Tag: 2012

  • Nick Gibb – 2012 Speech to the Grammar School Heads Association

    Nick Gibb – 2012 Speech to the Grammar School Heads Association

    The speech made by Nick Gibb, the then Education Minister, in London on 16 April 2012.

    Thank you Barry. I’m delighted to be here today and grateful to the Association for inviting me back to its annual conference this year.

    On the way over, I was pondering what Dr Pettit, the inspirational, and to me as a young 12-year-old, very scary headteacher at Maidstone Grammar in the early 1970s, would have said if he’d known any the pupils in my class had been interested enough in education to become a schools’ minister.

    I suspect he would have greeted the news with a certain wide-eyed amazement…

    Fortunately however, we did all get a little older and wiser. And I’ve certainly never forgotten the enormous debt of gratitude I owe to the school, for which I have only the very fondest memories.

    So, I wanted to start by thanking the Grammar School Heads Association for inviting me along to speak at the conference for a second year running – and for all its support over the last year. I’m looking forward to my next meeting with Roy, Barry and Simon in a few weeks’ time and I’m sure, as always, that your advice will be good advice. I’ll let you know if it isn’t ….

    Second, let me thank the 164 grammar school heads and their staff for the wonderful work they are doing, and have done. Their results over the past year have been incredibly strong. But more importantly, the quality and standard of education is world class.

    Last year alone, around 1,050 grammar school pupils were studying at Oxford or Cambridge after taking A levels in 2008;

    98% of pupils in grammar schools achieved 5 or more GCSEs at Grades A* to C, including English and Maths, compared to 55% of pupils nationally.

    And an incredible 95.6% of grammar school pupils who were eligible for free school meals, achieved 5 or more GCSEs at Grades A* to C, compared to just 30.9% nationally.

    That gap between the overall figure of 98.4% and the free school meal figure of 95.6%, which is just 2.8%, contrasts very sharply with the national figure.

    Last year, 55% achieved 5 or more GCSEs at grades A* to C including English and maths. But the free school meal figure was just 31% – and that gap of 24 percentage points has remained stubbornly constant over recent years.

    It is a disparity in outcome that we want closed – or at the very least brought closer to the 2.4% gap that grammar schools have achieved – for the very simple reason that reducing the attainment gap between pupils from rich and poor backgrounds is an absolutely key moral objective of the coalition government in general, and of Michael Gove in particular.

    The million dollar question of course, is how you achieve that moral objective? And if you look to the example of grammar schools, you see the answer comes from a combination of high standards and ambition. Essentially, it boils down to the old grammar school ethos of placing ‘no limit on achievement’.

    For example, we know that grammar schools don’t measure performance by the percentage of their pupils gaining 5 C grades. They’ve developed their own indicators that focus on the percentage of students gaining 5 As and even 8 As. As a result of which, it’s not uncommon for headteachers to see every single one of their pupils achieving the 5 A* benchmark.

    Quite clearly, there’s a very serious lesson to be taken from this and applied more widely. And that’s why the ‘no limit on achievement’ ethos, is one that’s now absolutely critical to the government’s own blueprint for education reform.

    Like grammar schools we want to be unashamedly ambitious on behalf of pupils locally; we want to spread opportunity more equally nationally; and we want to match (or better) the very best schools internationally.

    Now, in one sense of course, there is nothing radical about any of this. For many years, the UK marked itself out as one of the world’s top education performers by fostering exactly those kinds of high standards. Lofty expectations were placed on every child. Standards of behaviour were properly enforced. There was no embarrassment attached to high performance.

    Even today, we have many exceptional schools and teachers in this country who work extremely hard towards achieving these goals – some of the very best in the world in fact – but we also know that many comprehensive schools are struggling to work in what is (at times) an almost unworkable system of bureaucracy and central control.

    As a result, we’ve fallen back in the PISA international education rankings: from 4th to 16th in science; 7th to 25th in literacy; and from 8th to 28th in maths – meaning our 15-year-olds are 2 years behind their Chinese peers in maths; and a full year behind teenagers in Korea and Finland in reading.

    When the US Education Secretary Arne Duncan saw a similar story unfolding in America’s own PISA rankings, he made the point that the States was ‘being out-educated’. And here in the UK – exactly the same holds true. We’re being out-educated and out-thought by more ambitious education systems.

    In and of itself of course, this is a hugely worrying trend. But it is made almost a 100 times worse by the fact that our education system has also become one of the most stratified, and unfair in the developed world.

    Only last week, the OECD told us that pupils from poor backgrounds in the UK were less likely to escape disadvantage than students from countries like Mexico and Tunisia – coming 28th out of 35 leading nations.

    This was, I thought, a truly worrying report from the OECD. No-one wants to see the UK transformed from a land of opportunity to one of social stagnation. But the fact is, too many children, especially from the poorest backgrounds, are now getting a very raw deal indeed.

    We’re not introducing enough of them to the best that’s been thought and written; we’re not equipping them to compete against their peers around the world; we can’t even say we’re preparing them to enter the UK workforce. Only last month, the CBI’s annual education and skills’ survey showed almost half of top employers are having to invest in remedial training for school and college leavers.

    Even in the best of times, this kind of backtracking would be unsustainable.

    But the fact is, pupils today are being taught and studying at a time of unprecedented competition. We’ve just been through the worst financial crisis since 1929. Our economy is weighed down by a huge debt burden. Technology is moving faster than most of us can keep pace with, and there has been an unprecedented shift in political and economic power towards Asia.

    This leaves us with the obvious question: how do you match the success of places like Asia and make sure you’re not treading water for another 10 years?

    Leading experts like Sir Michael Barber and organizations like the OECD and McKinsey, have shown us time and again that the top performing nations have several key attributes in common:

    First, they value and respect their teachers and employ the very best people in their classrooms;

    Second, they step back and let schools get on with it, free from bureaucratic control;

    Third, they encourage collaboration between schools;

    And fourth, they hold schools to account in an intelligent way.

