the effective use of ICT across all secondary subjects at Key Stage 3. It builds on the work of the Secondary National Strategy's ICT strand, and the ICT skills that pupils bring to their subject lessons from their ICT lessons. To date over 9,000 packs have been requested and distributed to schools.

  By delivering training in a variety of ways including online, face to face, through mentors and formal courses, this blended approach ensures that ICT remains a key part of teachers' professional development.

  As a result of the continued investment in ICT infrastructure, practice and training, teachers are increasingly using ICT in new and exciting ways to improve lessons. Examples of these include:

—  Schools are using their online networks to provide parents with more information and give them greater involvement in personalising education.

—  Teachers are using video cameras to capture and review pupil performance in sport, guiding the pupils to improve techniques and skills.

—  Computer aided design has become an integral part of design and technology lessons enabling 3-D modelling and the production of pupil generated concepts.

—  Digital cameras and image manipulation software has added a new dimension to the teaching of art, motivating pupils to explore the properties of images and develop new forms of expression.

—  Video-conferencing has enabled schools to form links with other schools throughout the world, enabling teachers to bring citizenship to life.

—  Use of the Internet is now commonplace in schools, encouraging pupils to undertake independent learning and breaching the traditional boundaries between teaching and research.

Questions 219-222 (Fiona Mactaggart) and Question 239 (Paul Holmes):  Teaching to the test

  At the hearing it was mentioned that some schools coach pupils just below the exam pass mark level so that they pass exams with the main intention of improving the schools position in performance and attainment tables. This means that less effort is spent in teaching good and poor performers.

  We make no apologies for emphasising the importance of pupils reaching key attainment thresholds. We have high expectations and aspirations for all children, and are therefore right in setting challenging targets that will get as many children as possible to the levels of attainment that enable them to progress further and faster in the curriculum.

  There is a very clear correlation between achieving the target level at the end of Key Stage 2, for example, and further educational success—pupils who achieve Level 4 at age 11 are six times more likely to achieve five or more good GCSEs than those who do not achieve Level 4.

  It is right that teachers should support pupils to achieve as well as they can in the tests. The most effective preparation for tests is consistent, excellent teaching throughout a child's learning, not just in Years 5 and 6. Of course, teachers will want to spend a little time making sure that children are familiar with the format and nature of the tests, but we have stressed that this preparation time should be kept to an absolute minimum and that teachers help children prepare best when they teach the core subjects as fully and effectively as possible.

  However, we are also clear that success for some pupils cannot be at the expense of others. We are committed to ensuring that every child makes the best progress possible, which is why personalised learning forms such a critical part of the Schools White Paper. A personalised learning approach means stretching all pupils so that they can fulfil their potential. This includes helping low-attaining pupils, those close to the borderline and those higher-achieving pupils to get the best results they can.

  Funding for personalised learning was announced in the Schools White Paper, the schools funding settlement in November 2005 and in the 2006 Budget. By 2007-08 schools will have an extra £990 million to fund personalised learning for all pupils, including interventions for pupils who are below age related expectations, challenging opportunities for the gifted and talented, and providing access to after hours and year-round study support for children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

  National and local targets, within the context of a broader accountability system support this ambition. Evidence shows that the current system of national targets has driven improvements across the ability range, not just at the target level. For example at Key Stage 2 the greatest increase in results has actually been in the percentage of pupils achieving Level 5 in mathematics and English, not the target Level 4. In our guidance to schools on setting their own targets we make clear that these should start from an ambitious assessment of what all pupils could achieve.

  Recent developments in the accountability system, and the support and challenge offered to schools, further reinforce this focus on the progress made by all pupils. The new Ofsted inspection framework starts from schools' own self-evaluation, and detailed performance data. Inspectors look at how all groups of pupils are performing, and expect schools to show what they are doing to ensure that all pupils make good progress and do well. Additionally, the role of the School Improvement Partner and the use of data to monitor pupil progress are important ways of ensuring that schools are challenged to focus on the performance of all pupils. We are also continuing to take forward our commitment in the Schools White Paper to develop new pupil progress measures to support schools' focus on the potential of all their pupils.

Question 223-224 (Mr Marsden):  The latest figures on apprenticeships

  There are over 200 different Apprenticeship frameworks across 80 industry sectors on offer to potential learners, the responsibility for the content of each framework lies within an appropriate Sector Skills Council's remit.

