Examination of Witnesses (Questions 1-19)
MR PAUL
COLLARD AND
MS ALTHEA
EFUNSHILE
8 OCTOBER 2007
Q1 Chairman: Can I welcome Paul Collard
and Althea Efunshile to our proceedings. I will put their minds
at rest immediately and say that the demonstrations outside are
nothing to do with creativity and their programmes but about some
other matter that is being discussed at this moment, the statement
on Iraq. Apologies for the thin attendance today but some of our
members have been poached by Ministers for various jobs and shadow
jobs, so we are a depleted number until we are reborn as a new
Committee after the Queen's Speech. However, we were determined
to finish both a small inquiry that we are undertaking on Special
Educational Needs, which is dear to our hearts, but also this
look at creativity in schools, which has been a passion of Fiona's
for a long time. She has been pushing us to pay serious attention
to it for a long time and we were delighted to do it, even though
we are going to push it into this last bit of the old session
of Parliament, so it is thanks to Fiona that we are all here and
discussing something that is certainly close to the hearts of
the three members of the Committee you have with you today. You
have got a tremendous amount of experience and Althea is an old
hand at presenting evidence to this Committee, and we were very
impressed when she was here before when she helped us make the
Special Educational Needs inquiry a lot better than it could have
been. Paul and Althea, tell us what difference this programme
has made? Have you any general remarks before you start and who
is going to go first?
Ms Efunshile: If I can just say
we very much welcome the opportunity so thank you very much indeed
for having this inquiry. Creative Partnerships is really very
important to the Arts Council. Paul will be answering most of
the questions because Paul, as you know, has been leading this
programme very successfully for quite some time. However, I certainly
wanted to make sure that you were aware of the commitment that
the Arts Council has, both to the wider subject of creativity
and young people, and how important that is, but also to the part
that Creative Partnerships plays in that role. I think that is
probably all that I wanted to say rather than read out a long
statement at the outset.
Q2 Chairman: Paul?
Mr Collard: I will plunge right
in at the deep end and talk about the impact that I think the
programme has had. To start off with I think we need to define
what impact we are looking to have. Essentially, we are concerned
with developing a series of skills and behaviours in young people
that we think will make them not only more successful at school
but more successful in life broadly afterwards. This set of skills,
which we loosely call the creative skills, centres around not
only the ability to think imaginatively but to communicate effectively,
to work well in teams, to take risks, to challenge, to ask questions,
to be undismayed by failure, to be very resilient in the work
that they do, and to come to school motivated and to enjoy that
experience. It is that set of behaviours we would like to see
happen. Our belief is that when you talk outside school, to employers
for instance, and you ask them what they are looking for in young
people, they are very clear that they need numerate, literate
young people but they also need this wider set of skills and behaviour
that I think we are about delivering for them. Terry Leahy, the
Chief Executive of Tesco's, just three weeks ago gave a speech
in which he was talking about the need for that wider set of skills
and behaviours to be present in all young people going into employment.
There was a recent big report on IT graduates and their lack of
social skills. They are now nearly all doing jobs in other organisations
where they need to be able to communicate about the IT to lay
people, and that requires skills and so on and so forth. You see
that being consistently reflected back. Clearly what you do not
want is for those skills to be developed at the expense of any
academic attainment; what you want is both those things going
on simultaneously, and therefore, for us, the research into our
impact has to prove that we are getting both those things—improvements
in narrow educational standards but also these wider behaviours.
We also need to try and do it in a way that is relatively light
touch, so in beginning to identify a set of additional things
that we want to ensure that young people have, we do not want
to develop a whole network of confidence inspectors descending
on schools and checking on the confidence of young people. So
how do we collect that information in a light touch way and how
do we collect it effectively? That is what we are setting out
to do. One of the first things that we did was we asked David
Lammy, the Minister, to invite Ofsted to inspect our programme
because we thought these people are the experts but also they
are the people who should tell us how to make our programme better.