    These themes formed the basis of our White Paper last November: The Importance of Teaching – and today, I’d like to say a little about each of them – and pick out specifically where I hope grammar schools can lead improvement across the maintained sector.

    First – we want to get the best graduates into teaching by funding the doubling of Teach First over the course of this Parliament, and by expanding the Future Leaders and Teaching Leaders programmes, which provide superb professional development for the future leaders of some of our toughest schools.

    In addition, we’ll shortly be publishing our strategy for initial teacher training. This will set out our commitment to restoring the status of the profession by toughening up the recruitment process, and ensuring that all new entrants have a real depth of knowledge in their subject.

    Not only this, but we will also explore how excellent schools, including grammar schools, can be more involved in both initial training and the provision of professional development.

    Perhaps most exciting though, is the development of Teaching Schools. Where we have had more than 1,000 expressions of interest and 300 applications have already been received. And I know grammar schools themselves have been amongst the keenest to express their interest. In much the same way, I know many grammar schools are now already sponsoring academies or supporting local schools to improve standards. Transporting their own ambition and high standards out into their local communities, and helping to raise aspirations. While I know many more grammar schools have taken the step of actually converting to become academies. As of the 10th June this year, there were some 89 designated maintained grammar schools, plus 75 grammar schools, that had converted to academy status.

    Many of these will be supporting other schools in the local areas. And I know still more are involved in helping other schools on a less formal basis. So, for example, operating an exchange of staff, working with students and supporting school leadership.

    In fact, Barry has told me that 98% of grammar school headteachers are working on major partnership activities to support the work of other secondary schools and primary schools.

    A brilliant achievement, and we’re very keen to encourage exactly this kind of collaboration both through the new converter academies, which have, between them, agreed to support over 700 other schools and through the doubling of the National and Local Leaders of Education programmes to support fellow heads.

    But of course, we do understand that great teachers and collaboration between schools cannot raise standards on their own, if they are then bedeviled by the kind of bureaucracy that constricts achievement.

    In opposition, we counted the number of pages of guidance sent to schools in one 12 month period as coming to an incredible 6,000 pages. Twice the complete works of Shakespeare – but not as interesting.

    So, we’ve been systematically cutting down on the red tape headteachers and their staff have to deal with – to the point where departmental guidance will have been more than halved over the coming months.

    For example, we’re slimming down the national curriculum; scrapping the self evaluation form; reducing the behaviour and bullying guidance from some 600 pages to 50; we’re focusing Ofsted inspections on teaching; closing down quangos; and – of course – we’re in the process of cutting down, and consulting on the massively complex admissions and appeal codes.

    That consultation comes to an end on the 19th August, with the department then publishing its official response to the consultation in September.

    Without pre-empting its findings, I can assure you there are currently no new policy proposals specifically focusing on the areas of academic selection or grammar schools themselves.

    But, subject to the consultation, the Association’s schools would be able to take advantage of crucial freedoms such as:

    in-year coordination – which removes the requirement on local authorities to co-ordinate in-year admissions

    published admissions numbers – where we want to make it easier for popular schools to expand

    consultation – which would mean admission authorities only have to consult on admission arrangements every seven years (rather than three) when they are not making any changes

    and the pupil premium – which will allow academies and free schools to prioritise children from the poorest backgrounds

    Of course, when you have far more schools enjoying these kinds of freedoms, and improvement is driven not by government but by schools, proper accountability inevitably becomes more important than ever.

    That’s why we’re currently overhauling the Ofsted framework to focus on the four core responsibilities of schools – teaching; leadership; attainment; and behaviour and safety.

    And it’s why we’re also very pleased to see the introduction of the English Baccalaureate, which we specifically designed in order to narrow the segregation in education between those from the poorest backgrounds and the rest – and to give parents a simple benchmark against which to hold schools accountable.

    The Russell Group has been unequivocal about the core GCSE and A level subjects that equip students best for the most competitive courses – the list trips off the tongue: English; maths, the three sciences; geography; history, classical and modern languages.

    Nationally, grammar schools perform remarkably well in this area, with some 67.4% of its students achieving the E-Bacc. A figure that even the independent sector can’t match: where only around 24% of its pupils achieved at least a C in the combination – rising to 51.3% when the Edexcel iGCSE results, which were not credited initially, are included.

    Nonetheless, just 15.6% of students achieved at least a C in the E-Bacc combination in the maintained sector generally.

    And this does beg the question as to how it can possibly be fair to those students who are automatically handicapped by the system’s inherent lack of aspiration on their behalf?

    It should, I believe, be a major concern to everyone that nine out of ten state pupils eligible for free school meals are not even entered for the E-Bacc subjects – and just four% achieve it.

    Equally, it cannot be fair that no pupil was entered for any single award science GCSE in 719 mainstream state schools; for French in 169; for geography in 137; and for history in 70.

    Quite simply, the most academic subjects must not become the preserve of the few. They should be open to every single student, regardless of background.

    And this, as the Secretary of State described in his National College speech last week, is ‘the moral cause’ that lies behind all our reforms – and our aspiration to raise the minimum benchmark for schools to 50% of pupils achieving five A* – C grades in GCSEs, with maths and English, by 2015.

    Grammar schools, through their own example; through the sponsorship of academies; through partnerships with underperforming schools; through the network of teaching schools; the education endowment fund; and through the national and local leaders of education programmes; have a unique opportunity to make this happen.

    So, let me finish with a final thank you to all those grammar school headteachers who have already taken advantage of these changes. We owe the sector a very real debt of gratitude and enormously value your contribution to those reforms.

    I also hope that Simon, Roy and Barry and all heads here will continue to play a very active advisory role with the department over the coming months.

