Private education

ePolitix is running a policy consultation  on the continued row over schools involving Ruth Kelly.

Ruth Kelly has defended her decision to send her son to a £15,000-a-year private school for pupils with learning difficulties.

She said she had decided to "do the right thing for my child" after receiving "professional advice" that he needed specialist support as soon as possible.

 

Stakeholder Response: ACE

ACE told ePolitix: "ACE doesn't want to comment on the "facts" of an individual child and alot in the media seems to be speculation.

"However we are concerned that this story comes at a time when politicians of all persuasions are promoting a 'simplification' of the SEN process, ie. a reduction or removal of the formal assessment and statementing processes.

"Parents who ring ACE for advice and to get our Special Education Handbook report that it's much more difficult to get a statement for a child with specific learning difficulties, such as dyslexia.

"Yet they often feel that without the safeguard of a statement there is no guarantee provision will be made as the school level of support can be patchy.

"Few parents will have the luxury of opting for a private school place if they believe their child's needs aren't being met which is why we strongly support parents in wanting to retain the legal safeguard of statements.

 

Stakeholder Response: Association of Teachers and Lecturers

ATL's Head of Education Policy and Research, Martin Johnson, comments to ePolitix on the Ruth Kelly:  "Whilst we can not comment on the particulars of the ministers decision, the local authority is the best funded in the country with a wide range of provision.

"A state education system needs the support of the wealthy and privileged, and these families should be staying in the system to make sure they use their skills and influence to improve the system for everyone."

Also on the Education debate ATL has also commented to ePolitix: "Government’s analysis of the limitation of tests and league tables is good, but more tests will not improve pupil performance.

"The reasons for poor pupil performance are too complex to be solved by a quick fix, and certainly will not be helped by more tests says by the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL). 

"ATL says the government is spot on with its analysis of the limitations of the current system of key stage tests and league tables. 

"The union believes the need to examine why pupils do not progress, or even regress, at the end of the key stages is long overdue, so is pleased the government has recognised the complexity of this problem.

 Dr Mary Bousted, ATL's General Secretary said:  “The proposal to set shorter, more frequent tests does have the virtue of simplicity, but complex problems cannot be solved by simple solutions. 

"The problem with shorter tests is that they are more unreliable, and having more of them will further increase the danger that teachers will focus on teaching pupils to pass the tests, in the process neglecting national curriculum subjects which cannot be assessed by pencil and paper under timed test conditions. 

“ATL fears the government’s proposal to alter the league tables, so they measure progression as well as achievement levels, would further add to the high stakes burden under which schools currently operate. 

"The ’progression premium’ is another name for the concept of payment by results, which the victorians found to their cost did not build the skills-base to meet the needs of a rapidly changing society. 

"We should learn from their experience, not emulate it.

"The government should be commended for opening up the debate, but it needs to look beyond the confines of written tests if it is to create a climate where pupil progression, personalised learning and improved achievement can be properly supported and sustained. 

"We believe nationally-moderated teacher assessment would achieve this goal – allowing teachers to assess when ready and to teach a rich, personalised curriculum.

"It is good to hear that the government is planning to trial these new arrangements to evaluate their strengths and weaknesses.  We look forward to working closely with the Government to improve progression rates in schools."

 

StakeholderResponse: NASUWT

NASUWT, Chris Keates has told ePolitix: "School admissions proved to be one of the most controversial issues during the passage of the Education and Inspections Bill.

"NASUWT welcomes the fact that the intense debate and the subsequent consultation has now produced a code which has a clear statutory basis, binding all schools, including academies, to work in accordance with its provisions.

"Its provisions should secure more clarity, fairness and equity.

"The role of local authorities in ensuring fair admissions is now absolutely clear.

"However, the government will need to monitor local authorities to ensure that all schools operate fair admissions policies.

"The outlawing of the process of interviewing parents and pupils, an invidious form of selection which was creeping into some schools, is particularly important.

"However, the new code does not address the practice of permitting some schools to select up to 10% of their intake on the basis of the vague criterion of ‘aptitude’.

"NASUWT would have preferred to see this provision scrapped entirely.”