Examination of Witnesses (Questions 140
- 159)
WEDNESDAY 30 NOVEMBER 2005
CLLR ALISON
KING, CLLR
JAMES KEMPTON,
MR STEPHEN
MEEK AND
MS CHRISTINE
DAVIES
Q140 Mr Wilson: Have local authorities
continued to take account of surplus places up until this time?
Cllr King: Yes, we have to.
Cllr Kempton: We need to take
account of them bearing in mind the future demographic change
which may be up or down.
Q141 Mr Wilson: So the Prime Minister
is wrong?
Cllr Kempton: What I am saying
is that local authorities are taking account of demographic changes
to ensure that they have got a school system that can meet those
needs and where those changes are increasing, like somewhere like
Milton Keynes, they are taking account of those and making sure
they have got the right number of places available.
Mr Wilson: So, just to be clear, local authorities
are today still taking account of surplus places in their area,
despite what the Prime Minister has told the House of Commons?
Chairman: Sorry, could you articulate that a
bit more? I thought it was commonplace that at the moment local
authorities have that responsibility. Could you draw that out?
Q142 Mr Wilson: Well, the Prime Minister
was asked directly whether surplus places continued to be taken
into account by the local education authority and he said, "Absolutely
not".
Cllr Kempton: Well, there is no
surplus places rule that says you have to have 5% or 10% surplus
places. There is no rule that says the number that you have, but
clearly any authority is taking account of the future needs of
their area. If the numbers are declining in the area, then we
will be looking to see how we could amalgamate schools or work
to having the right number of schools to deliver it. It is in
no one's interest to have a school which is half empty; that does
not deliver good education for the children or provide—
Q143 Mr Wilson: Yes, but specifically
if a school wants to expand and there were surplus places elsewhere,
a local authority might be minded to say, "Because there
are places elsewhere, we won't allow that school to expand".
What the Prime Minister is saying is that they cannot take account
of that as part of what we have been discussing today.
Cllr Kempton: I think what is
more likely to happen is a local authority would say, "Why
is there pressure to expand in that school?" Surely this
is, as we have been having, a discussion about that school, but
it is also a discussion about why some schools are less popular
and this cannot just be a debate about the school that wants to
expand or where there is pressure for new schools, but it has
to be a debate where the schools are unpopular or where they are
not delivering good-quality education. That is where the intervention
powers of local government are required and where we think that
the White Paper gives enhanced powers which is why we are welcoming
that aspect of it.
Q144 Chairman: Where it is possible
is that I have always understood in my own local authority, Kirklees,
that my local authority had a duty and certainly a responsibility
they carried out of assessing across the local authority where
they have got more places and a shortage of places. I thought
that had always been the case. Is it not, Alison King?
Cllr King: Yes, it is. The responsibility
of the local authority is that we have to match the number of
places available with the number of children coming through the
system. As James has said, we do not want to see schools that
are half empty and you certainly do not want to wind up in a situation
in which that becomes even worse. We know that across the country
school rolls fluctuate and we know that the demographic trends
are that we are going to have a reduction in the number of children
coming into the system.
Q145 Mr Wilson: But presumably one
is a school organisation plan and what I am specifically referring
to is when parents in an area want a good school to expand and
the local education authority looks across the authority and says,
"Well, no, because there are places here, here and here that
could be filled by these pupils". I think that is slightly
different.
Cllr King: Yes, it is slightly
different and perhaps we go back to my statement that perhaps
we should ensure that all schools are properly performing schools
and are good schools so that we and the parents are not left in
this situation. What happens is that of course schools, as has
already been said, from which there is an exodus tend to wither
on the vine. You have to remember that there are children in those
schools and they could be in those schools for quite a long time
while they are in decline.
Q146 Mrs Dorries: Christine, I would
just like to come back to something you said a bit earlier. You
said, I think and please clarify for me, that in the new trust
schools, as they are envisaged, the vast majority of children
with special needs could be catered for within those schools.
Is that right?
Ms Davies: Yes, and it is not
just trust schools. The vast majority of special educational needs
can be catered for in mainstream education, provided the ethos
of the school is conducive to meeting those needs and provided
the school has sufficient resources and support to meet those
needs. I did not say all special educational needs.
