NEWS FOCUS SecEd: On Your Side


We must respect vocational education


The governmenT unveiled its plans this week for a review of vocational education in england, sparking yet more fierce debate (see our new pages). I for one have very grave concerns about this


Pete


Henshaw Editor SecEd


government’s stance on vocational education. I do not believe that the policies it has spoken of thus far will go any way to creating parity of esteem in our education system and, in fact, could prove fundamentally divisive. Little is known about what format and route the review


will take, but education secretarymichael gove has already made it clear that he will create a series of at least 12 so-called university technical colleges which specialise in practical skills. Speaking this week,mr gove accused the Labour government of “hollowing-out” vocational education and accused his predecessors of designing vocational qualifications to boost league table figures. “everything was reduced to fit tables of achievement,”


he said. Already the language being used is divisive.mr gove


tells us that vocational qualifications under Labour were used to boost league table standings, but what, I ask, is so wrong about enabling academic and vocational qualifications to sit alongside each other within league tables?must we only measure schools on academic results? Are vocational qualifications not worthy of the same standing – equally as telling as to a school’s success? his plan for technical academies (they would operate


with university and business sponsors and run outside of local authority control) could see students choosing to attend from the age of 14 and would provide practical courses but also academic subjects. I am disheartened by the very idea that, at age 14, a


number of students attending any mainstream school might be taken away to a technical academy. What message does that send to our young generation? That if you are vocationally orientated in your abilities, you cannot study alongside the “normal” children – that you must be sent to a technical academy? It is hugely divisive and I sincerely hope that the review


examines the full consequences of this in depth. We will not succeed in meeting the demand for skills


that our country desperately needs if we do not achieve parity of esteem between gCSes/A levels and the vocational equivalents. The Diplomas were making moves in the right direction and had a profession and British industry and business engaged, butmr gove hasn’t backed them. I fear greatly now where we might be heading.


The GTCE debate


The question of regulation crops up again this week as the debate continues over what will replace the gTCe. The proposal to close the organisation was one of the first made by the new government when it came to office inmay and many have welcomed the move and have criticised the gTCe for carrying out duties beyond its remit with regards to CPD and teacher research, and also not showing its teeth often enough in its regulatory role. Thevoice union this week has called for the body to


be reprieved, while other unions have said that while they don’t want the gTCe back, the regulatory function must continue. The Department for education’s statement to SecEd (see our news pages) only went to show that it does not seem to know what it is going to do yet. our profession must have a professional body that


regulates and does so with the respect and support of teachers everywhere. I am not sure the gTCe needs to be disbanded. A simple shake-up at gTCe hQ can allow the body to shed its superfluous activities while sharpening its teeth at the same time. That, surely, is a simple announcement that this government can quickly make. SecEd


• Pete Henshaw is publisher and editor of Seced. Email editor@sec-ed.co.uk, visit www.sec-ed.co.uk and follow us at www.twitter.com/SecEd_Education. Seced also produces Delivering Diplomas. Visit www.deliveringdiplomas.co.uk


Academy audit


ACCorDIng To the national Audit office (nAo), academy schools are improving at a faster rate than they were before they converted. Therefore, academies must be a good idea – right? not necessarily according


to a range of teachers, teacher organisations and, perhaps most vociferously, the teaching unions. however,


the coalition


government has made it unerringly clear that it rates academy schools highly. So highly, in fact, that education secretary michael gove has stated that he expects every school in england to operate as an academy eventually. And last week’s nAo report


throws up plenty of statistics to back upmr gove’s beliefs. It says the proportion of students


receiving five A* to Cs at gCSe is improving faster in academies than


The political response


Michael Gove, secretary of state for education: “(The nAo report) confirms our belief that the academies programme is working, reporting a clear lift in performance after schools convert to academies, confirming that they are improving faster than other comparable schools and that they continue to serve the most disadvantaged communities and pupils. We also know that pupils on free school meals have improved faster in academies than similar pupils nationally. The experience of the city


technology colleges in england, and other reforms across the world, shows that giving schools autonomy successfully drives up performance, and that this improvement is sustained. The performance of the