  Having already achieved the Public Service Agreement target for the number of young people starting an Apprenticeship and with achievement rates for full frameworks on the rise, this success means more young people will have the opportunity to learn skills that they need to secure a successful future. It also means that nearly 130,000 employers are growing the skills that their business will need to remain competitive in the face of global competition.

  Tables giving the number of people entering, participating and completing apprenticeship courses were contained in the answer to Mr Boswell's Parliamentary Question (Official Record, 18 April 2006, col 169W). The table below up-dates the completion figures to include the final numbers for 2004-05 contained in the Statistical Final Release published on 11 April 2006.

SUCCESS RATES BY PROGRAMME TYPE

2002-03

		ADVANCED APPRENTICESHIP	APPRENTICESHIP	ALL APPRENTICESHIPS
Framework	x	32%	24%	27%
NVQ only	y	11%	13%	13%
Framework or NVQ	x+y	44%	37%	39%
Total leavers		60,600	104,900	165,600
2003-04
Framework	x	32%	30%	31%
NVQ only	y	14%	12%	13%
Framework or NVQ	x+y	46%	43%	44%
Total leavers		51,400	106,800	158,200
2004-05
Framework	x	38%	40%	40%
NVQ only	y	14%	11%	11%
Framework or NVQ	x+y	52%	51%	51%
Total leavers		50,200	119,700	170,000

Notes:

Figures are rounded

For 2004-05 are those in the Statistical Final Release (FSR) published on 11 April 2006: Further Education and Work Based Learning for Young People—Learner Outcomes in England: 2004-05.

Apprenticeships are Level 2 and Advanced Apprenticeships are Level 3.

Question 230-231 (Mr Chaytor):  Expenditure on Adult Community Learning and Further Education

  In response to the first question asked by the Committee on 5 June we provided Table A which summarised expenditure on education in England and showed all the expenditure on Further Education and Adult Community Learning as one total. As requested the revised Table A has been produced which separates this expenditure into its component parts of Adult and Community Learning (ACL) and FE and Other Lifelong Learning.

  The information on ACL covers Learning and Skills Council (LSC) funding from 2001-02, when funding was transferred to the LSC from local authorities. Prior to 2001-02 reliable and consistent disaggregation of expenditure on ACL from local authority budgets is not available.

  ACL includes a wide range of courses run by local authorities under "adult education". They are largely non vocational and do not lead to qualifications, ranging from parenting to history to Information Technology. Increasingly local authorities funded "outreach" and related courses from this budget to help disadvantaged people back into learning. The figures include the LSC's expenditure on family learning, family literacy, language and numeracy and its fund for Neighbourhood Learning in Deprived Communities. The capital budgets are used to improve the infrastructure in ACL, particularly in deprived areas and to ensure physical access for disabled people.

  Further Education and other Lifelong Learning covers education expenditure by the Learning and Skills Council and others and includes further education and other lifelong learning. In the same way as Table 12.3 in the 2005 Departmental Report, it excludes expenditure classed as training.

  Footnote 9 of the original table we provided stated that "Adult and Community Learning has been removed from the FE line". This sentence was included in error as Adult and Community Learning is included in the FE line, so this sentence has been removed from the footnotes.