Q147 Mrs Dorries: I just wondered
how you squared that with the fact that 27% of children on the
autistic spectrum who are in the mainstream in any one day are
excluded from school.
Ms Davies: We could have a debate
about how you define "autism", but actually the vast
majority of children who are on the autistic spectrum, if their
needs have been assessed as being best met in the local school
and that school is sufficiently supported and resourced, then
those children are very well catered for, and I could give you
some very good examples of where children's needs are being met.
There undoubtedly are some children, and they are not just autistic
children, but a range of special needs, where mainstream education
is either not appropriate or it is appropriate, but the school,
for one reason or another, is not able or not willing to meet
those needs appropriately.
Q148 Mrs Dorries: Not willing is
quite an important point actually because whilst the Secretary
of State says that the Education White Paper is about driving
up standards and that those drivers are going to be the parents,
and this Paper is a lot about giving power to parents, if you
were a group of parents, 95% of parents, in a trust school whose
children do not have special needs, would there not be a tendency
for those parents, who are going to be given such greater powers
now in terms of the running of the schools, to decide perhaps
that they were not going to take children with special educational
needs? On the issue of choice, I would just like you to clarify
what choice the parent of the Asperger's child or the autistic
child is going to have, given that the special schools now, as
you said yourself, are moving towards the more very extreme complex
needs and the children who need 24-hours-a-day care, so what should
we say to the parents there?
Ms Davies: The evidence is that
where those schools are very effectively meeting children's special
educational needs, they are also most effective in meeting the
needs of all children because there is real thought going into
curriculum differentiation, teaching styles, the level of support
that is needed classroom to classroom, subject area to subject
area, and it is absolutely vital that parents of all children,
including those with Asperger's syndrome, do have an element of
choice, but it must be choice that is grounded in the reality
of which institutions are best able to meet those specific needs
and—
Q149 Mrs Dorries: Christine, can
I just interrupt you there. Do you actually believe then that
if the Education White Paper is implemented as it stands today,
given that we do have the special schools closure and the transferring
of those special schools that we have to the 24/7 children who
need the intensive care, are you actually saying to a parent of
a child who is today struggling to get their child into a school
when the local authorities have control that, when parents have
control, it is going to be as easy and it is going to happen?
Do you really think that when parents have control of the schools,
the special needs children are going to have the places? Do you
really believe that?
Cllr King: I was just going to
reflect on the fact that there are areas where mainstream schools
have attached to them SPELD units, special educational and learning
difficulties units.
Q150 Mrs Dorries: Some do.
Cllr King: Some do, yes, and I
think this is perhaps the way for the future for a lot of the
children, such as the ones you are describing, because it is perfectly
possible to integrate children with Asperger's and autistic spectrum
disorders generally and children with other special educational
and learning disorders, whatever you like to call them, into mainstream
schooling with the support of specialists within the unit.
Q151 Mrs Dorries: Having a lot of
knowledge of Asperger's and autism, might I disagree with that
because unfortunately those children are robbed of the ability
of being in a mainstream school just by the nature of their condition,
so I would disagree with that.
Cllr King: Well, can I just respond
and say that that situation does not exist across the country.
There are different practices around in different local authorities
and I know some SPELD units very well, I am also very involved
in autistic disorders and I am a trustee of the local Autistic
Society, so I do understand the worries that parents have about
how their children are going to be educated and how vulnerable
they will be in mainstream settings. There are situations, however,
that do exist and that operate very successfully. Of course what
a lot parents are worried about, parents of the mainstream children,
if you can call them that, is that the academic standard of the
school will be depleted if they have one of these units set up,
but experience does not show that that is always the case. In
fact in the school that I have most experience of, it has not
been the case at all and the whole thing has been very, very successful,
but it takes a lot of planning and a lot of work to get it to
that stage, but there is no reason why it should not exist. I
think your worries are well founded because very often prejudice
rules the decision-making process rather than sensibly thought-out
logic.
Q152 Mrs Dorries: That is absolutely
my concern with the parent power in schools, that prejudice will
rule and these children with SEN will end up nowhere, given the
situation that is happening in schools at the moment.