large academy chains is already improving at a rapid rate. This year the harris Federation reports a 10 percentage point increase across all their academies, and ArK academies have reported a 13 percentage point increase. We have already taken


prompt action on thenAo recommendations as we strive to strengthen the programme


in maintained schools with similar intakes, adding that academies have achieved rapid improvements in pupil attendance, with their initially high absence rates falling faster than those of similar schools. Also, the performance of


academy pupils who are eligible for free school meals, have english as an additional language, or have Sen has improved over time, the nAo claims. So why do so many teachers


even further. The academies programme is helping children from all backgrounds to get a better education – that is why we are allowing more schools to become academies, and are giving real power and autonomy back to schools and teachers.”


Ed Balls, shadow secretary of state for education: “This report confirms that while Labour’s academies programme was successfully raising school standards in the poorest areas, the new government’s complete distortion of this policy puts all that progress at risk. michael gove’s rush to turn


schools with more advantaged intakes and which are already thriving into academies, rather than underperforming schools in more deprived areas, is not only a perversion of a successful policy, but risks becoming an expensive failure. Decisions about the thousands


of schoolsmichael gove wants to convert into academies will be made by ministers in Whitehall rather than by local communities. As the nAo warns, with no role for local authorities at all this will either mean a massive centralised bureaucracy or no accountability at all.”


struggle with the idea of removing schools from local authority control? And why did the two largest unions issue responses to the nAo report claiming its findings represent not praise for academies, but a damning criticism? Chris Keates, general secretary


of the nASUWT, said that the report’s overall findings showed that academies were doing no better or worse than traditional local authority maintained schools. “Some academies are improving


quickly,”ms Keates conceded, “but from a low starting point.however, the most disturbing evidence is of widening social and educational inequality in academy schools.” Indeed, the nAo report does


state that the gap in attainment between more disadvantaged pupils and others has grown wider in academies than in comparable maintained schools. This suggests, the report claims,


that less disadvantaged pupils benefit from improved standards at the academy more immediately, while other pupils may take longer to improve. ms Keates is less convinced


that, given time, academies will benefit pupils from all backgrounds. She continued: “The


government’s ideological obsession with academy schools is not based on sound educational evidence that those schools deliver higher educational outcomes for pupils. In fact, academy schools risk worsening the outcomes for the most disadvantaged pupils.” Christine Blower, general


secretary of the national Union of Teachers, said it “came as no surprise” that the attainment gap was widening in academies. “This provides yet further


evidence that the fragmentation of the education system simply benefits those who are already advantaged,” she added.


6


The National Audit Office’s latest report praised the progress academies have made in delivering educational improvements. Chris Parr looks at


the findings, and hears from some who disagree “Taking schools out of the


local authority family of schools will always lead to problems, particularly for those pupils who are in need of additional help and support.” elsewhere in the nAo report,


the auditors assessed whether the academies system was providing value for money and, more specifically, if individual academies were proving to be financially sound institutions. The report stated: “Some


academies are finding it difficult to achieve financial balance without additional, non-recurrent funding, particularly those whose predecessor school had a structural deficit that was not resolved before conversion to an academy.” It also raised concerns about


the findings of the Young People’s Learning Agency, which identified that just over a quarter of academies may require additional financial or managerial support to secure their longer-term financial health. ms Blower said: “At a time


when we are being told the country is in desperate financial straits, the fact that over a quarter of academies will need additional funding to secure their future is a total and unnecessary waste of public money.” Despite the criticism, Amyas


morse, head of the nAo, says many academies are performing “impressively”, and providing value for money by delivering the intended improvements. however, he added: “It cannot


be assumed that academies’ performance to date is an accurate predictor of how the model will perform when generalised more widely.” This is partly down to the


radical changes to the academies programme currently unfolding. Previously, it was schools judged to be underperforming that were most likely to change status. The last 25 academies to open were fast-tracked onto the scheme for precisely the opposite reason – they were rated “outstanding” by ofsted. It seems we will have to wait a


little longer before any hard and fast conclusions about the academies programme can be drawn.


SecEd SecEd • September 16 2010


www.sec-ed.com


New academy: Northampton


School for Boys has become one of the first 32 schools to fast track to academy status


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16