£ million

	1997-98 Outturn	1998-99 outturn	1999-2000 outturn	2000-01 outturn	2001-02 outturn	2002-03 outturn	2003-04 outturn	2004-05 provisional outturn	2005-06 estimated outturn
SCHOOLS
CAPITAL (5)	1,260	1,378	1,494	1,821	2,075	2,260	2,590	2,815	3,017
CURRENT (6)	21,430	21,868	23,476	25,521	27,961	28,915	31,926	33,224	34,355
of which
Under fives (7)	2,057	2,098	2,336	2,614	3,147	3,201	3,570	3,847	3,928
Primary	7,687	7,794	8,102	8,789	9,483	9,901	10,516	10,698	10,980
Secondary	9,581	9,761	10,291	11,058	12,142	12,648	14,075	14,806	15,327
Other (8)	2,105	2,215	2,748	3,060	3,189	3,165	3,766	3,873	4,120
FURTHER EDUCATION AND ADULT AND COMMUNITY LEARNING (9) (10)	3,924	3,943	4,015	4,277	5,088	5,469	6,011	6,143	6,540
of which
FE and Other Lifelong   Learning	#	#	#	#	4,922	5,246	5,738	5,859	6,274
Adult and Community   Learning Recurrent	#	#	#	#	166	203	232	237	223
Adult and Community   Learning Capital	#	#	#	#	0	20	41	48	42
HIGHER EDUCATION (10)	5,283	5,236	5,573	5,172	5,423	5,579	5,852	6,064	6,509
HIGHER EDUCATION STUDENT SUPPORT (11) (12)	1,507	1,519	1,300	1,235	1,026	963	940	977	899
ADMINISTRATION, INSPECTION COSTS AND MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES (13)	1,503	1,591	1,055	1,110	1,255	1,522	1,578	1,690	1,764
TOTAL
Real terms	34,907	35,536	36,912	39,136	42,828	44,707	48,897	50,912	53,083
CASH	29,704	31,023	32,860	35,295	39,579	42,628	47,847	50,912	54,193

NOTES

  (1)  Figures within Departmental Expenditure Limits (DEL). Excludes DfES administration costs and expenditure on other areas than education, for instance on children and families and on skills. Figures for 1998-99 onwards are resource-based. Central government figures for 1997-98 are cash-based.

  (2)  Differences between the totals above and the figures for education spending published in Table 8.1 of the Departmental Report are the result of (a) data coverage: the exclusion of AME items in the above table, (b) definitional differences: Departmental administration costs and Ofsted spending on education are both classified as education spending under UN Classification of Functions of Government (COFOG) international definitions—the above table excludes these, (c) reclassifications made since Budget 2006 of Connexions spending to social protection and Adult Education spend to training in line with UN COFOG definitions. The next scheduled HMT National Statistics release will update education spending to take account of these reclassifications, (d) further minor data coverage and timing differences.

  (3)  The recurrent local authority figures in this table are drawn from Table 8.3 of the Departmental Report; the footnotes to that table set out the underlying data sources. The 1997-98 and 1998-99 derive from the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions education Revenue Outturn return (the "RO1"). Subsequent outturn figures derive from Section 52 Outturn Statements which were changed in 2002-03 arising from the review of the Section 52 categories following the introduction of Consistent Financial Reporting to schools.

  (4)  All figures have been converted to 2004-05 price levels using the 29 March 2006 Gross Domestic Product (GDP) deflators.

  (5)  Excludes Private Finance Initiative (PFI) credits (£35 million in 1997-98, £130 million in 1998-99, £350 million in each of 1999-2000 and 2000-01, £450 million in 2001-02, £850 million in 2002-03 and 2003-04, £1,050 million in 2004-05 and £1,200 million in 2005-06).

  (6)  Figures from 2003-04 onwards reflect the transfer of responsibility from the Department to LEAs of costs relating to teachers' pensions.

  (7)  Under five figures include education expenditure on Sure Start (Sure Start figures exclude current grant).

  (8)  Includes local authority services to schools, expenditure on City Academies, small remodelling programmes and on teacher training.

  (9)  This line now includes FE Student Support (previously a separate line). Includes expenditure on adult and community learning by local authorities, and, up to 2000-01, by the Further Education Funding Council (FEFC) and, from 2001-02, the estimated element of funding on education by the Learning and Skills Council excluding school sixth forms. The figures include Education Maintenance Allowances (EMAs) between 1999-2000 and 2002-03 and other support for students in further education and school sixth forms. The figures exclude EMAs from 2003-04 following their reclassification from DEL to AME.

(10)  The expenditure data in this table and those used in the calculation of funding per student in FE in table 8.7 and HE in table 8.8 are not directly comparable.

(11)  HE Support includes Student Loans RAB charge; Access Funds; Postgraduate Awards; EUI Bursaries; Discretionary Awards; Mandatory and Student Support Awards and all SLC-paid student support grants. Tuition Fee Grants are included in the HE total. From 2004-05 this line also includes HE Grant and Part Time Grant Support Package.

(12)  The Student Loans RAB Charge estimates the future cost to government of subsidising and writing off the student loans issued in that year. From 2005-06 the Student Loans RAB Charge outturn is predicted to fall as a result of the change in the discount rate from 3.5% to 2.2%. It does not represent the amount of cash lent to students, which has risen each year since the introduction of student loans.