A lot of us do not come from an educational background (although
we take a lot of educational advice) and here was an opportunity
to make sure we got that better. Secondly, we went out and asked
a lot of headteachers who are running our programmes in their
schools what impact that is having there. Thirdly, we have been
tracking, as far as we can, the performance of young people directly
involved in the programme. So if I pick up on some of those bits
of the research, there is a set of figures that we have recently
compiled putting in the 2006 GCSE results. We have looked at all
the Creative Partnerships (CP) secondary schools and we have looked
at how the percentage achieving five GCSEs has gone up over the
period since we started operating in 2002. We have compared it
with other schools in the same local authorities, because they
have a lot of the same characteristics, and we have also looked
at the national figures, the national average, and what you get—and
I can send this formally afterwards—is an average improvement
in GCSE results of 10.4% for CP secondary schools; 7.7% for non-CP
secondary school in the same local authorities, and 6% nationally,
so it is going on for double the rate. We deal with difficult
schools, we deal with schools that are at very low levels, but
we are by no means the only programme in those schools and we
would not say for a moment that it is entirely down to us. It
is just allaying the notion right from the start that there is
any conflict between what we do and improving standards. If you
look at the Ofsted report they said the same thing. At all the
schools they visited standards are higher. They cannot prove it
was CP but it is certainly not doing anything to put that aside.
So we then move on to saying, all right then, we can show that,
and the study of 13,000 young people that National Foundation
Educational Research (NFER) completed for us showed exactly the
same. Children in schools who had done CP work improved at a rate
faster than other children in the same school who had not and
they improved at a faster rate at Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 4
than the national average. They met the Key Stage 3 national average
but that was far above their expected performance level. What
we wanted to do was get a sense of: "But what about these
behaviours; are the behaviours present and there?" The first
thing we did was go and interview all our headteachers. This was
not a survey of a sample of them; we actually went after asking
all of them what difference Creative Partnerships had actually
made to children in their schools, and particularly focusing on
their performance. You can see in evidence that we have already
submitted that 90% said behaviour was better, motivation was better,
enjoyment was better, communications were better; all those skills
and behaviours that we were looking for had improved. This comes
back to my point of saying actually the only way you can observe
this is by asking adults who work with the children whether it
is true. You can check, triangulate it if you like, by asking
Ofsted to go and ask the same questions; we did and Ofsted said
exactly the same thing. In the schools that we went into what
we saw is what the headteachers saw: more confident and better
communicators; more enjoyment; more motivation and so forth generally
across the piece. There is quite a lot of other research that
we are doing, but I think those are the headlines that we wanted
to get across. We certainly do not seem in any way to impact negatively
on standards. In fact, the general evidence is schools that do
CP do better than other schools, but in addition there is a set
of skills and behaviours that we have nurtured which is evident
to the people meeting those young people and has been reported
as such.
Q3 Chairman: Good, so let us get
the questioning started then. Let me open by asking what does
this look like on the ground? One of the problems is that apart
from individual visits the Committee has not got time to go to
schools and look at programmes that are operating, which we do
with every other inquiry, and so where does creativity begin and
where does it end? When I went to school I suppose we always thought
that creativity was somebody coming in and playing the piano or
performing arts or a small theatre group, and of course all of
us have seen some very interesting innovation that is not part
of this partnership in schools, it is not the only show in town,
and some of the evidence that we were given sort of hinted that
"we do this on a much smaller budget just as effectively".
What does it look like on the ground? I was talking to John Sorrell
on Saturday and, of course, joinedupdesignforschools is
wonderfully creative in my view. Does that sort of thing fit into
your programme?
Mr Collard: Yes, we are doing
quite a lot of work on the Building Schools for the Future (BSF)
programme in working with young people and teachers to create
opportunities to develop visions for Schools for the Future in
order to be able to articulate that back to architects as they
become clients. It is very similar to the work that John Sorrell
has been doing. I would say I love what he does. I think we do
a lot of that as well and it is desperately needed because I think
otherwise—and you, as a Committee, have reflected upon this
recently with your report on Sustainable Schools[1]—without
better thinking by schools and teachers about what schools of
the future will look like, we are just going to end up with old
schools providing the same education. I see that as really key.
How does this operate on the ground? In our best practice—and
that is what Ofsted were pointing to and we are now trying to
roll out consistently across it all—is that we need to identify
when we start with a school exactly what issue in the school it
is that we are dealing with. We can then identify appropriate
creative professionals to come in and work with that school on
dealing with that issue. The issue can vary enormously. In one
school it can be listening and speaking skills in reception class;
in the next school you will be starting with truancy; in another
school you will be doing BSF and so on and so forth, so there
is a wide range of starting points that we work on, and I think
Ofsted are very clear in their report that we work best when we
are clear, when we start with exactly what issue it is that we
are going to address.
