|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Jim Knight: In January 2007 some 18,800 children in maintained primary schools were identified as having an autistic spectrum disorder and provision made for them at the school action plus level of support as set out in the Special Education Needs code of practice or through a statement. Further information on SEN can be found in SFR 20/2007, which is available on the Departments website at:
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what proportion of 11-year-old children in care achieved at least level 4 at key stage 2 in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Jim Knight [holding answer 16 July 2007]: In 2006, the proportion of children continuously looked after for at least 12 months aged 11 and achieving at least level 4 at key stage 2 for English, maths and science was 43 per cent., 41 per cent. and 57 per cent. respectively(1). Although educational outcomes for children in care are improving slowly more needs to be done to close the achievement gap compared to all children.
Our White Paper, Care Matters: Time for Change describes how we will improve educational outcomes for children in care. Measures include giving all children in care at risk of not meeting expected levels of achievement a personal educational allowance of £500; requiring all schools to have a designated teacher to focus on the learning needs of this vulnerable group and funding virtual school heads to drive up attainment, school attendance and reduce exclusions of children in care. We also intend to legislate so that children in care move schools only in exceptional circumstances, particularly during their GCSE years.
(1) Statistical first release (SFR) 17/2007 Outcome Indicators for Looked After Children: 12 Months to 30 September 2006, England, www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families if he will list the curriculum changes in (a) primary schools and (b) secondary schools since 1 May 1997; and if he will make a statement. 
the introduction of a statement setting out the rationale for the school curriculum, including its values and aims;
a new general statement on inclusion, setting out the different ways in which teachers should ensure that individuals or
groups of pupils are provided with appropriate opportunities for learning across all national curriculum subjects;
the introduction of revised English programmes of study at key stages 1 and 2 which are aligned with the national literacy strategy Framework for Teaching;
the introduction of revised mathematics programmes of study at key stages 1 and 2 which are aligned with the Framework for Teaching Mathematics;
the introduction of a non-statutory framework for the teaching of personal, social and health education.
the introduction of a statement setting out the rationale for the school curriculum, including its values and aims;
a new general statement on inclusion, setting out the different ways in which teachers should ensure that individuals or groups of pupils are provided with appropriate opportunities for learning across all national curriculum subjects;
the introduction of citizenship as a subject at key stages 3 and 4;
allowing more flexibility at key stage 4 to enable pupils making significantly less progress than their peers to focus on fewer subjects and allow talented pupils to build on their strengths.
In September 2004, the key stage 4 curriculum was amended to reduce the number of compulsory national curriculum subjects to six: English, mathematics, science, ICT, citizenship and physical education. We also introduced entitlement areas in languages, design and technology, the arts, and humanities.
further reduce prescription;
create flexibility for teachers to support pupils who are struggling to master the basic skills of English and mathematics;
free up time and space for greater personalisation of the curriculum, allowing pupils to study some areas in more depth;
increase the emphasis placed on developing personal, learning and thinking skills.
Dan Norris: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what the funding was per (a) primary and (b) secondary school pupil in the Bath and North East Somerset council area in each year from 1995-96 to 2006-07. 
Jim Knight: The revenue funding figures per pupil aged 3-10 and 11-15 for Bath and North East Somerset local authority for years 1997-98 to 2005-06 are given in the following table. Comparable figures are not available for 1995-96 to 1996-97.
|Primary (3 to 10-year-olds)||Secondary (11 to 15-year-olds)|
| Notes :|
1. Price base: Real terms at 2005-06 prices, based on gross domestic product deflators as at 27 September 2006.
2. Figures reflect relevant sub-blocks of standard spending assessment/education formula spending settlements and exclude the pensions transfer to EFS.
3. Total funding also includes all revenue grants in DCSF departmental expenditure limits relevant to pupils aged 3-10 and 11-15, and exclude education maintenance allowances and grants not allocated at local education authority level
4. The pupil numbers used to convert £ million figures to £ per pupil are those underlying the SSA/EFS settlement calculations plus PLASC 3-year-old maintained pupils and estimated 3 to 4-year-olds funded through state support in maintained and other educational institutions where these are not included in the SSA pupil numbers.
5. Founding: figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
6. Status: some of the grant allocations have not been finalised, if these do change, the effect on the funding figures is expected to be minimal.
The revenue per pupil figures shown in the following table are taken from the dedicated schools grant that was introduced in April 2006. They are in cash terms. They are not comparable with those for the years 1997-98 to 2005-06 because the introduction of the DSG in 2006-07 fundamentally changed how local authorities are funded.