(13)  From 1999-2000, a portion of local authority administration and inspection costs is delegated to schools and is included within the school current expenditure lines. These figures in part reflect the transfer of responsibilities for early years inspection from local authorities to Ofsted.

    Figures are not available

Question 234-237 (Mrs Dorries):  The position of the three-tier system of schools in England and within the 14-19 agenda

  I can confirm that there is no move to withdraw support for the three tier system where it exists, and that the 14-19 agenda lends itself very well to that system. I am aware of the controversy that any proposal to close schools causes in a local community, but in order to reorganise schools, the local authority would need to publish proposals to close schools and establish new ones or expand and change the age-range of existing schools. In the case of foundation and voluntary schools, only the governing body of the school itself would be able to propose to change the age-range of the school (except for adding a sixth form). Anyone proposing to open, close, or make prescribed alterations to schools would first have to consult in the area, and anyone could comment on the proposals or object to them. In many cases a competition would be required for any new schools. Proposals to move from a three-tier to a two-tier system would therefore be fully discussed in the local area.

  On funding, the main driver in any local authority school funding formula, which is used to calculate individual school budgets, is the number of pupils on the school roll. That applies whether the system is two tier or three tier, and we have no plans to change that. Moreover, the condition and suitability of all schools of whatever age-range are included in the data used to allocate capital funding to local authorities, and local authorities should fairly prioritise the needs of all schools in their asset management planning.

Question 241 (Rob Wilson):  Improving the performance of Bangladeshi pupils

  The Department provides helpful information on ethnic minority achievement on its website www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/ethnicminorities/ . The site gives support to local authorities and schools by providing an update on the Department's work, sharing successful experiences and signposting useful links and publications.

  In 2003, the Department launched its Aiming High national strategy for raising the achievement of ethnic minority pupils. The strategy includes a number of priority areas and projects, including, support for Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils; pupils for whom English is an additional language; support for Black pupils; and the Minority Ethnic Achievement Project (MEAP). MEAP focuses support on Somali, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and Turkish pupils at Key Stage 3—Year 8 and 9, around 96% of whom are Muslim.

  MEAP—Phase 1 of the MEAP project ran in 12 local authorities (LAs) across the country, and involved a total of 52 schools and was developed in consultation with national Muslim organisations. The project's aims, included ensuring that the educational aspirations of the participating pupils were realised, that there will be a narrowing of the achievement gap between these pupils and other groups, and that suitable, inclusive approaches to teaching and learning are developed. The MEAP project aims to provide support, evaluate and disseminate practical strategies to maximise the progress of pupils by:

—  identifying where pupils from Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Somali and Turkish communities are underachieving;

—  developing effective teaching and learning approaches and building on recognised good practice;

—  ensuring effective whole schools structures and systems;

—  Identifying and transferring best practice in challenging Islamophobia and racism;

—  ensuring that the curriculum properly engages with the particular interests and concerns of Muslim pupils; and

—  engaging with parents and the wider Muslim community.

  Evaluation of MEAP—Early results from the evaluation of phase 1 of MEAP, show that in LAs,

—  MEAP was seen as a stimulus to better target intervention to address aspects of underachievement identified by LAs and schools;

—  it was most effective in LAs where collaboration and partnerships were strong; and

—  the support provided by the LA as part of MEAP, was highly valued by schools.

  For schools:

—  the evaluation identified that pupils involved in MEAP reported improvements in their motivation, attitude, engagement and learning;

—  parents welcomed increased involvement in their children's education through participation in MEAP; and

—  staff involved in the project had increased confidence to better address the needs of underperforming pupils.

  The evaluation went on to make several recommendations, which are being incorporated into phase 2 of the project. These included:

—  LAs should continue to provide a strong strategic lead to schools, stating clear expectations and outcomes;

—  LA advisers, inspectors and school improvement partners (SIPs) should be made fully aware of the potential of MEAP in helping to raise attainment; and

—  head teachers should support the take-up of professional development opportunities for staff working on MEAP.

  For schools, the evaluation:

—  stressed the value in ensuring MEAP is part of a whole-school improvement plan;

—  recommended that schools should continue to work closely with parents to support their child; and

—  schools should continue to provide clear senior leadership.