Q4 Chairman: That sounds like a professional
from outside coming into the school and taking hold of this. Is
that always the way it happens or what do you do in terms of professional
development of the in-house teaching staff?
Mr Collard: I think you should
think of Creative Partnerships as being a professional development
programme for teaching staff. That is what we do. What we have
learnt in our experience from working with teachers is that teachers
are not terribly good classroom learners; they are very good experiential
learners, and when you go and talk to a teacher in the first case
and say, "You could do this," when you get them in a
seminar room, what you tend to hear a lot is, "Oh that's
very good and that's a good example but it would not work with
my children." Until you have done it in their class with
their children it is very hard to persuade them that it is really
going to work, so therefore what we are really doing is going
into their classrooms with their children, with other professionals,
and showing them that it works. Once we have done that they then
adopt it for themselves. A couple of weeks ago Althea and I visited
a couple of schools in Basildon in which we operate, and what
was interesting about it is I do not think any of the schools
were doing anything other than what they had permission for, were
encouraged to do in current Department for Children, Schools and
Families (DCSF) guidelines and may possibly have had the money
to do, but they did not know how to do and they did not want to
take the risk until they had been shown how to do it. That, for
us, is what we are about. We do not believe we need to be there
forever. We need to be there for a while until we have got them
to the point of confidence to do that for themselves and we have
opened up a whole series of new opportunities for them.
Q5 Chairman: Althea, how do
you view this in terms of the Arts Council? I ought to declare
an interest; I have a member of my family who works for your organisation
but that does not mean to say I cannot give you a hard time! Althea,
how does it look from your perspective from the Arts Council?
It is rather new territory for you, is it not?
Ms Efunshile: I will start with
the visit to the schools in Thurrock and Essex and then move back—
Q6 Chairman: It has moved, it was
not Thurrock.
Mr Collard: Thurrock and Basildon.
We were at one school in each; it was the same visit.
Ms Efunshile: --- And then move
back to the Arts Council. Creative Partnerships is new territory
so I have come at it with fresh eyes really. What I found difficult
at first was that question that you have just asked: what does
it look like? I think it is a programme where you do have to see
it and feel it to understand it. I have been very impressed by
the extent to which in the schools that I have visited teachers
have been given, if you like, permission to take risks around
the sorts of issues that they are concerned about. It is not that
there is a programme with a set of ingredients that they then
work their way through; it is that as a teacher I am trying to
think through how I deliver this aspect of the curriculum and
I want to make it more interesting and more engaging for children,
and as a school we have an attendance issue and so on and so forth,
very much as Paul has described. I too was very struck by the
fact that this is very much about developing creativity, not just
amongst the pupils but amongst the teaching staff as well, so
it is that sense of Creative Partnerships as a form of continuing
professional development and a way in which creative practitioners
from outside the school and the pupils and the teachers engage
together and learn from each other. It is not about imparting
the arts in school; it is about using the arts in order to encourage
creativity. As an Arts Council this is really very important to
us because we work to get more great art to more people. We are
a development agency, we are there to develop and promote the
arts right across the country. We fund approximately 1,000 organisations
regularly in order that they can produce the arts. We see the
arts as having substantial power, if you like, to change people's
lives and to impact on local communities. Children and young people
are a key to that vision. Children and young people are key because
if we work with children at a very young age then we are more
likely to encourage a passion for the arts at that younger age.
We think it is important that we build a passion for the arts
and a knowledge of how to be creative in young people so that
they can take the opportunity later on to be members of the creative
industries and so on. Creative Partnerships is one of the routes
in and through that. We have a range of other programmes with
children and young people as well but certainly Creative Partnership
is one of those ways through, hence my opening comments about
the importance of such programmes to the Arts Council.
Q7 Chairman: One more thing before
Fiona and David take over and that is in terms of listening to
what you are saying and reading all the material that I have read
in relation to this, I got a feeling—and these two will
groan about this—when we were looking at citizenship it
seemed to me we needed to get the mind-set of children opened
to a more participatory mode of behaviour in school, which we
saw in some of the schools that we went to, and indeed I was with
Andrew Adonis at the launch of the Schools Councils Report a couple
of weeks ago. It just seems to me that you need a synthesis for
this work between how children operate in the school as a young
citizen and being able to think and act creatively. It just seemed
to me that it was the whole package. Are you not in danger of
giving it that brand: this is creativity, it is dancing, it is
singing, it is performing, rather than actually sitting at your
computer and doing fascinating things in quite different ways?
