4 Lessons for the DfE
Academies
42. Four of the five schools placed in special measures
in Birmingham were academies (three as part of the Park View Educational
Trust). Some commentators questioned whether the rise of academies
made it easier for governors to change the ethos of a school,
unchecked. For example, Sir Tim Brighouse commented:
The arrival of academies and free schools has
created an open season for lay people and professionals keen to
pursue their own eccentric ideas about schooling: and when trust
or governor vacancies occur, some perpetuate the very English
tradition of inviting friends to join them. When the community
is white it doesn't cause much comment. In mono-ethnic east Birmingham,
however, it is seen as a Muslim plot to expose pupils to an undefined
"extremism". [46]
43. This view was supported by an anonymous Birmingham
head, also writing in the Guardian, who reported his/her own observations
about how colleagues in other schools had been "marginalised,
ignored, belittled and patronised" and in some cases forced
out of jobs, before concluding:
This isn't really about Islam: it's about how
academies make it easy for governing bodies, a chair of governors,
or a sponsor with an agenda-religious or otherwise-to completely
undermine school leaders. There is simply no one stopping them.[47]
44. The DfE was criticised by both Ian Kershaw and
Peter Clarke for the speed at which academy chains had been allowed
to expand. Ian Kershaw recommended that "BCC, in consultation
with the DFE, should review the process of due diligence in determining
the suitability and capacity of a multi academy trust as a sponsor
of a maintained school converting to academy status".[48]
Peter Clarke told us that the process was currently "opaque"
and that, in the case of Golden Hillock which had been sponsored
by Park View Educational Trust, "no-one could actually set
out for me a very clear timeline of decision-making, rationale
and so on".[49]
45. Sir Michael Wilshaw told us in July 2014 that
"There is a big debate to be had about how increasingly autonomous
schools are going to have effective oversight".[50]
In his statement to the House a month earlier, Mr Gove undertook
to "work with Sir Michael Wilshaw to ensure, as he recommends,
that we can provide greater public assurance that all schools
in a locality discharge their full statutory responsibilities".[51]
He also stated that "one of the things that is clear from
the action that has been taken in schools today is that academies
and, for that matter, free schools, are subject to a higher level
of accountability than local authority schools".[52]
On 22 July Nicky Morgan was only slightly less categorical: "The
expansion of the academy programme has been one of the great success
stories of this Government, and the actions of a small number
of individuals will not divert us from that path".[53]
She told us: "I do not accept the premise that it is because
of academisation that these problems happened. It is because of
certain individuals that these problems happened".[54]
46. The Government nevertheless accepted Mr Clarke's
recommendations that the process for academy conversion needed
to be reviewed. Nicky Morgan told the House on 29 January that:
Since Peter Clarke's report was published, my
department has strengthened the process for converting to academy
status or joining a multi-academy trust. New checks are now done
on prospective trustees. Regional Schools Commissioners decide
convertor applications using local intelligence, with help from
local Headteacher Boards.[55]
Governance
47. The Trojan Horse Review Group asserted in their
report that "the central challenge emerging from [Kershaw's]
investigation and related matters is the credibility and transparency
of the framework within which school governors operate."
[56] Both Kershaw and
Clarke found the behaviour of governors to be at the heart of
what had occurred, leading to a series of recommendations on improving
governance in schools. Ofsted came to similar conclusions and
advised the Secretary of State on action to be taken to address
common issues with regard to governance, including mandatory training,
the introduction of professional governors and the publication
of Registers of Interest.[57]
48. The DfE has responded to the recommendations
by revising the Governor's Handbook to ensure that governors are
aware of their responsibilities and the skills required and to
address issues of whether governors have the capacity to serve
in more than one school. The handbook now also advises all schools
to publish information on their governing bodies on their websites.[58]
Whistle-blowing and warnings
49. One of the facts which emerged quickly from the
Trojan Horse story was that the difficulties faced by the schools
had been brought to the attention of Birmingham City Council and
the DfE on several occasions prior to the receipt of the anonymous
letter which precipitated the current investigations. In consequence,
all the inquiry reports referred to the need for improvements
in how information from whistle-blowers and more general warnings
are handled by the agencies involved.