  Attainment—In English schools, the attainment of Pakistani and Bangladeshi pupils has improved markedly. In 2005, 48.4% of Pakistani and 52.7% Bangladeshi pupils achieved 5 A*-C grades at GCSE, compared with 54.9% of all pupils. Since 2000, this represents an improvement of 19.4 percentage points for Pakistani pupils and 23.7 points for Bangladeshi pupils. This compares with a 5.9 percentage point increase for all pupils.

  Launch of Phase 2—The launch of phase 2 of the project in June 2006, has resulted in the project almost doubling in size, expanding to include more schools in the participating LAs, and through widening its coverage to a further 6 LAs. Around 85 schools are now involved, with an expectation that this figure will increase further. This delivers on a commitment to strengthen targeted support for under performing Muslim pupils, made in the Schools White Paper.

Question 248 (Mr Chaytor):  The 14-19 diploma roll out timetable will be made public

  The timetable for the roll-out of the 14-19 specialised Diplomas was set out in the 14-19 Education and Skills Implementation Plan last year. The full timetable is shown in the wallchart diagram accessible through the Timetable for Reform link at www.dfes.gov.uk/14-19/.

  The first five Diplomas, in Construction and the Built Environment, Creative and Media, Engineering, Health and Social Care and ICT, will be available for first teaching in 2008.

  The following five Diplomas, in Land-Based and Environment; Manufacturing; Hair and Beauty; Business Administration and Finance and Hospitality and Catering will be available for first teaching in 2009.

  The final four Diplomas, in Public Services; Sport and Leisure; Retail; and Travel and Tourism, will be available for first teaching in 2010.

  Each Diploma line will be piloted for 3 years from first teaching.

  For all 14 Diploma lines, the Diploma qualifications will be accredited and available in schools and colleges that wish to offer them during the pilot 12 months before teaching is due to begin.

  A full national entitlement to study a Diploma will be in place from 2013.

Question 252 (Mr Marsden):  The funding of schools with a transient population

  The Government fully accepts that, as the work of Dr Janet Dobson of University College London shows, pupil mobility, especially in the two years before GCSE exams are taken, can have a significant impact on pupil achievement.

  There are many pupils who experience high mobility for a range of reasons. There is naturally high pupil turnover in parts of London, and there are many other areas where pupil turnover is high: for example, where there are high numbers of children from service families; and where there is seasonal working in seaside towns and agricultural communities. Pupil mobility presents two issues for schools: how they can best address the additional educational needs these pupils may have; and how schools can manage the turbulence high pupil turnover can bring.

  We have considered previously with our national education partners whether there should be a pupil mobility factor in the distribution of funding for schools from central government to local authorities. We have decided against for two reasons. Firstly, pupil mobility is widespread and affects many pupils. A mobility factor would therefore have only a marginal effect on the distribution of resources between authorities. Secondly, it is difficult to produce a consistent definition of mobility which could be matched by data robust enough to be included in a distribution formula which would command widespread support.

  The Government considers, therefore, that this issue is best dealt with locally, through each local authority's local funding formula, in consultation with the local Schools Forum. Local formulae can include a factor to mitigate the effects of pupil turnover. In this way, the needs and circumstances of individual schools and their pupils can be taken into account.

  The new school funding arrangements introduced for 2006-08 provide greater stability in school funding through the introduction of a single pupil count. This means that school budgets, once set, are no longer subject to re-determination for a sudden reduction in pupil numbers. Conversely, a local authority can help a school with a sudden influx of pupils from its contingency budget. And the emphasis on greater personalisation in learning, backed by additional resources, will help schools meet the additional educational needs of all their pupils.

  The future distribution of the Dedicated Schools Grant is a key issue for the current review of the school funding system for 2008-09 and beyond, and we will examine again how the national distribution of resources can most effectively support schools in meeting the needs of all their pupils.

Question 255-258 (Chairman)  The early identification of gifted and talented pupils and their further development

  Chapter 4 of the White Paper Higher Standards, Better Schools for All sets out the Government's plans to further improve gifted and talented education, building on the programme that has been progressively developed since 1999. That programme recognises a wide range of abilities, providing support for those with talents in creative arts or sports as well as for those with academic potential. It aims to provide support from primary school through to entry into higher education. It assumes that ability is evenly distributed within the population, so that a school's register of gifted and talented learners should be broadly representative of the whole school population, whether by gender, ethnic or socio-economic background.