Bill Gates is creative, is he not?
Ms Efunshile: One of your questions
early on, to which Paul answered, was something along the lines
of how would we define creativity, and what Paul did not say was
that it was about the arts. Creativity is not synonymous with
the arts, it is not synonymous with music or dance and so on.
Creativity is about that ability to be questioning, that ability
to think outside of the box, that ability to use one's imagination
in a purposeful and valuable way. I think the way that we would
be wanting to think about creativity from an Arts Council perspective
is rather more about the behaviours that it generates in the child
rather than the route through. What Creative Partnerships does
and what the Arts Council would seek to do is to use the arts
in order to invoke and encourage that creativity. I would certainly
argue and have seen that the arts are a very powerful route in.
Artists are creative and so what they are doing is transferring
their creative skills, if you like, into the school right across
the curriculum. I think that is what is very important. This is
not about teaching the arts; it is about using the arts so that
the teaching of mathematics or the teaching of history or the
teaching of science can be more successful.
Q8 Chairman: I understand that. I
came across a very interesting scheme with a football club recently
which said for a long long time that they had been just going
to a school, finding the talented kids who have got a natural
interest and can kick a ball reasonably well and all the other
kids were left alone, and they have started this new programme
where the kids come in and they design the fan magazine and they
help at the turnstiles and they do all the other things associated
with a premier sports club. The worry I had on reading some of
the material was that the kids who were not natural singers or
musicians or whatever might again be left on the sidelines.
Mr Collard: No, I do not think
so at all. It is very much not about that. It is a product, if
you like, of Creative Partnerships that young people are exposed
to the arts and artists but it is not the purpose to do that.
The purpose is to develop behaviours and skills in them, as Althea
said, as well as helping the teachers teach more imaginatively
and creatively. You have mentioned citizenship, you have mentioned
football clubs, and I will mention enterprise and the work of
Enterprise Insight and say that we have worked very closely with
the Citizenship Foundation. What citizenship has is a curriculum
and a lot of teachers wanting to know how to make it work, and
we work very effectively with them. Very often the issue that
the school will identify is "can you help us with citizenship?",
and we are able to bring in the professionals to help make the
citizenship bit work. Enterprise Insight, which is trying to develop
a set of behaviours and skills which is interchangeable with that
which we would identify, do not have networks of schools, so therefore
in Enterprise Week a lot of the projects are Creative Partnerships
projects because we have the network of organisations on the ground
that can find it. Where do the football clubs come in? If the
football clubs are doing it, that is fine. If the school says,
"I want something that is not a football club," our
job is to find that, if you see what I mean, and to broker that.
I think all these things do join up and there are a lot of similarities,
but I think our network of brokers and trainers is what distinguishes
us from the other programmes.
Chairman: I am going through the five
sets of questions, I started I hope broadly on one, so who wants
to pick up on that?
Q9 Fiona Mactaggart: I would like
to pick up on that. Althea, I was very interested in what you
said at the beginning because I have to say my impression at the
start of the Creative Partnership programme was that the Arts
Council was rather miffed in that it felt that money that ought
to be going to proper arts was now being diverted into stuff in
schools. Are you telling us that there is a change in heart or
that in practice something has made the Arts Council feel that
this is an appropriate way of spending its money?