Ms Davies: I understand your concern
about children with Asperger's Syndrome. If, for instance, you
come to Telford, you will see mainstream schools working and supported
by special schools, working with the National Autistic Society,
and you will find that the whole spectrum of children with Asperger's
Syndrome or the autistic spectrum, their needs are well met, but
they are not met by one institution, they are met by a group of
institutions working together with the local authority services.
My second point is that we will be in very dangerous territory,
you are absolutely right, if it is left for a parent body to determine
which children go to that school and which children do not go
to that school for all the reasons that we do not have to go over.
Children that are less popular in schools are often less popular
with other parents and that will be a very dangerous situation.
I will reiterate the point I made very much earlier about academies.
I think there is a very real concern on the part of the Local
Government Association and local government generally that academies
have the right to be refused to be named in a statement of special
educational need. We cannot have a situation where one category
of school is under no obligation to meet the needs of children
with special educational needs when all other categories of school
are.
Q153 Mrs Dorries: With the admissions
criteria, schools are going to be able to select by interview,
if they wish. Regardless of the parent body, if schools are selecting
by interview or have a selection criterion which is not in the
statutory code of admissions practice, how do you think children
with special educational needs will fare in that circumstance?
I am just thinking of the autistic child who goes into a headteacher's
office and wrecks it within five minutes of getting in there.
Is the headteacher going to give that child a place?
Ms Davies: I think potentially,
and some schools will behave very honourably and others perhaps
less honourably, but potentially there are some children with
special educational needs and disabilities who are more popular
in other schools, so those children who perhaps have a hearing
disability or visual disability or a physical disability, those
children will be deemed to be able to have their needs met, but
there are other children, those children in the looked-after system,
those children who present with behavioural difficulties for one
reason or another, who will be deemed to be "less popular"
and I think it is those children whom interviewing as a means
of selection will seriously disadvantage.
Q154 Dr Blackman-Woods: I am going
to ask some questions about quality and come back to a point Alison
made earlier. We know that some schools are considered unacceptable
by a significant number of parents and my question is really:
should the White Paper be focused on bringing all schools up to
a basic standard rather than encouraging different types of schools?
Cllr King: Yes.
Q155 Dr Blackman-Woods: Do you, therefore,
think that already local authorities are doing enough to improve
schools in their area?
Cllr King: I would say yes and
there is research to show that the role of local authorities in
raising school performance, improvement, attainment, et cetera,
has been absolutely critical. There is any amount of evidence
around about that and the National Foundation for Educational
Research have done some very recent work on it. I think the local
authorities are committed to improving standards in their local
area. If they are not, they certainly should be because we are
looking at the needs of the next generation, very, very important,
and I think that the means that we use, the improvement guidance
advice in our local inspection units, whatever you like to call
them, however they are billed, are seen as a most important tool
to raising school attainment levels, and I think it would be the
odd school that would not actually make use of that sort of system,
an outside person coming in to give an evaluation and an assessment,
a trusted outside person with whom they have an ongoing relationship
and who constantly monitors their progress and constantly supports
the teaching staff in their quest for improving the service that
they have on offer. I think it is most important.
Cllr Kempton: If you take the
evidence from Ofsted, it is that the number of failing schools
is reducing really substantially, so the question is not so much
perhaps about what goes on in the classroom that is about raising
standards, but what goes on in the wider lives of those children.
Clearly I think under Every Child Matters that is absolutely
central to the role of local government for the future, so we
are about to get a new duty under the Childcare Bill which we
very much welcome. To narrow attainment gaps for the youngest
children and giving them the best start in life is clearly a really
substantial step in this direction. Working to address some of
the other issues in their lives, whether it is overcrowding at
home, whether it is problems with parental support or parenting,
whether it is drug or alcohol abuse, whether it is being known
to the criminal justice system, all of those issues are what is
going to transform education in the broadest sense and those are
all areas where local government and the interventions that we
can bring together are highly crucial. I think we are getting
to the point where just improving little by little what goes on
in the classroom, which we clearly can do, will make a difference,
but the really substantial differences, I think, are going to
come from addressing some of those things which happen in children's
lives either when they are younger or when they are going through
the school system which impact on their learning.