The 1997-98 to 2005-06 figures are based on education formula spending that formed the education part of the local government finance settlement, plus various grants. This was an assessment of what local authorities needed to fund education rather than what they spent. In addition, the DSG has a different coverage to EFS. EFS comprised a schools block and an LEA block (to cover LEA central functions) whereas DSG covers only the school block. LEA block items are still funded through DCLGs local government finance settlement but education items cannot be separately identified. Consequently, there is a break in the Departments time series as the two sets of data are not comparable. An alternative time series is currently under development.
To provide a comparison for 2006-07 DSG, the Department has isolated the schools block equivalent funding in 2005-06; as described above this does not represent the totality of education funding in that year. As the DSG is just a mechanism for distributing funding there is not a primary/secondary split available. The figures are for all funded pupils aged 3-15.
1.The revenue funding per pupil figures only run to 2005-06 because we cannot provide a consistent time series beyond that year as the introduction of the DSG in 2006-07 fundamentally changed how local authorities are funded. The 1997-98 to 2005-06 figures are based on EFS, which formed the education part of the local government finance settlement, plus various grants. This was an assessment of what local authorities needed to fund education rather than what they spent. In 2006-07 funding for schools changed with the introduction of the DSG which is based largely on an authoritys previous spending,
2. In addition, DSG has a different coverage to EFS: EFS comprised a schools block and an LEA block (to cover LEA central functions) whereas DSG only covers the school block. LEA block items are still funded through DCLGs local government finance settlement but education items cannot be separately identified. This means we have a break in our time series as the two sets of data are not comparable, an alternative time series is currently under development.
3. To provide a comparison for 2006-07 DSG, we have isolated the schools block equivalent funding in 2005-06; as described above this does not represent the totality of education funding in that year.
4. Some of the grant allocations have not been finalised. If these do change, the effect on the funding figures is expected to be minimal.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what assessment he has made of the (a) costs and (b) benefits of raising the education leaving age to 18 years; and if he will make a statement. 
I have placed a copy in the Library of the House. We estimate that there will be one-off costs of around £200 million, made up of £80 million for new buildings and facilities, and £120 million for the training of new staff. We estimate that there will be annual costs of around £740 million on top of costs already factored into achieving our existing aspiration of 90 per cent. participation of 17-year-olds by 2015. This is made up of £590 million in additional participation costs, £50 million in additional funding for local authorities (to run the registration system, to provide additional support and guidance, and to enforce the duty), £10 million in enforcement costs and £90 million in additional costs to support those with special educational needs.
Initial analysis suggests that the additional economic benefit to the economy from all young people participating to 18, over and above the current 90 per cent. participation aspiration, is around £1.4 billion for a single cohort of young people (discounted over their lifetime). The likely benefits of raising the participation age are much wider than this, however, as we know those who participate and attain post 16 enjoy better health, better social skills and reduced likelihood of being involved in crime.
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what estimate he has made of the number of additional pupils aged over 16 years who will be in (a) schools, (b) further education colleges
and (c) other academic and vocational education if the education leaving age is raised to 18; and if he will make a statement. 
Jim Knight: Figure 4.3 of the Raising Expectations: staying in education and training post-16 Green Paper, shows the number of additional 16 to 17-year-olds we would expect to be participating in each learning setting if we introduce compulsory participation to age 18. The overall population of 16 and 17-year-olds is projected to decrease after 2007/08, so the increases in participation numbers are not as great as they would be without this demographic trend.
Mr. Brady: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the oral answer of 10 July 2007, on school sixth forms, by which mechanism (a) funding for new sixth forms will be routed through local education authorities and (b) pupils involved in 14 to 19 programmes in (i) schools and (ii) further education colleges will be funded. 
Jim Knight: Arrangements for the transition of funding for 16 to 18's in school sixth forms and colleges to local authorities, including the mechanisms which will be used to route funds through local authorities to schools, will be subject to consultation to ensure there will be no disruption to schools and colleges and the introduction of diplomas, and subject to the passage of the necessary legislation,
Funding of diplomas at key stage 4 from 2008-09 will be through a new specific formula grant to local authorities, as announced in the written statement on school funding made to Parliament on 25 June.
Mr. Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many spare places there are for pupils in (a) West Chelmsford constituency and (b) Chelmsford local authority area in (i) primary and (ii) secondary schools. 
Jim Knight [holding answer 16 July 2007]: The Department collects information annually from each local authority on the numbers of surplus school places. The most recent data available is for 2006. The following tables outline the numbers of surplus places in primary and secondary schools within the West Chelmsford parliamentary constituency and the Chelmsford district council area, which falls within Essex local authority area.
|Surplus places in primary schools in West Chelmsford in 2006|
|School name||Surplus places|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|