Ms Efunshile: I was not around
seven years ago so I will skip along from there, but children
and young people certainly are a priority for the Arts Council,
so in terms of the current corporate plan, our current agenda
for the Arts Council, children and young people are one of the
six priorities. In terms of where does one access children and
young people, how do we do that? We access children and young
people and impact on them in a number of ways, I suppose the key
ways are through the regularly funded organisations. 90% of those
have some sort of programme for children and young people and
that is something that we encourage and that we welcome and that
we want to see more of, so that is one way through. We also have
a range of projects and programmes which are not necessarily the
focus of this session such as Arts Award, Arts Extend, Cultural
Hubs and so on, where we have the ability to work with children
and young people. There is also partnership work increasingly
with children's trusts in local authorities and so on. Creative
Partnerships therefore sits within that family of programmes,
initiatives, work and partnerships that the Arts Council has and
has developed in order that we can pursue that priority. I think
there are questions that the Arts Council would ask about the
extent to which it is appropriate for it to be delivering a programme
such as Creative Partnerships as opposed to commissioning a programme
in that way, and certainly there are conversations which have
been on-going within the Arts Council for the last year or so
now which are about the extent to which we can move to a position
where in fact there is more of a commissioning role of Creative
Partnerships rather than the Arts Council delivering it, but that
does not change what would happen on the ground, and certainly
Creative Partnerships across the nine regions in the Arts Council
is playing an increasingly important part in those nine regional
strategies for arts development in that area. I am thinking particularly
of examples in the East of England where Creative Partnerships
is playing an important role in that regional strategy in terms
of regeneration of the local area, using Creative Partnerships
as a vehicle. In other areas, Creative Partnerships is very central
to the wider strategy for children and young people. I would want
to say, yes, I think there has been a shift, and I am aware that
there may well have been questions at the outset, but I think
certainly, under Paul's leadership, the programme is vibrant,
it is successful, it is thriving and the possibilities are very
clear.
Mr Collard: I have been here a
little bit longer but again I was not here at the start. I was
on the National Council of the Arts Council when Creative Partnerships
was invented and then I left and then I came back to run this
programme because I, like the Council, thought it was fantastically
important. I do not think the Arts Council has doubted it. I think
that there has been rhetoric from some of the regularly funded
organisations of the Arts Council that the money should have gone
directly to them. I think that the Arts Council recognised that
the money was a new opportunity. It was an opportunity to connect
with creative professionals and cultural organisations it had
not connected with before. Out of the 5,500 individuals or organisations
we have commissioned to work in schools to date we know from research
that we have done that 60% of them have never worked with the
Arts Council before. We see that as a real success. 40% of them
have never worked in the public sector before and they are now
working in schools and delivering schools programmes, and we think
that that is a real success. So the way that we have brought more
people into this and reached out is very significant. Secondly,
and you will know this from your personal experience, in a lot
of the places we set up shop there was no regularly funded organisation.
There were probably museums or theatres up the road who felt they
could have done it for you. In Slough there was nothing and CP
arrived in Slough and became that and has brought into existence
some cultural organisations which did not exist before and done
a whole lot of things to develop the cultural infrastructure and
the opportunities which now exist for people in Slough. That is
much more typical of the places that we operate. Whether it is
Margate in East Kent or Bolsover or the Forest of Dean or up in
the Cumbrian Coast, and so on and so forth, these are places where
there was nobody to deliver and we have gone and trained people
to deliver. We have brought cultural organisations into existence
in order to be able to do that and support that and for the Arts
Council that was really important. I think it has changed the
geographical reach of the Arts Council very dramatically. I think
the National Council and the senior staff believe that, but amongst
the regularly funded organisations there will always be some who
will say, "Give it to us," and it is not the only constituency
that says, "Give us the money and we would have done it,
you would not have needed all this"; you sometimes find that
from local authorities saying, "You do not need Creative
Partnerships, just give us the money and we would do it much more
effectively." However, I do not think in reality it can be
duplicated in quite that way.
Q10 Fiona Mactaggart: You also said,
Paul, that one of the things that creativity is about is encouraging
young people to challenge and ask questions. I think that is true.
How well do you think that fits with the National Curriculum?
Do you think Creative Partnerships feels as though it goes with
the grain or feels as though it goes against the grain?
Mr Collard: There have been a
number of reviews of the curriculum recently which have all been
rolled out. If you go into those documents and look at their ambition
they would describe young people like we see them, that is what
they are trying to do. The question arises as to whether sufficient
investment has been made in the professionals in the classroom
who are actually having to do it to help them be able to manage
young people in this way because it is clearly different from
what they have had to achieve before. In the many submissions
that you received as a Committee there is a very good one from
Anne Bancroft --- sorry Anne Bamford—
Q11 Chairman: Anne Bancroft was the
star of The Graduate!
Mr Collard: It may have been her
but I suspect not!
Q12 Chairman: She is dead!