Q156 Dr Blackman-Woods: I think that
is an interesting point. I am glad you have raised Ofsted because
the Ofsted report said two additional things: one, that there
are still too many failing schools; and, two, that a lot of schools
are coasting. Indeed a lot of the thrust of the White Paper is
about the fact that schools are coasting, so I will put the question
back to you again. If you are doing such a good job raising standards,
why do we still have so many failing schools and why do we still
have so many schools that are coasting?
Cllr Kempton: Well, I will probably
let Christine come in in a minute, but local authorities have
responsibilities for failing schools and I think the evidence
shows that where we have intervened in failing schools, that number
has reduced. We have not got it to where we want it, but we are
working well and the evidence shows that generally, as I said
before, local authorities are performing better now than they
have ever done, so the additional powers to work with coasting
schools that the White Paper brings, I think, are very welcome
and we would anticipate that in a few years' time you can look
back and see the effect that that has had of local authorities
working with schools. It is, I think, an issue to do with school
autonomy, that we have to respect the rights of schools, as autonomous
institutions, to make decisions for themselves, other than at
times when they are in crisis, and we work very effectively with
many schools, but it is about getting the right balance of when
you intervene and when you stay out. I think the cumulative effect,
as I say, of these powers and of the new relationship with schools
will, I hope, achieve the changes that we all want to see in that
area. It is not, as you say, quite where we want it to be, but
the direction of travel is, I think, very positive and I think
Ofsted acknowledges that too.
Q157 Chairman: But you can understand
the Prime Minister's impatience, can you not, in the sense that
there are still around about 30% of the children in our country
that do not get the education that he thinks they should get?
Indeed if you look at staying-on rates at 16, it is still awful
and if we take the OECD average. Arguably, is there not a bit
of complacency here? You have been in charge of education for
yonks and it has not really delivered to those people most in
need there.
Cllr Kempton: I do not think there
is complacency, but what there is, I think, is a concern that
structural change is not the answer and we are being faced with
a set or proposals again about structural change when the sort
of interventions that we know will work are the ones I have talked
about already which are to do with the wider children's lives
as well as the interventions in supporting schools that are not
doing very well. It is not about saying that just because you
create a different category of school, somehow there will be less
propensity to fail because they have the label "academy"
or "trust school". I think what we are looking at is
the systems that can be put in place to help local authorities
support and challenge.
Q158 Dr Blackman-Woods: I noticed
you said in your submission that, although you agree with what
the White Paper is trying to achieve in terms of driving up standards,
you do not think this is the route and you want them to be more
radical and this White Paper is not sufficiently radical, so what
would you have liked to have seen in it that is not there?
Cllr Kempton: Well, I am very
happy to take that, but, Christine, did you want to come in on
this?
Q159 Chairman: So it is not radical
enough and you have said so, but why not? How would you make it
more radical?
Ms Davies: It needs to be radical
in the sense that it needs to be robust because, you are absolutely
right, whilst there are some schools where for some children their
improvement is not sufficient, in the vast majority of local authority
areas, performance has been raised year on year and there are
some excellent examples in Liverpool, Blackpool, Durham, Sheffield,
Telford, Knowsley, all the way across the country where actually
performance has been raised year on year. You are absolutely right,
this is where we need to be more radical, that actually all local
authorities must match the best in terms of performance. Without
local authorities, you would not have had the primary strategy,
the Key Stage 3 strategy, behaviour and attendance 14-19, et cetera,
delivered, you would not have had it delivered in the way that
it has been delivered. In terms of being more radical, it is very
important to understand how, where and why the most effective
local authorities have worked well with their schools and we need
to be learning from those local authorities and learning about
that relationship between the local authority and the school because
it is not just about challenge and support, but it is about what
I call "mess and mire, fire, plague and pestilence".
The local authority's role in driving up school improvement is
complex and it needs to be understood what it looks like on a
day-to-day basis. What the local authority needs is not the heavy
hand of the local authority intervening in schools, but it is
the local authority having a sufficient lever to go into a school
and talk with a school's governors and with the teachers in order
to address areas of need as well as identifying where there is
best practice and sharing it. We welcome the White Paper suggesting
that we have those levers in schools which are failing. We continue
to need those levers in schools which are coasting.
|
