‘It’s déjà vu all over again’ (Yogi Berra).
Reading reactions to Stephen Twigg’s speech on the future direction of Labour’s policy on education, my initial response was to sigh. Once again the myths were trotted out that have bedevilled so much of this debate in recent years.
On the one hand we had the myth of local authority control. That somehow in schools maintained by the local authority the council ‘controlled’ everything and the headteachers’ job is to be a humble suppliant at the directors of children’s services. On the other hand we had the myth of the automatic superiority of academies. Freed to pursue their own goals they become automatically places of high academic standards and probity.
In local government we have been dealing for the last 20 years with the reality of the relationship rather than the myths. It is galling when ministers themselves do not understand their own systems as when health secretary Jeremy Hunt seemed to be under the impression that we could instruct schools to take soft drink machines off the premises. We, however, carry on building a partnership with all our schools regardless of status to raise standards and provide a better experience for young people.
It is within this context of reality rather than myth that local government will in the main welcome Stephen Twigg’s new direction. In particular his belief stated in the speech ‘it is not feasible nor is it desirable for thousands of schools to be accountable only to the secretary of state. Local communities will have a greater say about education in their area.’
Councils have not run or controlled schools for some time, nor have they any desire to. They seek to work in partnership with schools and only intervene when things go wrong. They need to do this not because they want to exercise power but because their communities are demanding it.
If you are a parent concerned about admissions or standards it is of course possible to speak to the school directly but in most cases they look to the council to act on their behalf.
By extending academy freedoms to all schools, Twigg is in reality bringing schools back into the family of local schools. The important thing is how schools work together at a local level not how their governing body is made up. Local authorities should act as the broker in making that collaboration happen and be the champion of parents and children.
As local authorities, we will not interfere in the running of successful schools whatever their make-up but we would, if given the responsibility, be prepared to intervene in those schools that are not meeting the expectations of the community. We welcome the opportunity not to run academies but to be able to serve them notices to improve if they are failing.
Let’s think about our vision. In each locality a diverse group of largely self-governing schools being brought together by the local authority in a partnership to improve all. The council being able to plan new provision where needed and to speak on behalf of its community when schools are failing. That is a Labour vision for the many not the chaos that Michael Gove seems determined to create.
——————————————————————————————
John Merry is a councillor and assistant mayor for services for children and young people in Salford. He is also vice-chair of the LGA’s children and young people board. He tweets @JohnDMerry
——————————————————————————————
There’s quite a lot of stuff here that John has written that is very hard to disagree with. He has a handle on the issues that schools and local authorities face- unlike the policy wonks -inevitably people whose own educational experience or the experience of their own offspring has a tangential acquaintance with the state sector. Unfortunately, he then conflates “extending academy freedoms to all schools” with “bringing schools back into the family of local schools”. That’s not what is going to happen. “Academy freedoms” allow school to vary terms and conditions of teachers – make them work longer hours, or have less leave, for instance, and allow schools to vary curricular subjects (to make exams easier to pass). Most worryingly “academy freedoms” also allow schools to control their own admissions. The “holy grail”, sadly, for many academies, as this allows them to ensure that difficult to teach or children likely to be low achieving can be refused admission, via a variety of spurious reasons. Allow all schools “academy freedoms” will result in a mess of an education landscape, with plenty of provision for the Charlottes and Emmas of this world, and little or nothing for the Stacies.
The sad things is, is that Progress in general, and Stephen Twigg in particular have now unquestioningly accepted a whole welter of stereotyped, pathetic, uniformed, evidence free neo-liberal viewpoints on education, that has gone on to inform a policy position that has been subjected to little or no debate within the party either locally or at NPF level. I am sad to say, that, in the circumstances, as a party member I am not prepared to publically back this policy shift, and if, on the doorstep, I am asked what my viewpoint is, I will let people know my complete opposition to it. It’s not what parents want, it’s not what teachers want, it’s not what academics want, it’s solely a pathetic grasp at swing voters.