NEWS


Emerging from the shadows


Almost four months into his new position as shadow education secretary, Andy Burnham, met with SecEd editor Pete Henshaw. He discussed his passion for a comprehensive education system, his priorities for Labour’s policy review, and in light of the publication of the league tables, talks about his views on school accountability, his plans to resurrect Labour’s School Report Card, and what he calls his battle for the ‘soul’ of the school system


A


ndy Burnham MP is relatively satisfied with his first few months as shadow education secretary and the opposition he has given to Michael Gove’s education team. And, if you sit in the Labour camp, there has been a lot to


oppose. Free schools, the dramatic expansion and shift- ing of the academies programme, curriculum reform, funding cuts, and much more have stunned education in the seven months since the coalition government was formed. Mr Burnham speaks passionately about his belief in


a comprehensive education system and opposition for the free school and new-look academies programmes. However, he is also blunt about areas where he knows Labour needs to improve if he is to get his party’s line across to the public and the profession. We start the interview with his take on what he feels


are a successful first few months. “I have fought a number of campaigns with suc-


cess – school sports, Bookstart, the pupil premium,” he explained. “I think you can look back so far and say the government’s approach has been successfully challenged.” The shadow education minister, who served as


minister for health under the final year of Labour’s reign, admitted that government has not always got the balance right between national standards and school autonomy. He believes ministers need to “rethink” the balance between top-down and bottom-up. Mr Burnham now says he is fixed on “piecing


together the jigsaw” of the coalition’s education poli- cies to see what it means for education in this country. He is doing this in the context of the Labour-wide review of policy, which is taking place throughout this year. He explained: “When I look ahead for this year, we


have to piece it all together and we have to consider the kind of education system that’s going to result from this change – curriculum reform and free schools. “I hope from what I have said so far that people can


see where I am coming from. I have proudly spoken about my belief in the comprehensive ideal. “My challenge in terms of Labour policy is to


update that and refresh it,” Mr Burnham continued, emphasising again that he wants to bring the compre- hensive word back into the debate. However, given his support for the comprehensive


ideal, Mr Burnham has notably refused to be drawn on what a Labour government would do with the acad- emies programme – something the policy review will determine later this year. He said: “Labour used the academies idea to give


a fresh start to struggling schools. (The coalition’s approach) will create a very different education system. They have a two-tier education system in mind – aca- demic versus vocational.” Mr Burnham, 41, grew up in Merseyside and


attended the local Catholic comprehensive school, St Aelred’s. His support for his former school hit the headlines recently during a recent Commons debate when education secretary Michael Gove noted that the school was converting to academy status under the


4


coalition government, only for Mr Burnham to point out it had actually applied to convert under Labour. Mr Burnham then proceeded to invite Mr Gove to accom- pany him on a trip to his former school – an invitation which is yet to be accepted. Mr Burnham perhaps speaks with most passion


about his fears of a two-tier education system. He does not believe that the plans for technical colleges, which would see students at age 14 being asked to choose either an academic or vocational route, is the right idea. He fears a return to the secondary modern system of old. He continued: “I am worried about the curriculum


reform when it’s set along with the reform to school governance. Put these two together and it’s a recipe for a very different education system.” His views have been bolstered by criticism last


week after the publication of the league tables showed that only one in six students achieved the new English Baccalaureate measure introduced by the coalition. The measure ranks schools on the number of stu-


dents achieving grades A* to C at GCSE in maths, English, science, a language and geography or history. Critics say it is forcing schools to push students down an academic route and does not recognise vocational or less academic subjects.


‘ Mr Burnham is quick to emphasise that the publica-


tion of information on schools is a good thing, talking about our “information age” and the “empowerment of citizens”. He continued: “In schools, there is a debate to be


had about whether measuring them by the English Baccalaureate is precisely the right way to do it. People could argue about the five A* to Cs and whether that creates the wrong incentives in the system. “We have to have a rigour and discipline around


maths and English. The league tables need to do more in terms of value-added and how we communicate the difference a school is making.” Mr Burnham refuses to be drawn on whether the


C benchmark between so-called “good” and “bad” GCSEs would go under Labour, talking instead of resurrecting their plans for the School Report Card in the forthcoming policy review. He talks about more effectively measuring progression and the impact of collaboration. He said: “We will take forward (the School Report


Card) as part of our policy review. I am interested in the idea about the power of collaboration and how we need incentives for collaboration across the system. PISA is clear that all the very best systems are collaborative and comprehensive.”