    I know headteachers will not always agree with all our changes, but I think we agree on more than we disagree – and the voice of grammar schools remains one that is highly valued and respected not just by myself, but also – I know – by the Secretary of State and by Lord Hill.

    In the final analysis, education reform is not about politics, it’s about progress. Or, as Ronald Reagan put it: ‘It’s not about left or right – it’s about up or down’. I hope you’ll agree that these reforms are squarely aimed at getting us on the right trajectory.

    Thank you.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Fair funding for all schools [April 2012]

    PRESS RELEASE : Fair funding for all schools [April 2012]

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 13 April 2012.

    Headteachers today welcomed a government consultation on how school funding can be made fairer.

    It seeks the views of parents, teachers, schools, unions and local authorities about the current system, and asks whether a new system would result in a fairer outcome for schools.

    The consultation launched today is the first part of a two-stage process. Taking into account these views, further proposals will be published for consultation later this year.

    As it stands, the school funding system creates large variations in how much money similar schools in different parts of the country receive. Funding is based on historic calculations – some dating back to at least 2005 – that bear little resemblance to the needs of schools and their pupils today.

    For example:

    • Similar primary schools’ funding can vary by as much as £1,300 per pupil. Similar secondary schools’ funding can vary by as much as £1,800 per pupil. In a secondary school of 1,000 pupils, that is a difference of around £1.8 million. This could pay for around 40 extra teachers.
    • In one local authority, a school with 43% of its pupils eligible for free school meals received £3,367 per pupil. In another local authority, a school with only 10% of its pupils eligible for free school meals received £4,032 per pupil. This is a difference of £655 per pupil.
    • The system cannot respond to changes in the types of children living in certain areas. In Peterborough, for example, the number of children who speak English as an additional language has risen by 60% since 2005. This significant change will not have been reflected properly in the funding system.

    Ministers believe this is unfair, which is why the government is consulting on whether we should try to make school funding fairer.

    Ideally a new funding system for all schools would:

    • distribute money in a fair and logical way, with schools in similar circumstances and with similar intakes of pupils receiving similar levels of funding
    • provide transparent, additional funding to support deprived pupils, with the pupil premium being the first step to creating a fairer funding system
    • be clear and easy for parents, schools and the public to understand
    • support a diverse range of school provision, including academies and free schools.

    More than £35 billion of revenue is spent on schools each year. It is crucial that the funding system provides good value for money and that resources are distributed fairly.

    The consultation asks questions including:

    • Do you agree with the case for reforming the system?
    • Do you agree with the aim of ensuring that all deprived pupils get the same level of funding no matter where they live?
    • What is the right balance between simplicity and complexity?

    Schools Minister Lord Hill said:

    Headteachers tell us that the current funding system is unfair and illogical. In some cases it means a child living in one part of the country can be funded up to £1,800 more than a child with similar needs living elsewhere. Having a fairer system is not just right in principle. It would enable parents to see more clearly how schools are doing with the funding they receive.

    Addressing the disparities and inequalities within our school system is a top priority for the coalition government. For standards to improve, all pupils must get the support they are entitled to. This consultation is the first step to ensuring fairer funding for all.

    Brian Lightman, General Secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL), said:

    ASCL has long argued for a reform of the funding system and the development of a new funding system. We are therefore very pleased to see that the government is launching this consultation.

    What we have known for some time, and was obvious following the department’s release of financial data on schools in January, is that the current funding method is inequitable and indefensible. Funding between similar secondary schools can vary by up to £1,000 per pupil; this situation surely cannot be allowed to continue. A continuation of the current ‘spend plus’ methodology would actually increase the level of unfairness in school funding, making this review absolutely essential.

    Implementation of a change of this magnitude will need to be very carefully planned and we welcome the opportunity to contribute to this consultation.

    Russell Hobby, General Secretary of the NAHT, said:

    The time is right for a debate on a new funding system. The significant differences in funding between schools of the same size and intake cannot be justified and the current system is far too complicated. Funding must be consistent across schools if accountability is to be fair. We are under no illusions about the challenge and risk, especially in times of financial constraint, but it is a conversation worth having.

    The early framework for consultation asks many of the right questions and suggests some workable principles. As an association, we endorse the need to recognise the differing characteristics of pupils and for simplicity and transparency. School leaders must be able to plan over the long term.

    We need to think carefully about how we protect small schools that are so clearly valued by their communities, how we avoid turbulence and how we manage any transition.

    These are the early days of a very long run process and we welcome the commitment to a genuine dialogue from first principles.

    The government is also consulting on potential options for funding academies next year, as an immediate step towards making the funding system simpler. This consultation will run for 6 weeks.

    At present, academy funding replicates the funding that other schools in the local authority receive. But this system was designed for a much smaller number of academies. As more schools choose to convert, the current system is becoming increasingly clumsy and needs to change. 629 academies are now open, compared to 203 in May 2010.

    The current academy funding system has a number of flaws:

    • Like maintained schools, academies receive opaque funding allocations
    • The system is complex and lacks transparency
    • Replication of funding is labour-intensive and bureaucratic. The Young People’s Learning Agency (YPLA), the body that administers academy funding, estimates that an average replication model takes 3 to 5 days to build but may take up to 3 weeks to verify
    • The system for calculating the Local Authority Central Services Equivalent Grant is extremely complicated and does not deliver funding that is transparent

    The Government is consulting on three different options for funding Academies in the school year 2012 to 2013.

    David Wootton, Chair of the Independent Academies Association, said:

    We in the academy movement are committed to a funding formula that is fair for all schools and all children. The present system is innately unfair and has for a long time disadvantaged many youngsters. The funding system has not kept up with the pace of change or indeed changes in localities.