Mr Collard: Anne Bamford has done
a summary of all the research on arts interventions and education
in the world and she contrasts the approaches of different countries,
and in particular she talks about the Mongolian experience where
they developed a series of really excellent national curricula
but which have made no real difference to the curriculum because
nobody was training the teachers how to do it. I am a big fan
of the Mongolian education system but I am thinking that we need
to go one better than them on this, to support the teachers to
be able to do that. The CPD element is partly what we do and we
are there to provide the support to the teachers to learn how
to do that—and we do that—but there is another part
where the education system now needs to support us in this, which
is to put in place some form of evaluation of those behaviours
which show that we recognise them as much as the other forms of
evaluation that we have in place. The QCA have a very useful document
which you will have all seen, it is the structure of the whole
of education—
Q13 Chairman: This is a little naughty
in the sense that our scribes cannot describe it so it will make
no sense at all in the written record!
Mr Collard: QCA, in describing
the purposes of education, have three headlines which are that
they want to end up with successful learners, confident individuals
and responsible citizens. What we currently measure is successful
learners insofar as they past tests, but we do not actually have
people coming out with certificates in confidence and communication;
we do not have certificates of responsible citizenship. I do not
want to impose on the education system yet another labyrinthine
way of measuring that, but we have to come up with something which
says that these outcomes which we have described in our National
Curriculum are given as much value and as much importance as the
ones that are subject specific. We do not do that currently. Often
DCSF, as they are now, will say to us, "What evidence have
you got you are achieving confident individuals and responsible
citizens?" and our reply is, frankly, "What evidence
have you got that you are doing it?" because you have said
that is the point of education.
Q14 Chairman: I am sorry I described
your behaviour just now as "naughty". I was at a four-year-old's
birthday party yesterday and that is the reason that escaped!
Mr Collard: I am used to it!
Q15 Fiona Mactaggart: Have Creative
Partnerships developed tools for assessing those sorts of things?
Mr Collard: I think we know it
when we see it and headteachers know it. We have asked headteachers
and they have said, "Yes, when you come in, we see it,"
and we said to Ofsted, "Well, Ofsted, did you see it?"
and when Ofsted came in they said, "Yes, we saw that as well."
However, people say it is very subjective, it was just the headteachers
and maybe they would have said that anyway, and so on and so forth.
We are saying no, they would not. I do not think that is true.
What else do you want? Do you want confidence inspectors or are
we willing to trust headteachers to tell us that this programme
works? At the end of the day I do not believe there is any headteacher
in the country who is going to lie about the programme. For what
benefit? Either it works for their kids or it does not work for
their kids. In the way schools describe themselves and in the
way that the education system describes what success is in schools,
we have to find ways of identifying what confident, strong communicators
and successful citizens look like and recognise that. I do not
think it is hard to do. We know it is there; we just sometimes
do not trust the messengers.
Q16 Chairman: Headteachers sometimes
say nice things about things that bring extra resources into their
schools.
Mr Collard: They do.
Q17 Chairman: How much does a school
get if they are part of this deal?
Mr Collard: A core school, which
is the model that we have been operating up until now, would expect
to get something like £20,000 to £25,000 a year coming
into the school. £25,000 to £30,000 would be at the
upper end and that would be in a secondary school and the average
secondary school budget is £4.5 million. Are you going to
lie about it in that particular context? And given the pressure
you are under as a headteacher today to be delivering, have you
got time to be distracted in a sense by something that you are
really not convinced is making a difference to your school? No,
you do not, you absolutely do not.
Q18 Chairman: But you are delivering
a programme through mostly secondary schools, are you not?
Mr Collard: No, it is almost the
same as the national model of about seven primaries to a secondary.
Q19 Chairman: Do you poll the students
to see what they think of it?
Mr Collard: We have not yet actually;
that is something we ought to do. There was an early piece of
research which we were contemplating and it did raise a particular
question. Most of the impact research would tend to ask the young
person: "Are you different because this happened to you?"
and the thing about young people is that they change, that is
their state, they change dramatically, and for them to be able
to identify an input on a 13-year-old: "Have you changed
much in the last year?" "Yes, I've hit puberty."
"Was it Creative Partnerships?" "I don't think
so." It is quite hard for them to place this kind of change
because they do not necessarily know any alternatives. One of
the ways that you can get them to do it, which we encourage a
lot, is getting students from CP schools to visit other schools
and say, "Do you think this school is different?" and,
"Are there things you like or dislike about it?"
Chairman: You could get a reasonably
articulate response from schools councils where the students are
empowered and would have an opinion, but let us move on, David?
1 Education and Skills Committee, Sustainable Schools:
Are we building schools for the future? Seventh Report of
Session 2006-07, HC 140-I. Back
|