50. Peter Clarke recommended that BCC, the DfE, Education
Funding Agency and Ofsted should review their respective channels
for raising issues of concern, and that "The Department for
Education should ensure that the receipt of sensitive complaints
forms part of the new Regional School Commissioners' responsibilities,
and that the Regional Schools Commissioners are able to refer
complaints and concerns to the relevant agency for further investigation".[59]
Sir Michael Wilshaw called for a review of whistleblowing procedures
for all schools, including academies, and within local government
and central government.[60]
51. The Clarke and Kershaw reports both referred
to the importance of improving how information is shared between
all those bodies which have responsibility for oversight of schools.
For example, Ian Kershaw pointed out that Ofsted focusses on school
governors in terms of support and challenge for the leadership
of the school and their ability to improve school performance
but not on their conduct more generally—"Ofsted does
not inspect good financial management, the quality, breadth and
balance of a school's curriculum offer to students, or the adequacy
of governance generally". This leaves a "fundamental
gap" and makes it vital that Ofsted, BCC, the DfE and the
EFA gather and share information.[61]
However, Mr Kershaw noted that "It is not possible to discern
a relationship between BCC, Ofsted, the DfE and the Education
Funding Agency in the process of sharing critical data and intelligence".
52. Peter Clarke added: "It seems that if you
have got a structure that is inevitably split because of the range
of agencies and departments involved, you need to make sure that
information is shared in a timely and efficient manner across
them."[62]
53. In her July 2014 statement, Nicky Morgan suggested
that the new head teacher boards "will be the best people
for teachers to turn to in the first instance" when issues
emerge in their schools.[63]
The DfE is putting in place new measures to address whistle-blowing,
including improvements to the process for schools staff and the
public to contact the Department and extending legal protections
for staff making whistle-blowing allegations.[64]
Its January 2015 update also set out the role of the Regional
Schools Commissioners in handling and responding to safeguarding
concerns and working with local authorities, Ofsted and others
to ensure that all complaints and concerns are identified and
reported to the DfE.[65]
Appointment of education commissioner
54. Following the publication of the Clarke report,
the DfE announced that a new education commissioner would be appointed
for Birmingham, reporting jointly to BCC and the Secretary of
State. Nicky Morgan added in her statement that "If we are
unable to make rapid progress with those new arrangements, I will
not hesitate to use my powers to intervene further".[66]
The appointment of the new education commissioner was considerably
delayed and it was not until 24 September-two months after the
statement-that it was announced that Sir Mike Tomlinson would
take up the role. The Secretary of State explained to us that
"it took time to find the right person over the course of
the summer and to negotiate with them and their release from other
activities".[67]
Due Diligence and Counter Extremism
Division
55. The DfE was the first Whitehall department to
set up its own counter-extremism unit when the Due Diligence and
Counter Extremism Division (DDCED) was established in late 2010
"to deliver DfE's commitments in the government's Prevent
strategy, and to carry out financial and non-financial due diligence
on those applying to set up free schools".[68]
The unit works "to ensure that children and young people
are safeguarded from extremists and extremist views in schools
or in out-of-school-hours learning, and stop young people from
becoming radicalised […] or acting on extreme views".[69]
56. In June 2014 the DDCED had 20 members of staff,
some of whom were supporting the work of the Education Commissioner
in his inquiry into Birmingham schools.[70]
Mr Gove told the House on 9 June 2014: "Unreported and under-appreciated,
[the unit] has prevented a number of extremist or unsuitable organisations
from securing access to public funds". [71]
57. Peter Clarke was critical of the DDCED in his
report. He told us:
If the division wants to fulfil what its title
suggests it should be doing, which is due diligence and counter-extremism,
it needs to improve its capacity to actually mount an investigation
[…] I was surprised to find that actually, the department
is not well-equipped at the moment to be an investigative body
and to carry out its role of ensuring due diligence around a whole
range of issues. I would suggest that it needs to up its game.[72]
58. In response to the Clarke report and the subsequent
Wormald review, the DfE has acted to strengthen the Division.