  The Government sees gifted and talented education as integral to personalising education to meet the needs of all learners, regardless of their backgrounds. Gifted and talented learners need the right blend of challenge and support to achieve their potential—and addressing their needs is not always straightforward for schools. Some gifted and talented learners are hard to identify and there is continuing evidence of underachievement, particularly for those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

  Funding for personalised learning was announced in the Schools White Paper, the schools funding settlement in November 2005 and in the 2006 Budget. By 2007-08 schools will have an extra £990 million to fund personalised learning for all pupils, part earmarked within the Dedicated Schools Grant and part provided through the Schools Standards Grant. In calculating the sums available, the Department identified three main priorities for this expenditure, one of which was support for gifted and talented learners.

  Government support for gifted and talented education is intended to improve pupil attainment, recognising the impact on attainment of raising pupils' aspirations, motivation and self-esteem. The programme seeks to achieve this through a mix of support for students themselves and action to improve the quality of gifted and talented education in all schools.

  The action programme set out in the Schools White Paper depends on two key reforms:

—  Improving the identification of gifted and talented pupils and tracking improvements in their attainment and performance through a new National Register, which can also potentially support Universities' widening participation strategies. The Register will be an amalgamation of all school gifted and talented registers: secondary schools have provided these details through the Schools Census for the first time this year and primary schools will do so in 2007. It will support the identification of all those aged 11-19 within the top 5% by ability who are eligible for membership of the National Academy for Gifted and Talented Youth (NAGTY)—slightly over half of these students have so far registered with NAGTY. The Register will be linked to the National Pupil Database, so permitting detailed analysis of performance and providing evidence to inform policy and support functions;

—  Improving the quality of gifted and talented education in schools through effective self-evaluation, using new Quality Standards for gifted and talented education at whole school and classroom level. These can also be used as the basis of all professional development and support for those working in schools, as well as providing a common framework for school improvement partners and others to apply in their work with schools. The whole school standard is already in place, with an interactive online tool available to schools. The classroom standard, designed to capture consensus on effective practice in teaching and learning, is currently under development.

Other White Paper commitments provide:

Additional opportunities for gifted and talented learners including:

—  A new national programme of extended day non-residential summer schools developed through partnership between higher education institutions and specialist schools—a pathfinder programme is currently under development for summer 2007;

—  "Goal"—a scheme developed by NAGTY providing an entitlement to learning opportunities and additional support for those of its members who come from the most disadvantaged backgrounds—the Government will be providing up to £1 million per year over two years to match-fund business and philanthropic contributions;

Additional support for schools and educators including:

—  A trained leading teacher for gifted and talented education in every secondary school and for every primary school (with a group of primary schools allocated to each primary lead teacher). Training will be based on the Quality Standards and will include the preparation of an improvement plan for the school or schools for which the leading teacher is responsible;

—  New guidance for schools built around the Quality Standards;

—  Development of tools and guidance to help schools to more effectively identify, teach and support gifted and talented learners from black and minority ethnic backgrounds.

Key partners engaged in this action programme include:

—  NAGTY, the Department's core partner for gifted and talented education, which supports the education of the top 5% of 11-19-year-olds nationally, as well as developing professional development and other services for educators and researchers;

—  the National Primary and Secondary Strategies, which will provide the delivery mechanism for much of the support to schools, while also reviewing and updating their own guidance and structures to ensure that the needs of gifted and talented learners are more fully incorporated into the Strategies;

—  London Gifted and Talented, part of the London Challenge, which is developing resources to improve gifted and talented education and foster collaboration across all London Boroughs; and

—  evolving regional partnerships for gifted and talented education in every other region, built around local authorities and higher education institutions, but also engaging a range of other partners in related fields.

  The Department is currently reforming the national support structure for gifted and talented education to provide a clearer, more efficient division of responsibility, so enabling Departmental staff to focus on strategic policy development and system design. A tender is being let to identify a managing contractor who will provide evidence-based policy advice to inform strategic policy-making, manage key central services, contract with delivery partners responsible for providing services of various kinds—including all those currently supported by the Government—and promote the development of the market for such services. The contractor will be in place by early 2007.

September 2006