| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
The Earl of Sandwich: In view of what the noble Baroness, Lady Andrews, has just said, can the
Minister give further consideration to the marrying of the two amendments? In retrospect, I think that the noble Baroness, Lady Blatch, was right: we do not need the previous amendment. Perhaps we should consider them together.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: I am not entirely certain that I understand what the noble Earl seeks to do. Can he give me a little clarification?
The Earl of Sandwich: I am talking about interference with the normal operation of a school. It is clear from what the noble Baroness, Lady Andrews, said that we are moving towards a situation in which there is no such interference. The two amendments feed into each other.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: I apologise to the noble Earl for not picking up his point. I believe that there is no difference between what we are trying to achieve. We want to ensure that schools that wish to provide community services do so in consultation with their staff, the education authority and others and provide those services in order to support the educational attainment of their children and as a community resource.
Those are compatible objectives, and the evidence so far is that, when that is done, educational attainment, behaviour and attendance improve. That must be an overall objective for a school as a community resource. I am happy to discuss further the particular words that we use with the noble Baroness, but I believe that we are all on the same plane.
Baroness Blatch: It is an important point. The noble Baroness, Lady Andrews, gave us some powerful reasons why so many positive things are going on, helping schools to achieve their own ends. That is what the noble Earl, Lord Sandwich, was saying.
The funding that the Government put in to address the issue of class sizes for children up to the age of seven partly achieved its objectives. However, at the other end of the scale—almost as a direct result—class sizes for other age groups worsened. We know now that there will be a concentrated effort to move up the age range. We do not want to see newer or developing activities that interfere at all with the primary duty of schools to educate their children and achieve standards. That is the safeguard that we seek, and, as long as those words remain in the Bill—I am sorry to go back to my amendment, but the amendments are linked—there will be a suspicion that some of the activity will be at the expense of those things.
We must put it beyond doubt that no activity will be acceptable if it interferes with a school's primary duty to all its children, however important it is to provide community facilities. What the noble Baroness, Lady Andrews, said was persuasive, but we must get the balance right and make sure that there is no compromise.
Baroness Walmsley: I thank the Minister for her reassurances. Guidance is, of course, good, but it
would be better to have in the Bill a requirement for consultation with staff about such initiatives, particularly because of the impact that having such facilities on the school site would have on their job—teaching the children. I was, however, delighted to hear the Minister say that, at least in that case, the local authority would be involved.I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Clause 27 [Additional functions of governing body]:
Baroness Massey of Darwen moved Amendment No. 122:
- Page 17, line 17, at end insert—
The noble Baroness said: I rise to move this amendment tabled in my name and those of the noble Baroness, Lady Howarth, and my noble friend Lady David, who cannot be here this evening. The amendment was tabled and received with support and enthusiasm in the other place. To me it seems to be irresistible and one that is totally in line with national and international wishes to see children consulted about matters which affect them.
The amendment states that governors,
Education is an important context for consultation with young people, because children spend so long in it. The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child states that if a child can form his or her own views, then those views should be taken into account,
It is good that citizenship education is to be introduced into the school curriculum this year. Citizenship will include debates and discussion on human rights and responsibilities, and community involvement. However, it seems that citizenship as a subject without citizenship in practice across school life may be seen as tokenistic and pointless. The Advisory Group on Citizenship in education would agree with that. The group states that:
A recent study on schools councils and democracy commissioned by the Association of Teachers and Lecturers found that where schools councils existed and, within school structures, enabled pupils to take an active role in society, then citizenship education and understanding of democratic processes were enhanced. The Children's Consortium on Education points out that the UK is behind the rest of Europe in pupil democracy. We have no legislation on pupil involvement and no system for consulting pupils on educational policy. This amendment would contribute to remedying that situation.
But this is not just about democracy. Pupil participation has been shown to influence academic achievement. In a recent study, high levels of attainment at GCSE were found to be associated with active pupil involvement. That is not surprising, given that with participation, positive attitudes to school are likely to be increased.
In the guidance for applications for the power to innovate, related to this Bill, paragraph 9 states that:
I hope that I have convinced the Minister that this amendment is useful and constructive in promoting both democracy and pupil achievement and that she will embrace it with enthusiasm. I beg to move.
Baroness Walmsley: I rise to support Amendment No. 122. One of the most worrying things about our education system today is the large number of pupils who feel disaffected with their education to the extent
There may be many causes of that in the wider society and we need to look carefully at the curriculum, particularly that for 14 to 19 year-olds. However, when the Government are about to introduce citizenship into the curriculum, surely it makes sense to allow children to learn to make decisions about things that affect them right there in their own schools. Schools forums have been with us for a long time and the best schools take a great deal of notice of what they say. Pupil governors too have made an important contribution to all matters discussed by a governing body, except the pay and conditions of staff.
However, these structures involve only small numbers of pupils and it is desirable that consultation with pupils becomes much wider. Putting Amendment No. 122 on the face of the Bill would ensure that this happens and send out a message that children are respected and that their views not only matter but are very valuable to schools.
The Government have made many statements of intent about encouraging more student participation in decisions that affect them; for example, as the noble Baronesses, Lady Massey and Lady David, mentioned, in the White Paper, Schools—achieving success, and in the special educational needs code of practice. Furthermore, by ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Government have committed themselves to ensuring that the views of the child are given due weight.
This piece of legislation gives an excellent opportunity for the Government to show that they mean business as regards student participation, but only if it is on the face of the Bill. Non-statutory guidance is not enough. The amendment sets out a light-touch duty with phrases such as reasonable steps and due weight. It is not unduly onerous to schools to be able to comply with it. Indeed, I believe that schools which have not done enough pupil consultation in the past will, when encouraged to do so by this amendment to the Bill, find it so worthwhile that they will want to do more and more of it.
"(6) The governing body of a maintained school shall use their best endeavours to secure that—
(a) reasonable steps are taken by the governing body, head teacher and staff to ascertain the views of pupils on matters which affect them, and
(b) due weight is given to the expressed views of pupils on matters affecting them, having regard to the pupil's age and understanding."
"shall use their best endeavours",
rather than "may"; the word "shall" is what I mean here. The proposal ties in with what my noble friends Lady David and Lord Peston said earlier about pupil governors. Indeed, my noble friend Lady David talked about pupil participation on Second Reading. I listened carefully to my noble friend Lady Ashton's earlier remarks about pupils as associate governors, so presumably she agrees with the principle of consulting pupils. We must ensure that reasonable steps are taken to do just that, which is what the amendment seeks to achieve.
"being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child".
My noble friend Lady David quoted the White Paper, Schools—achieving success, in which the Government state that they will,
"encourage students' active participation in the decisions that affect them, about their learning and more widely".
That might include issues such as organisation, school meals, discipline, policies on bullying as well as curriculum matters. Many schools have school councils and other mechanisms in place for consulting
pupils. I know of examples of consultation with regard to PE lessons: what should be worn and what should be taught.
"Formal preparation for citizenship in adult life can be helped or hindered by the ethos and organisation of a school, whether pupils are given opportunities for exercising responsibilities and initiatives or not; and also whether they are consulted realistically on matters where their opinions can prove relevant both to the efficient running of a school and to their general motivation for learning".
"We would expect applicants to consult all those who are likely to be affected by a proposal".
Paragraph 11 states that:
"Those we would expect the applicants to have consulted include the teaching staff, parents, pupils and any other relevant parties. In assessing proposals, the Secretary of State will wish to be satisfied that all those with direct interest have been properly consulted".
We surely should not encourage consultation and participation in one document but not embed consultation and participation for pupils in the whole Bill.
10 p.m.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page