Memorandum submitted by School-Home Support
School-Home Support is a national charity, established
in 1984 that provides practical and emotional support for disadvantaged
and disaffected children and young people and for their families
and carers.
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS:
— The role of "choice adviser"
should be imaginatively conceived and parent focused; designed
to ensure that parents and children find transfer to secondary
school manageable and that it is successfully completed.
— Schools should find interesting ways
of communicating information about children's progress—ways
that succeed in engaging all parents and carers.
— Home-School agreements do need to
be re-launched. But although parents usually sign them how many
actually understand what they have signed up to? If mediated by
a support worker these can be made much more effective.
— We hope Ofsted will interpret their
brief for inspection of schools' engagement with parents as widely
as possible and not interpret it solely as that prescribed by
law.
OUR EVIDENCE
1. SHS welcomes the White Paper's emphasis
on the responsibilities parents have in the education of their
children. Some of the ambitions described—raising standards
for all, especially amongst the least advantaged, helping parents
to engage with the education of their children we would share.
2. We welcome the notion that ALL secondary
schools are responsible for combating truancy, for improving behaviour
and for hard to place children.
3. The expectation that schools will work
closely with Children's Trusts is welcomed.
4. We also welcome the emphasis on the design
of a system of education around the needs of children and on personalisation.
5. We are concerned about the changing role
of local authorities especially as they have the responsibility
to implement the Every Child Matters agenda. If they lose
their maintaining responsibility for schools how will they be
able to monitor the delivery of the five key outcomes in schools?
6. There are schools that need to improve
particularly with regard to working in partnership with parents.
Where schools work in partnership with parents the benefits in
terms of outcomes for children and young people are huge. In our
experience parents want their children to be happy at school.
It would not occur to many of the parents we meet to request a
new school.
7. The role of the local authorities as
recruiter of a Parents' Champion is welcome. We welcome the proposals
to provide better information for parents.
8. "Choice advisers" will undoubtedly
help parents confused and worried by the plethora of choice of
secondary schools in London and in other urban areas.
9. We know that many parents need more than
a one-off session with a "choice adviser". Changing
school is rightly recognised as a daunting and difficult time
for parents and children; there are always some who have no school
to go to when September arrives. The reality of a "choice
adviser" needs to be imaginative if the process of transfer
is to be made more manageable and if children are not to lose
ground in their first year in secondary school.
10. The requirement to give parents information
on children's progress at least three times a year is welcome
but schools must find innovative ways of communicating this.
11. The decision to re-launch the guidance
on Home-School agreements is welcome. Where mediated by a support
worker they will undoubtedly be more successful. At present parents
sign them—but how many really understand what they have
signed and why? But this should not be where home-school links
begin and end. Successful intervention where problems are identified
early can prevent problems young people experience becoming intractable
and constructive home-school links can facilitate this.
12. We welcome the requirement of Ofsted
to report on schools' engagement with parents. We hope Ofsted
will not take a mechanistic view of this and refer only to schools'
legal obligations. Effective parental involvement in schools is
much more than that prescribed by law.
13. The stronger encouragement to involve
pupils in secondary schools in decision making through school
councils is welcome. Many primary schools also have school councils
so those in secondary schools need to build on the experience
many young people have already developed.
14. The additional funding that will be
made available for schools to provide information sessions when
children start at primary and secondary school is welcome—however,
time and thought need to be given to responding the kinds of questions
parents have. Some, unfamiliar with the UK system, may be unable
to articulate the anxieties they have and building trust takes
time.
15. The recommendation that schools should
develop the function of a Pupil and Parent Support worker mirrors
the role our School-Home Support Workers have in schools. It would
be a pity if the Pupil and Parent support worker role was too
narrowly conceived.
16. The continuing consultations with local
authorities about whether they have the tools they need to support
parents is welcome—it is our view that they do not, that
they need to recruit or commission from the voluntary sector where
there is considerable expertise.
17. We welcome the recognition of the role
of parents and of the needs of disadvantaged children and families—they
do need more resources. But we do consider that the White Paper
misses the point insofar as disadvantaged groups are concerned.
It is not they who will lobby for new schools or drive change.
For whatever reasons they are concerned that their children go
happily and safely to school, that they are happy there and are
not bullied. Within the context of their lives they are unlikely
to be able to campaign for new schools.
18. We know that there are some groups who
are more at risk of being troubled by the secondary transfer process:
The risk factors are:
— Children who have less parental support.
— They appear to teachers and other
adults o be less confident and mature young people.
— Their SATs results are below average.
— They are more likely to be from poorer
socio economic background.
— Their families suffer from poor health.
— They live in poor housing conditions.
— They suffer from material deprivation.
— The family are often led by a lone
parent.
— Children already have a pattern of
poor attendance or behavioural, social and emotional issues.
It is important to identify risk factors early
and make contingency plans so that these children have appropriate
secondary school places.
19. SHS makes a difference. Where secondary
schools employ School-Home Support workers:
— Attendance in Year 7 improves.
— Information about a Year 7 student
is received in time for schools to implement special provision.
— Students already "know"
main people in the secondary school when they attend.
— Parents feel supported and can ask
for advice.
— Fewer children are lost in the system.
— Children in Year 7 "settle in
better".
We have case studies available that illustrate
our interventions.
17. We are concerned that allowing popular
schools to expand may well affect less successful schools adversely.
It is not always the case the less popular schools are not good
schools. Small schools are often more successful with more challenging
children and young people because they are small—this is
a case where size does matter—in this instance—smallness.
November 2005
| 