The current ministerial team are in danger of trying to recreate their own school experience. It is


quite clearly a nonsense to say to children it’s better to do ancient Greek or Latin rather than IT


Mr Burnham described his visit to one northern


school whose headteacher faces an A to C pass rate of zero when the English Baccalaureate is included within his school’s figures. He explained: “This school has been in special


measures and is making progress. But it’s going to knock the stuffing out of secondary schools in different areas facing real challenge. There is a real danger of creating very low morale.” In fact, the figures last week revealed that 270


schools had no students achieving the new benchmark. Mr Burnham added: “Michael Gove’s message to


young people – that they can study Latin but not ICT – shows he is not living in the real world. The secretary of state seems intent on rubbishing the achievements of heads, teachers and students who will struggle to see the fairness in why they should now be judged on something they only learned about seven weeks ago. “The current ministerial team are in danger of try-


ing to recreate their own school experience. It is quite clearly a nonsense to say to children it’s better to do Ancient Greek or Latin rather than IT.” So given his opposition to the coalition’s league


tables, what will his policies entail when it comes to school accountability?


While perhaps welcoming some of his views,


headteachers on SecEd’s editorial board have also expressed fears about the constant change in education and worry that another potential change of government in the next few years will heap yet more turmoil onto schools. Mr Burnham was unwilling to allay such fears. He explained: “I can understand why people might


’


feel that way. The danger for me is that would put the convenience of the system over what is right. I can’t accept that it’s right to split academic and vocational education in the way that they are proposing and alien- ate a whole lot of kids before the age of 14. What is that going to do to their self-confidence. For me it’s the wrong reform.” Mr Burnham believes that a number of programmes


have been scrapped or put out to pasture by the coali- tion purely because they were Labour initiatives, not least the Diploma qualifications. “Some of our things are being scrapped because


they are our things – look at school sport and EMA as well. A lot has been put into Diplomas. Schools and the wider sector have taken ownership of them. Schools have really begun to make them work and some of them have said to me that they are going to close it – it’s very dispiriting. That is the sad thing about the


coalition’s curriculum reform. It is the message it sends about vocational education.” The shadow minister admits he needs to do more to


communicate just how socially divisive he believes the reforms are going to be. “The most urgent thing is to explain what the


reforms mean and what it would do to equality and opportunity. I think the coalition is taking a massive gamble with a largely successful school system. It is a gamble with young people’s life chances. “It is a battle for the soul of the school system in


England. I really mean that.” School funding is also in the spotlight at the


moment, with the coalition’s publication of per-pupil funding tables. However, headteachers have also accused Labour of not tackling the disparities in per- pupil funding that existed under their government. Mr Burnham defends his party’s record, but does


admit that they should have done more to fund their inclusion policies. He explained: “I think that we did a good job in


terms of resources that we put into school with some exceptions. We did not properly support the inclu- sion agenda. While we encouraged SEN kids to go to mainstream school, the money did not always follow. Perhaps there was too much complexity. I will accept that we could have made it more simple.” However, he is quick to round on the coalition’s


claims to have protected school spending – repeating his accusation that the pupil premium, which amounts to £430 extra a year for free school meal children, is recycled money and not on top of the school settlement. He continued: “There are no easy answers. Funding


has to follow need. There has to be a basic entitlement for everybody. If you are teaching in a school where the critical mass of children who need support is much bigger you need significantly extra resources to be able to deal with that challenge.” It is clear that Mr Burnham has the support of the


education unions in his opposition to the coalition and he admits that on certain issues he will be supporting them 100 per cent. “I always had a good working relationship with


the health trade unions. Where the education unions are saying things that we think are absolutely right and critically linked to maintaining good standards in schools, we will support them 100 per cent.” He points to the scrapping of the School Support


Staff Negotiating Body as an example: “The unions are absolutely right in my view to raise the alarm about that. Workforce reform in health was fantastic at carving out a structure so that support staff could move into clini- cal roles. If you do not have national standards around pay and conditions it does not lead to a fair and stable system. The unions are absolutely right to say it was a positive thing. It was not a huge burden. It was a simple advisory structure.” He also warns that it will be support staff who will bear the brunt of the funding cuts. As Mr Burnham leaves the interview to head to the


Commons for a debate on a potential flu outbreak in schools this month I ask him whether he will be taking that trip back to his old school with Mr Gove, but he is yet to hear from the secretary of state on this one: “I suspect that is the last we will hear of it,” he tells me.


SecEd • January 20 2011


Photo: Stefan Wermuth / Reuters


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