Political changes during the summer fuelled speculation about the future of the Educational Excellence Everywhere White Paper. The issue of grammar schools stimulated further debate, building to a crescendo before any announcement was even made.
The title of the government’s consultation – Schools that work for everyone – is a commendable aspiration, albeit one that schools work tirelessly to achieve on a daily basis. The controversy centres on, but is not restricted to, selection by ability at 11, although in practice selection tests for many take place at the age of 10.
Selection by merit is another sound aspiration, but one where the system is “played” up and down the country. For the policy to achieve its aims, it would require significant safeguards to ensure fair and equal opportunity for all children – not just a privileged few.
The debate so far on selection, social mobility, choice and new grammar schools suggests that there will be strong and numerous responses to the consultation. However, it is essential that the consultation and debate focus on the proposals as they stand, and that responses are grounded in fact and evidence and do not resort, as some commentators have, to personal anecdotes of what did or did not work for them in the “good/bad old days”.
The high risk of these proposals is that they distract government, and funding, from the real issues facing education – teacher shortages, funding, pay and conditions, curriculum, assessment, availability of support staff, and the wider economic and social challenges which schools and teachers are expected to address in order to deliver education to all.
It is a source of constant disappointment and frustration that the government remains fixated with school structures, what they are called and how they are governed, rather than with what actually happens in schools or the effect constant policy change, often unevidenced, has on the teaching profession.
In order for education to provide fair and equal opportunity to all pupils, it is essential to strike the right balance between offering appropriate opportunities for those who show high ability and support to those who need it.
Such opportunity can be achieved in a variety of ways and within the current system. Selection at 11 must therefore enhance such opportunities if it is to succeed and achieve the government’s aspirations and election manifesto commitments, although it could be argued that these do not fulfil the needs of pupils, universities or employers.
The question of whether selection and parental choice can co-exist in a selective system is a further policy dilemma. Whether parental choice will be reduced or increased remains to be seen. Some commentators claim that the majority of parents want a return of the grammar school system. If this is so, the policy may be well received. However, is the policy driver popularity or the needs of education?
Surely, for all schools to work everywhere, for all pupils, the system should be working towards, and putting resource into, ensuring that parental choice is not about choosing between an outstanding or failing school, but between which outstanding school best meets the learning needs and aspirations of their children.
Delivery of high-profile policy rests on on-going and meaningful engagement with all stakeholders. The three-month consultation period is therefore welcome, but assurance that the teaching profession is not only heard but carefully listened to is also necessary.
This policy will dominate discussions in education for the next three months, but while contributing, we will not lose sight of, and will continue to seek to address, those on-going important issues that exercise teachers and schools.
- Deborah Lawson is the general secretary of Voice. Visit www.voicetheunion.org.uk/greenpaper