An improving school system is characterised by six key factors:
• Strong and effective school leadership – not just of individual institutions but also across the school system, with leaders of high performing schools supporting struggling and under performing schools through federations, improvement partnerships, trusts, academies and chains of schools.
• A curriculum that engages and excites pupils and balances imparting knowledge, developing key skills and facilitating student centred learning – a curriculum that also adapts to meet the personal learning style and needs of each pupil.
• High quality classroom teaching with teachers who have a passion for and expertise in their subject and demonstrate excellent pedagogical skills.
• A single system of accountability that assesses outcomes and progress, takes account of context, incentivises innovation, rewards success and promotes the freedom of schools that are thriving.
• Empowered and engaged parents who work with schools to support learning, foster aspiration and look after the all-round welfare of children and young people.
• A diverse range of schools to increase choice for parents and students, spur schools to be competitive and encourage innovation across the school system.
Gordon Brown’s education speech ticked all these boxes and in contrast to the Tories shows that the government has got a real grasp of how to take the education system forward.
School leaders will welcome the commitment – if it is followed through – to focus the government’s efforts on ‘a more strategic role, focussed on clear priorities not hundreds of initiatives’ since they are being driven round the twist by what they see as an announcement-per-day culture.
The media coverage of the speech centred on the last two drivers of school improvement: empowered parents and greater school diversity. Until now it has been the Tories who have made the running on reforming the supply side of school policy.
The prime minister rejected what he called the Tories free market approach – and the Gove plan for parents to run schools is indeed a dog’s dinner of a policy. But the challenge for Labour is to stake out clearly its own position on school supply and parental choice.
The ideas in the speech are interesting but do not yet go far enough. Using parental satisfaction surveys or the proportion of parents getting their first preference for a school as triggers for opening up the supply of school places is welcome, and in line with what Alan Milburn and I argued for in the recent Progress Public Services White Paper.
One might also use school performance – as reported through the proposed new balanced scorecard – as a further trigger for inviting other providers to intervene in or take over struggling schools.
Where I am less convinced by the plan is leaving the decision on how to act on parental satisfaction solely in the hands of local authorities. I would argue that the Office of the Schools Adjudicator and the Commissioner for Schools should be combined to create an overarching regulator for the supply of school places.
In addition all new schools – including academies – should be opened up to proper competition. There should be no favours for particular academy, church, local authority or any other sponsors or promoters.
Finally it is also time for Labour to be bolder on admissions. The more we open up the supply of school places in a regulated way the more that gives us the political space to say that providers, who compete for what are in effect long term school franchises, should be required to use fair banding or other systems that ensure they have a balanced intake.