Supplementary memorandum submitted by
Vernon Coaker MP, Minister of State for Schools and Learners,
Department for Children, Schools and Families
Thank you for the interesting discussion at
the recent CSF Committee evidence session on School Accountability
on 8 July 2009. I undertook to write to you about the Schools
Commissioner role and Jon Coles promised that we would send additional
information on School Improvement Partners. Following concerns
expressed by some Committee members in the discussion on the School
Report Card, I also wanted to clarify Ofsted's position.
SCHOOLS COMMISSIONER
I should clarify that there is no mention of
the Schools Commissioner in legislationprimary or secondary
legislation. Of course during the passage of what became the Education
and Inspections Act 2006 there was discussion of Local Authorities
role as commissioners of services and in that context the role
of the Schools Commissioner arose but that debate did not translate
into any legislative provisions. As you know Sir Bruce Liddington
was appointed in the Autumn of 2006 as a Director in the Department
fulfilling the role of the Schools Commissioner. This role has
always been a standard civil service appointment, subject to the
normal appointment rules of the civil service. Civil servants
and expert consultants were recruited to the Office of the Schools
Commissioner (OSC)supporting Sir Bruce in his roleover
the following year or so, and there continue to be some 19 civil
servants working in this area. As Ed Balls said to you in a reply
to a Parliamentary Question on 9 March "Sir Bruce Liddington
did an excellent job supporting the commissioning of new schools
places, expanding our academies programme and developing National
Challenge Trusts". And as you also know Sir Bruce left the
Department at the end of last year to take up an important role
in the system.
As Jon Coles said in evidence, the Department will,
subject to budgetary constraints, advertise for a new Director
in Schools Directorate, though he will be reconfiguring to some
extent the responsibilities of senior civil servants in the Directorate.
There will of course continue to be a Director within Schools
Directorate with responsibility for the work of the Office of
the Schools Commissioner, as there is now, but alongside a range
of other responsibilities. This reflects the fact that following
the success of Sir Bruce, we can now move into a different phase
of worklooking to secure effective implementation alongside
embedding commissioning at LA level.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT
PARTNERS (SIPS)
The School Improvement Partners (SIPs) programme
was introduced alongside a number of other policies together known
as the New Relationship with Schools (NRwS) in 2005 after a trial
in 2004. SIPs were first deployed to secondary schools in a phased
roll out during 2005-06. At the same time, a pilot project for
SIPs in primary schools was carried out, as well as a trial of
SIPs in special schools. As a result of a successful pilot and
trial, SIPs were rolled out in primary schools from January 2007
and in special schools from September 2007. There have been SIPs
in all maintained schools since April 2008. Since its launch,
the SIP programme has been independently evaluated as follows:
2004 NFER evaluation of the NRwS trial.
2006 Cambridge University evaluation
of the special SIP pilot.
2006 York Consulting Ltd Evaluation of
the primary pilot.
2008 York Consulting Ltd Evaluation of
the NRwS.
A copy of the most recent report (2008 York
Consulting Ltd Evaluation of the NRwS) is attached to this letter.[16]
OFSTED
During discussion on the School Report Card,
concerns were expressed that Ofsted's independence was compromised
by it working together with the DCSF.
As with other public service inspectorates, the functions
of the Chief Inspector are clearly defined in law. Ofsted is a
non-Ministerial Government Department, accountable directly to
Parliament. The law also places the Chief Inspector under a duty
to provide advice to the Secretary of State, and establishes a
power to provide advice when the Chief Inspector considers it
appropriate to do so. The Chief Inspector can and does publish
her advice, in the form of reports and publications, some of which
are critical of government policy.
Ofsted's knowledge of the schools system is
an essential and valuable resource which the Department can and
should call upon to inform policy in relation to schools, including
the design of the accountability system. The Department has benefited
greatly from Ofsted's advice throughout the work to date developing
the School Report Card, leading up to both the initial, joint
consultation on the School Report Card in December 2008; and the
recent joint School Report Card Prospectus. Such joint working
is not a new departure. For example, in 2004, the Department and
Ofsted consulted jointly on the NRwS reforms. Inspection was a
key part of the NRwS and Ofsted worked with the Department to
develop a coherent set of proposals which were jointly presented.
As the Committee identified, it will be important that we establish
the right relationship between Ofsted inspection and the School
Report Card, so that there is coherence between the different
elements of the accountability system. Both the Department and
Ofsted have therefore taken the view that it will be of greatest
benefit to parents and to schools that we develop our proposals
for the School Report Card with similar engagement. Indeed, the
two organisations would be open to criticism if they did not properly
work together to ensure that there is a coherent and consistent
accountability system for schools. Both the Department and Ofsted
are clear that this in no way compromises Ofsted's independence,
and places no barrier on Ofsted criticising government policy,
where it considers it necessary to do so.
August 2009
16 Not printed. Back
|