    A new funding system has the potential to create a fairer and simpler way of funding schools. This consultation offers everyone the chance to explore and consider in some detail the opportunities and challenges in moving from the current highly complex arrangements to a simpler, transparent system.

    The intention to consult on the benefits of a new funding system was set out in the Schools white paper.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Disruptive children – new rules restore headteachers’ power to exclude [April 2012]

    PRESS RELEASE : Disruptive children – new rules restore headteachers’ power to exclude [April 2012]

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 13 April 2012.

    New rules published today will put an end to excluded pupils winning the right to come back to school against the headteacher’s wishes.

    Coming into force from this September, the new regulations will apply to maintained schools, academies and pupil referral units. The changes were legislated through the 2011 Education Act.

    Currently when a headteacher excludes a child from school, the school can be forced by an appeals panel to re-admit that child. This can lead to a disruptive child continuing to damage their own education as well as that of others – as well as undermining the headteacher’s authority.

    Under the new system, headteachers will have the power to exclude a child as long as the decision is legal, reasonable and fair. If the new review panels believe this has not been the case, they will be able to require schools to revisit their decision. They will not be able to force the school to take back the child.

    Supporting schools to promote good behaviour is vital to enabling all pupils to achieve their full potential, regardless of their circumstances.

    Schools Minister Nick Gibb said:

    Raising standards of behaviour in schools is a key priority of the government. It is a vital building block in the government’s objective of raising academic achievement and closing the attainment gap between those from poorer and wealthier backgrounds.

    Restoring the authority of teachers and headteachers is an important part of the objective of raising standards of behaviour in schools. When head teachers decide that they have no choice but to expel a persistently disruptive or uncooperative pupil that decision must not be undermined by an appeal process which can result in the pupil returning to the school against the wishes of the school and its leadership.

    These new rules preserve the right to have a decision to expel a child reviewed by an independent panel but take away the power to force the return of the pupil to the school.

    The new independent review panels will provide a fair and accessible process for considering exclusion decisions in a way that takes account of the impact that poor behaviour can have on the education and welfare of other pupils.

    The new exclusions system will also provide additional safeguards for pupils with special educational needs (SEN), in particular through the introduction of the role of SEN experts to advise independent review panels.

    In addition, in all cases where schools stand by the decision to exclude following a direction by the review panel to reconsider its decision, schools would have to provide a payment of £4,000 towards the cost of alternative provision for the excluded child.

    Ultimately, the government’s intention is to reduce the need for exclusion by supporting schools to manage behaviour and intervene earlier to address any underlying causes. The government is currently trialling a new approach in a number of local authorities with around 300 secondary schools, where schools retain responsibility for permanently excluded pupils and work in partnership to secure better outcomes for pupils at risk of exclusion.

    In the academic year 2009 to 2010 there were 5,740 permanent exclusions and 331,380 fixed period exclusions in England. In the same period, 510 appeals against permanent exclusions were heard in the academic year 2009 to 2010. Of these, 110 appeals were determined in favour of the parent, and reinstatement of the pupil was directed in 30 cases.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Apprentices more successful if they complete work experience [11 April 2012]

    PRESS RELEASE : Apprentices more successful if they complete work experience [11 April 2012]

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 11 April 2012.

    A best practice report on apprenticeships for young people launched by Ofsted today has found that those who had completed work experience, course tasters or vocational study were more likely to make good progress in their apprenticeship than those starting straight from school without it.

    The best practice report also found that good relationships between employers and trainers were crucially important in capturing evidence of apprentices’ skills.

    The National Director for Learning and Skills Matthew Coffey said:

    “There has been much concern lately about the quality of apprenticeships. When looking at the national picture we can see that around 70% of apprenticeships are good or outstanding but more needs to be done to improve provision further. The Apprenticeships for young people best practice report will provide a vast pool of knowledge and examples on how to deliver apprenticeships successfully and will act as a useful guide for trainers, assessors and educational leaders wishing to improve.

    “When preparing post-16s for apprenticeships schools need to provide meaningful work experience. While the majority of learners are completing their apprenticeships around a quarter are dropping out. It is clear that more work experience, vocational study and course tasters are needed to ensure learners are on the right apprenticeship for them and that they understand the demands of work.”

    Apprenticeships have a key role in the government’s strategy to develop the skills of the workforce and to promote the growth and rebalancing of the nation’s economy. The government’s ambition that all young people will participate in learning up to the age of 18 will rely critically on the sector’s expertise in designing and delivering high quality programmes, including pre-apprenticeships and intermediate and advanced apprenticeships.

    As seen in this best practice report it is important for employers and teachers to work together and understand how the apprenticeship is delivered so learners can show evidence and be readily assessed on both their practical and theoretical skills.

    Work experience in the area that interested the young person was seen as a positive force in equipping young people with an appropriate work ethic and basic employment skills. Despite the benefits of work experience, the employers in the survey said that the number of students they could accommodate on placements was restricted. This was because too many local schools tended to ask for placements during the same short period at the end of the academic year.

    Providers and employers felt that the most important attributes of a potential apprentice were the right attitude and commitment to employment.

    Employers and trainers who worked together and had a good understanding of how the apprenticeship was delivered were better placed to help learners capture evidence of the skills they learnt during their apprenticeship. This way they had a wide base of evidence to link their workplace training with the training they had done with their provider, marrying both their practical and theoretical skills.

    The most effective teaching was well planned, engaged learners and enabled them to put quickly into practice what they learnt in theory lessons. The strong vocational backgrounds of the staff together with small group sizes ensured good and sometimes outstanding skills development.

    Providers surveyed in this best practice report said that good training in key and functional skills such as English and maths was seen as more relevant by young people when it was put into context and used in relation to the skills associated with the young person’s apprenticeship. Linking key or functional skills training to the area of learning being studied meant that young apprentices did not view it as more of the same ‘English and maths’ they studied at school and could see the real benefits of improving these skills. Those who had not done well at school said that they could see the point of mathematics in particular when they would be using it as part of their jobs.