The Secretary of State told the House that she had "increased
my Department's capacity and expertise in counter extremism—dramatically
expanding the Due Diligence and Counter Extremism Group in the
DfE and placing it under the leadership of a full-time Director".[73]
The complement of staff at the time of the Wormald review had
grown to 25; following that review it is to be increased to 36.[74]
Other measures include introducing a system for staff across the
DfE to refer concerns about extremism to the DDCED; introducing
a case handling system within DDCED for warnings received; establishing
a Counter Extremism Steering Group; requiring briefing for all
Deputy Directors on extremism; and introducing monthly reports
from the DDCED to the DfE Management Committee on cases received
and action taken.[75]
59. We suggested to the Secretary of State that she
might consider publishing an annual report on the priorities and
activities of the DDCED. She was enthusiastic about the proposal,
responding "Certainly. It is always good to make clear to
people what it is there for and what it has been doing".[76]
Conclusions and recommendations
60. Our recent
report on academies and free schools addresses many of the issues
of oversight which have arisen in the context of the Trojan Horse
inquiries.[77]
The greater autonomy of academies makes it easier for a group
of similar-minded people to control a school. While it should
be remembered that several of the governors criticised in Birmingham
were local government appointees, the DfE needs to be alert to
the risks of abuse of academy freedoms of all kinds and be able
to respond quickly.
61. It is vital
that information is shared effectively between the various bodies
responsible for oversight of schools. This was a problem in Birmingham
and the DfE needs to keep its new arrangements under review to
ensure that they are working well.
62. The recent steps taken to strengthen the Due
Diligence and Counter Extremism Division are welcome, all the
more so for being overdue. The unit should also have a higher
profile. We recommend that the Secretary of State make an annual
written ministerial statement on the priorities and achievements
of the DDCED.
46 "Trojan horse affair: five lessons we must learn",
The Guardian, 17 June 2014, accessed 3 March 2015 Back
47
"A Birmingham head: Trojan horse is not about Islam, it's about academies",
The Guardian, 17 June 2014, accessed 3 March 2015 Back
48
Kershaw report, p.21 Back
49
Q208 Back
50
Q26 Back
51
HC Deb, 9 June 2014, col 266 Back
52
HC Deb, 9 June 2014, col 280-1 Back
53
HC Deb, 22 July 2014, col 1250 Back
54
Q405 Back
55
HC Deb, 29 January 2015, col 1017 Back
56
Trojan Horse Review group report, p.10 Back
57
HMCI: Advice note provided on academies and maintained schools
in Birmingham to the Secretary of State for Education, 9 June
2014 Back
58
Implementation of recommendations from "Report into allegations
concerning Birmingham schools arising from the 'Trojan Horse'
letter", DfE, 29 January 2015, p.7 Back
59
Clarke report, p.85 Back
60
HMCI: Advice note provided on academies and maintained schools
in Birmingham to the Secretary of State for Education, 9 June
2014 Back
61
Kershaw report, p.14 Back
62
Q206 Back
63
HC Deb, 22 July 2014, col 1258 Back
64
Implementation of recommendations from "Report into allegations
concerning Birmingham schools arising from the 'Trojan Horse'
letter", DfE, 29 January 2015, p.3 Back
65
Ibid Back
66
HC Deb, 22 July 2014, col 1248 Back
67
Q359 Back
68
Memorandum from the Department for Education Back
69
Ibid Back
70
Ibid Back
71
HC Deb, 9 June 2014, col 269 Back
72
Q226 Back
73
HC Deb, 29 January 2015, col 1017 Back
74
Wormald Review Back
75
Wormald Review Back
76
Q447 Back
77
Education Committee, Fourth Report of Session 2014-15, Academies and free schools,
HC 258 Back
|
