Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Lucas: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn during pleasure until 8.22 p.m.
Moved accordingly, and, on Question, Motion agreed to.
[The Sitting was suspended from 8.19 to 8.22 p.m.]
House again in Committee on Clause 30.
Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede moved Amendment No. 129:
After Clause 31, insert the following new clause--
The noble Lord said: The purpose of the amendment is that a local education authority should act as a clearing house for admissions to secondary schools. The amendment as drafted is a little narrower than I had originally intended. I had originally intended that a local education authority should also distribute school prospectuses and other supporting information to parents who are deciding where their children should go at the secondary stage.
The amendment arises out of a plea from the heart which I received from a friend who is the head teacher of a primary school in central Battersea, which is a feeder school for what has unfortunately become one of the sink schools in Wandsworth. That is a pejorative term but it is the popular perception of that school.
My friend the head teacher spends a lot of his time explaining to parents of pupils that they should take advantage of the choice now available to them in the London Borough of Wandsworth. He encourages them to exercise choice and think of moving their children further afield. However, his impression is that many of the parents are simply overwhelmed by the amount of time it would take to exercise their choice properly and make an informed judgment about what is best for their children.
Many children go to the local school for no better reason than that it is where their elder brothers and sisters have gone and where the other children are going. The head teacher said that the one thing that would lighten the burden for parents would be to have a single port of call to obtain information and literature about the availability of school places and the types of schools available. I propose in this amendment that the LEA should be given that role. The authority is not expected to be an advocate for any particular school. The sole purpose of the amendment is that the LEA should be a clearing house and a source of information for all schools in its locality. I beg to move.
Baroness Thomas of Walliswood: I rise formally to support this interesting amendment and look forward with interest to hearing what the Minister has to say.
Lord Henley: I note that the noble Lord, Lord Ponsonby, originally wanted a different amendment. So be it, but I think it would be better to take the amendment before us today. If he wants to bring a different amendment another time, no doubt we can look at that.
The amendment is permissive and is therefore unnecessary. There is absolutely nothing to stop LEAs acting in the way proposed if that is what the admissions authorities concerned agree to do. I therefore believe that there is no need for the noble Lord to move the amendment.
Lord Ponsonby of Shulbrede: The experience of parents in Wandsworth is that, although the local education authority may be entitled to distribute this information, they do not do it on a systematic basis and do not necessarily do it for the grant-maintained and private
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Schedule 5 [--Schedule inserted as Schedule 33B to the Education Act 1996]:
[Amendments Nos. 129A to 130C not moved].
Lord Henley moved Amendments Nos. 131 to 134.
The noble Lord said: I spoke to Amendments Nos. 131 to 134 with Amendment No. 118. I beg to move.
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Schedule 5, as amended, agreed to.
Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton moved Amendment No. 135:
Page 66, line 13, leave out ("who is a disqualified person") and insert ("to whom sub-paragraph (3) applies").
Page 66, line 16, leave out ("the child is a disqualified person") and insert ("sub-paragraph (3) applies to the child").
Page 66, line 18, leave out from ("schools,") to ("during") in line 19 and insert ("this sub-paragraph applies to him").
Page 66, line 21, leave out ("in relation").
Before Clause 32, insert the following new clause--
The noble Baroness said: Amendments Nos. 135 and 137 were grouped on the first day but mentioned only briefly. Our recollection is that the Minister acknowledged that we would return to these. They are linked by subject to Amendments Nos. 139 and 141. I will speak to those when we reach them.
Amendment No. 135 is the first amendment which deals with baseline assessment and this is therefore an appropriate moment to place on record general support for the principle of baseline assessment. There is agreement across the political parties and among educationalists that the introduction of universal baseline assessment for children entering primary education is a positive development which should be supported.
The School Curriculum and Assessment Authority (SCAA) conducted a survey in early 1996 and found that about half of all English LEAs were involved in some form of baseline assessment and that it was well established in many schools and authorities. Reception class teachers have had an excellent record over many years of making formative assessments, finding out about the prior learning and attainment of children who are new in primary school. Information from that
The advantages of baseline assessment as opposed to reception class teachers carrying out their own formative assessments are that assessment materials can be used across a number of schools and the results moderated. Common training can also be provided for teachers. Children will have a record of their learning at entry to school which can be carried on at school transfer and the assessment instrument can be used for diagnostic purposes--screening children for special needs, but not for assessing the detail of those special needs--and for value added information on the work done in school. The value added information is important as the development, for better or worse, of primary school league tables based on the achievements of 11 year-olds will mean that schools will wish to examine their performance against the achievements of pupils entering at the age of five.
We believe that the first purpose of baseline assessment means that schemes are expected to fulfil two not necessarily complementary objectives: formative diagnostic and value added. The other purpose of baseline assessment is the measurement of children's future educational achievements as referred to in the SCAA consultation document; namely, to assist with curriculum and resource planning, form part of a value added measure and aid accountability.
It is possible to speak in great detail on the issue of the way in which baseline assessments can be performed. It may well be an area to which we shall wish to return on Report. At this stage, suffice it to say that in recording a very broad measure of support for baseline assessment, there is certainly not a broad measure of support for what possibly the proposed law could enable or even plan to happen; namely, that the Government would use baseline assessment as a measure for entry tests to primary schools. If the Government are committed to preventing baseline assessments being used to create a new model of some kind of primary grammar school, we are able to support the government proposals in these areas. I await with interest the reply from the Minister. I beg to move.
8.30 p.m.
Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale: I should first like to thank the Minister for his letter to me of 14th February after the Second Reading debate, assuring me that there has never been any intention that the information derived from baseline assessment should be used for selection purposes. He also specifically wrote about entry to primary school and made the point that children
cannot be assessed until they have already entered a school in reception class. I thank him for that letter and the views it contained.But the information could easily be used for subsequent moves of the child or for entry to junior school at the age of seven. There is also a possibility, which rather disturbs me, in Clause 34(8) of the Bill that the age at which baseline assessment takes place could be changed from what is currently proposed and that the baseline assessment could be done on children in nursery classes prior to admission to the school in the reception class. The Minister, I know, must be well aware that schools often--certainly those in London in my experience--have nurseries attached to the school which give no automatic right at all to admission to the reception class. The children have to apply again to go into the reception class from the nursery.
I suggest that if the Government are committed to preventing baseline assessments being used for any kind of selection, they should welcome this amendment and the amendments associated with it which will be moved later.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page