  • PRESS RELEASE : New National Careers Service launched [April 2012]

    PRESS RELEASE : New National Careers Service launched [April 2012]

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 5 April 2012.

    National Careers Service

    Combining face to face to face local advice with a new interactive website, the new National Careers Service will:

    • Provide information and advice for approximately 370,000 young people through the use of the helpline and website.
    • Offer face to face advice to 700,000 adults each year in a range of locations in local communities.
    • Provide detailed sector by sector labour market information so people can discover which industries are growing in their area.
    • Provide tools such as a CV builder and a Skills Health Check on the website to help people identify their skills strengths and gaps.
    • Allow people to open a Lifelong Learning Account, which gives them clear information and advice on skills, careers and financial support in a single, personalised online space.

    John Hayes said:

    “The National Careers Service, universally available to people at all stages of their careers, has the very best interactive tools on its website and the highest-quality advisers, committed to the noble cause of helping others fulfil their aspirations.

    “Making available the right advice at the right time and in the right places is to strike a blow for social mobility, social cohesion and social justice – a society that encourages people from wherever they start to journey to the destination of their dreams.”

    Model turned Chef, Lorraine Pascale is an Ambassador for the service. Speaking from the launch she said:

    “After modelling, choosing my next career move was a big decision. I knew I wanted to find something that I was really passionate about, but I tried courses in hypnotherapy, auto repair and interior design before I found the thing that really makes me tick: cooking.

    “Having independent careers advice can really help you find the thing you want to do. I’d encourage everyone to make the most of the National Careers Service to find out how to take their career forward, and realise their ambitions.”

    Her view was echoed by Record Producer Pete Waterman. He said:

    “I know from my own experience that it’s never too late to learn a new skill.

    “I learnt to read and write much later in life than many people, but this opened up a whole new world for me.

    “It’s one of the reasons why I’m so passionate about helping people to get the skills they need to fulfil their ambitions.”

  • PRESS RELEASE : Too few pupils develop creativity through confident drawing [March 2012]

    PRESS RELEASE : Too few pupils develop creativity through confident drawing [March 2012]

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 30 March 2012.

    An Ofsted report launched today looking at art, craft and design education in schools and colleges has found that after getting off to a confident early start, pupils’ progress slowed during primary school and was no better than satisfactory at the start of secondary school.

    The report, ‘Making a mark: art, craft and design 2008-2011’, shows that weaknesses in the teaching of drawing have not been addressed since Ofsted’s last report. Too few pupils developed creativity through confident drawing. Limited provision for teachers’ professional development meant that less than a quarter of teachers surveyed participated in subject-specific training in the year before their inspection.

    Only 2 out of 5 primary schools and 3 out of 5 secondary schools provided good or better education in art, craft and design, the main short coming with the remainder being inconsistency in provision. The report says that opportunities available out of school, such as visits to art galleries, are not made clear enough to pupils, parents and carers. It recommends that these opportunities and other good practice should be accessible to all.

    Ofsted Director of Education, Jean Humphrys, said:

    Children’s ability to appreciate and interpret what they observe, communicate what they think and feel, or make what they imagine and invent, is influenced by the quality of their art, craft and design education.

    We found that children often began well, drawing adventurously and imaginatively at the very start of their education, but too few made consistently good enough progress to flourish creatively, especially boys. This was masked by their enjoyment of the subject even when teaching was barely satisfactory.

    I would like to see teachers getting better access to professional development. I want schools to build on pupils’ experiences and creative development in their early years more effectively in primary and secondary school.

    The quality of the curriculum had improved since Ofsted’s previous survey. The schools inspected for the report typically had broadened curriculum provision to promote greater inclusion.

    The best work inspectors saw in schools and colleges was characterised by a breadth of drawing media used for a range of purposes such as recording, experimenting, analysing, and developing ideas. They found that good skills in drawing, a fundamental subject skill, underpinned good achievement in later secondary school and post-16 education.

    An increase in photography courses and crafts-based approaches had improved boys’ participation and achievement. For example, in 11 of the 86 secondary schools visited, photography courses had improved boys’ participation and performance. But there is still more to do to close the gap with girls’ high attainment in the subject.

    In the 14 schools and nine colleges visited where provision was outstanding, best practice was promoted by energetic subject leaders who ensured that the exciting world of art, craft and design was reflected in and beyond the classroom. Their impact was reflected in work in art galleries; self-motivated pupils, outside lessons, strong teamwork, vibrant displays and challenging exhibitions of work.

  • PRESS RELEASE : Almost 400,000 pupils miss at least a month of school [March 2012]

    PRESS RELEASE : Almost 400,000 pupils miss at least a month of school [March 2012]

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 28 March 2012.

    Almost 400,000 persistently absent children missed at least a month of school, figures reveal today.

    The statistics for the 2010/11 school year also show that children on free school meals, or those with special educational needs, were around three times more likely to be persistently absent.

    Schools Minister Nick Gibb said persistent absence was a serious problem. Much of the work children miss when they are off school is never made up, leaving them at a considerable disadvantage to their peers.

    There is clear evidence of a link between poor attendance at school and low levels of achievement. Figures from 2009/10 show that:

    • Of pupils who miss more than 50 per cent of school, only three per cent manage to achieve five A* to Cs, including English and maths.
    • Of pupils who miss between 10 per cent and 20 per cent of school, only 35 per cent manage to achieve five A* to C GCSEs, including English and maths.
    • Of pupils who miss less than five per cent of school, 73 per cent achieve five A* to Cs, including English and maths.

    A child is defined as persistently absent if they miss 15 per cent or more of school time. Previously, children who missed 20 per cent of school were considered persistent absentees. The Government lowered the threshold so schools could step in to tackle absence sooner – before the problem really takes hold.

    Schools and local authorities have a range of strategies and sanctions open to them to tackle the problem. Penalty notices can be issued to parents for unauthorised absences. Department for Education figures, also published today, show that 32,641 notices were issued last year but that 13,629 of those went unpaid or were withdrawn.

    Schools Minister Nick Gibb welcomed the downward trend in absence but said he remained concerned about the impact of persistent absence on children’s attainment.

    He said:

    A hard core of almost 400,000 pupils still missed at least a month of school. We should not underestimate the impact of this on their future prospects.

    The effect that poor attendance at school can have on a child’s education can be permanent and damaging. Children who attend school regularly are four times more likely to achieve five or more good GCSEs, including English and Maths, than those who are persistently absent.

    We have asked Charlie Taylor to carry out a review on attendance and have lowered the persistent absence threshold, so schools tackle the problem earlier. We are determined to tackle absence before it causes long-term disadvantage.

    Overall pupil absence in schools in England continued to fall. The overall absence rate decreased from six per cent in 2009/10 to 5.8 per cent in 2010/11.

    More than a million pupils (15.8 per cent) missed half a day or more of school per week, equating to 10 per cent of school time missed.

    Authorised absence has fallen to 4.7 per cent in 2010/11 from five per cent in 2009/10.

    Unauthorised absence has increased to 1.1 per cent – a rise of 0.1 of a percentage point on 2009/10. The rate of unauthorised absence has changed very little over the last five years.

    Term-time holidays remain a major reason for absence and in 2010/11 increased to 9.5 per cent of overall absence, from 9.3 per cent the previous year. Illness continues to be the most common reason for absence in schools, accounting for 59 per cent.

    The Government’s Expert Adviser on behaviour, Charlie Taylor, who is carrying out an independent review of attendance in schools, said:

    Schools are aware of the consequences of poor attendance on their pupils’ attainment. Some schools go to great lengths to tackle attendance issues and to see the absence rates decreasing is very promising. But as these figures show there is yet more work to be done to reduce the number of pupils who are still persistently absent.

    The earlier schools address poor attendance patterns, the less likely it is that they will become a long term issue. The best primary schools realise this and take a rigorous approach to poor attendance from the very start of school life.

    He added:

    Schools can issue penalty notices to parents whose children persistently miss lessons. But when about 40 per cent of fines are unpaid or withdrawn, it shows the current system is not working.

    Ofsted allows for flexibility around the inspection of attendance. The individual circumstances of pupils with good reason to be off school will not affect the final judgment i.e. long term absence on medical grounds. Schools should also not be penalised for the absence of genuinely sick children.

    Ofsted will continue to take into account the number of pupils over the ‘persistently absent’ threshold when looking at a school’s performance on attendance.

    Local authority breakdown

    Local authorities with the most persistent absence

    Local Authority Percentage of children who are persistently absent
    Nottingham 9.7
    Liverpool 9.6
    Kingston upon Hull 9.1
    Knowsley 9.1
    Newcastle upon Tyne 8.8
    Middlesborough 8.8
    Blackpool 8.7
    Bristol 8.4
    Sandwell 8.4
    Wolverhampton 8.0

    Local authorities with the least persistent absence

    Local Authority Percentage of children who are persistently absent
    City of London 2.2
    Rutland 3.8
    Isles of Scilly 3.8
    Westminster 4.2
    Kingston upon Thames 4.3
    Wokingham 4.4
    Bracknell Forest 4.5
    Bexley 4.6
    Windsor and Maidenhead 4.6
    North Lincolnshire 4.7
  • PRESS RELEASE : New early years framework published [March 2012]

    PRESS RELEASE : New early years framework published [March 2012]

    The press release issued by the Department for Education on 27 March 2012.

    A slimmed down and more focused Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) for children aged from birth to 5-year-olds was today published by Children’s Minister Sarah Teather.

    The new EYFS, which will take effect from 1 September 2012, focuses on getting children ready for education and increasing the attainment of all children, particularly those from deprived backgrounds.

    The government also today pledges to go further. Where there are examples of regulation and paperwork that are not necessary to safeguard children, drive up quality or promote child development, they will be removed.

    The revised curriculum reduces the number of early learning goals from 69 to 17, gives more focus to the main areas of learning that are most essential for children’s healthy development and simplifies assessment at age 5. It also provides earlier intervention for children who need extra help with a progress check at age 2.

    The government has reduced paperwork for professionals to allow them to exercise their judgement, for example by removing the requirement for written risk assessments for all activities.

    Children’s Minister Sarah Teather said:

    What really matters is making sure a child is able to start school ready to learn, able to make friends and play, ready to ask for what they need and say what they think. These are critical foundations for really getting the best out of school.

    It’s vital we have the right framework to support high quality early years education. Our changes, including the progress check at age 2, will support early years professionals and families to give children the best possible start in life.

    People working in the early years, teachers, parents, and other professionals support our proposals, which keep the best of the existing framework but slim it down.

    This is the first part of our reforms to the early years. Where we find examples of regulation and paperwork that are not necessary to safeguard children, drive up quality or promote child development, we will remove them. We will continue to help practitioners to focus on children’s healthy development.

    The reformed EYFS builds on the independent advice of Dame Clare Tickell. Dame Clare Tickell said:

    I am very happy to endorse the new EYFS. It closely follows my recommendations, building on the strengths of the current framework and making key improvements in response to the concerns of many people working in the sector.

    There is a compelling reason for reforming the EYFS while retaining its overall shape and scope: the evidence is clear that there is a strong positive link between high quality early education and children’s healthy progress through school and into adulthood. To secure that link, and to ensure that all children grow-up healthy, safe, and resilient, and develop the ability and curiosity to learn, we need the EYFS.

    Together with a more flexible free early education entitlement and new streamlined inspection arrangements, the new framework is an integral part of the government’s wider vision to free professionals to focus on their interaction with children.

    Last summer, the government asked Professor Cathy Nutbrown to consider how we might strengthen the early years workforce. Her report is due in June, and the government will carefully consider her recommendations – along with international evidence on staffing levels and qualifications – as we continue to promote early years provision that is high quality and cost effective to parents.

    People working in the early years will get additional guidance and information so they feel confident to deliver the new EYFS. And a summary of the EYFS will be available for parents so they know what their child will be learning and what they should expect from their child’s early years setting.

    The coalition government is committed to investing in the early years and is expanding free childcare to many 2-year-olds as well as all 3- and 4-year-olds. The new EYFS will ensure that good quality early learning benefits all children, as the government believes this can make a real difference to success in later life.

  • Sarah Teather – 2012 Statement to the Commons on the Early Years Foundation Stage

    Sarah Teather – 2012 Statement to the Commons on the Early Years Foundation Stage

    The statement made by Sarah Teather, the then Children’s Minister, in the House of Commons on 27 March 2012.

    I am today publishing the reformed Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) which will take effect from 1 September 2012.

    The new, simpler and clearer EYFS framework is an integral part of the Government’s wider vision for families in the foundation years. It demonstrates our commitment to freeing professionals from bureaucracy to focus on supporting children. Together with a more flexible free early education entitlement and new streamlined inspection arrangements, this is a major step towards a lighter touch regulatory regime. But we need to go further. I will continue to seek opportunities to reduce burdens and remove unnecessary regulation and paperwork which undermine professionals’ ability to protect children and promote their development. Last summer, I asked Professor Cathy Nutbrown to consider how we might strengthen the early years workforce. Her report is due in June, and I will carefully consider her recommendations – along with international evidence on staffing levels and qualifications – as we continue to promote early years provision that is high quality and cost effective to parents.

    Improving the support children receive in their earliest years is central to greater social mobility. Young children develop quickly, and they develop better with the help of high quality early education and good support at home – the cornerstones for children’s success in school and later life. That is why the Government continues to invest heavily in early education, including the expansion of free childcare for three and four year olds, and the new entitlement for two year olds.

    The EYFS sets out the standards that early years providers must meet. It has improved quality across the early years sector, but some aspects of the 2008 framework have proved overly bureaucratic and burdensome. The reformed EYFS, which builds on the independent advice of Dame Clare Tickell, will reduce paperwork and bureaucracy for professionals and enable them to focus more strongly on the areas of learning most essential for children’s healthy development. It will also simplify assessment at age five, reducing the early learning goals from 69 to 17, and provide for earlier intervention for children who need extra help.

    When we published our response to the main EYFS consultation on 20 December 2011, we launched a further one-month consultation on new learning and development requirements (as required by the Childcare Act 2006). The responses to this additional consultation were broadly positive and I have made no significant changes to the framework as a result. I am publishing the report of this consultation alongside the Framework.
    I am also laying before Parliament the amended regulations to enact the reformed Framework. Together, the Early Years Foundation Stage (Learning and Development Requirements) (Amendment) Order 2012, and the Early Years Foundation Stage (Welfare Requirements) Regulations 2012, give legal effect to the requirements set out in the Framework.

    I am also laying the Childcare (Early Years Register) (Amendment) Regulations 2012, which amend the Childcare (Early Years Register) Regulations 2008. These amendments secure alignment between the conditions which providers must meet for registration with Ofsted, the requirements of the EYFS, and providers’ general responsibility to ensure that all staff are suitable to work with young children.

    I am placing copies of the EYFS Framework, the statutory instruments, and the report of the learning and development consultation, in the libraries of both Houses.

  • Michael Gove – 2012 Speech to the Association of School and College Leaders

    Michael Gove – 2012 Speech to the Association of School and College Leaders

    The speech made by Michael Gove, the then Secretary of State for Education, in Birmingham on 26 March 2012.

    Good morning – and thank you for the very kind invitation to come to Birmingham this morning. My last visit here was made memorable by the warmth of the welcome I received from Ninestiles School, a secondary in a challenging area which has made fantastic progress under the leadership of Chris Quinn. It was a pleasure for me to talk to the students there and especially one sixth former – Cameron Kigonaye – whose parents are from Kenya and Cameroon and who is now course to read law at Oxford. It was a reminder of just how much latent talent we have in this country.

    I visited another outstanding school in challenging circumstances earlier this week – Freemantle Academy – in one of the most deprived parts of Southampton.

    The head there, Kevin Barratt, became a teacher after a successful career in consulting engineering – something that has proved useful in helping design the new buildings he has delivered for his school in record time. I was intrigued as to why Kevin had left one high-paying profession for another profession and why, having become a teacher, he wanted to become a head. “Simple, really” he replied. “I wanted to help children. And being a head gave me the chance to help more children.”

    In one sentence Kevin, I am certain, spoke for everyone in this room.
    The reason we work in education is because we want to help children.
    And the reason people take on leadership positions is they want to help as many children as possible. That is the central moral purpose that brought all of you into education.

    And it is what animates the work of the leaders whose schools I have been fortunate enough to visit in the last year.

    The magificent seven

    Like Amanda Philips in Old Ford Primary in Bow – whose students come from one of the poorest parts of one of the capital’s poorest boroughs but who leave with the sort of love of literature you’d expect of English undergraduates.

    Or Yasmin Bevan in Denbigh High in Luton- whose students again come from some of the most challenging areas of one of our most ethnically diverse cities and who again excel – securing superb results in the GCSEs which set them on course for the best universities.

    Or Pete Birkett – who leads the Barnfield Federation – whose studio school is delivering an amazing technical and academic education for those students – overwhelmingly from disadvantaged homes – who have struggled most at primary…

    And then there’s Jerry Collins from Pimlico – the head who has recorded the fastest progress yet in taking a school from categories to outstanding – and who is now devising a whole new secondary curriculum designed to ensure his students – again overwhelmingly from disadvantaged backgrounds – can out-compete privately educated children.

    Or Patricia Sowter – at Cuckoo Hall in Edmonton – whose students come from one of the poorest areas of the Labour borough of Enfield and who secures for every student – including those with special needs – Level 4 at Key Stage Two.

    Or Greg Wallace at Woodberry Down -whose students are drawn from the poorest parts of Hackney and who have benefitted hugely from a rigorous approach to reading in the early years which makes them enthusiastic devourers of every book they can get their hands on by years 4, 5 and 6.

    And I cannot miss out Barry Day – in Nottingham – who again draws his students from the most challenging neighbourhoods in an ethnically diverse city – and who generates outstanding academic results in an environment where grace, civility and cultural ambition are expected of every child.

    The reason I mention these – and I could mention many more – is that I don’t think any leader in education should give a speech – or appear in public to talk about education – without celebrating success and giving a shout-out to those who’ve achieved it.

    But there’s a special reason I mention these magnificent seven today.
    And it goes to the heart of the moral purpose of this Government.
    I’ve said in the past – will say again – and the evidence backs me up when I say it.

    We have the best generation of young teachers ever in our schools.
    We have the best generation of heads ever in our schools.
    And our whole school system is good- with many outstanding features.

    But our education system – our country- is still held back by two weaknesses.

    We have – for generations -failed to stretch every child to the limit of their ability.

    And we have – for all our lifetimes- failed the poorest most of all.
    And tackling these problems for me isn’t just business, it’s personal.

    When you spend the first months of your life in care. When you know your life could have taken many, very different, courses. But you know that education liberated you to enjoy opportunities your parents could scarcely have dreamt of, then you know that it’s a sin not to do everything in your power to help every child transcend the circumstances of their birth to achieve everything of which they’re capable.

    Which is where the magnificent seven come in.

    Every single one of them proves -every single day of their lives – that deprivation need not be destiny. That the assumptions of a generation ago of what students were capable of were narrow, limiting and unfair.
    And that with great teaching – and that’s really it – we can democratise access to knowledge, find the talent in every child and make opportunity more equal.

    We’re all in this to help children- as many children as possible.
    But when there are schools where more than forty per cent of children don’t reach an acceptable level of reading, writing and maths then there are more children who still need our help.

    And when children eligible for free school meals are in schools where they fall further and further behind their peers at every stage of their education then there are more children who still need our help.

    And when children from wealthy homes who go to schools in comfortable areas are getting the GCSEs that give them a wide choice of futures – and poorer children going to schools in poorer areas aren’t getting those GCSEs then there are more children who still need our help.

    The terrible temptation of fatalism

    Yet from some quarters in the political world there’s still a lack of rooted determination to make all our schools excellent, because there are individuals who have succumbed to the terrible temptation of fatalism.
    They believe that there are some children who cannot be expected to succeed.

    They hold that there are some students who will never transcend the circumstances of their birth.

    For some – usually on the right – there can only ever be a small percentage of children who either can – or even deserve – to make it to the top. They see society either as a pyramid or a bell curve. Those with the intelligence to make something of themselves are the minority at the far right of that bell curve – the cognitive elite – those with a higher than average IQ who are – by definition – only ever a minority of the population.

    Sometimes injustices, or inefficiencies, mean that those at the far right of the bell curve do not make it to the top of the pyramid – but beyond ensuring that the minority who are smart are also the minority who are rich there is nothing much more to be done.

    For others – usually on the left – the existence of material inequality determines everything – and as long as there are differentials of wealth and background you can never expect real progress to be made.

    From their point of view, poor children cannot succeed because their circumstances prevent it. Poor children will lag behind their wealthier peers in any school that educates both. And a school with a large number of poor children will be so weighed down – or held back – by the socio-economic background of its intake that those children will always be at a disadvantage.

    Only if every school has as close to an identical intake as possible will every child have as close to an identical chance as possible. You cannot solve in the classroom the problems created by fundamental class divisions. Both the Bell Curve Right and the Class Struggle Left agree on more than they might like to admit.

    Both agree that there are some children who won’t succeed because of their background.

    Both would say of our weakest schools – where poor students from poor homes do poorly – well, what do you expect?

    Both of them, however, are wrong.

    We know they’re wrong because there are schools in this country with very challenging intakes – with a higher than average proportion of children with special needs, a higher than average number eligible for free school meals, a higher than average number who don’t have English as a first language – that outperform schools with much more favoured intakes in much wealthier areas.

    Schools such as those I mention run by the Magnificent Seven, and by so many others of you here in this hall.

    More than that, many of these schools prove that there need be no difference in performance – none – between students from disadvantaged circumstances and students from wealthier homes.

    No such thing as an attainment gap

    There is no such thing as an attainment gap at Cuckoo Hall or at Thomas Jones Primary in North Kensington. In both schools exactly the same percentage of children eligible for Free School Meals reach an acceptable level in English and Maths as children from wealthier homes – and in both cases that is 100%.

    There are more than forty primaries across the country which have achieved the same – eliminating any attainment gap between rich and poor. The same has been done at secondary level as well. At Paddington Academy, which has an especially challenging intake, there is no difference in pupil performance on the basis of background.

    These schools demonstrate on the ground what brain science is telling us in learned journals and best-selling paperbacks. There is nothing determined, fixed or immutable about a child’s chances of success.

    Neither the genetic or material inheritance of any child need automatically determine how far they will rise, or what achievements they might secure.
    In Matthew Syed’s ‘Bounce’, in Malcolm Gladwell’s ‘Outliers’ and – most comprehensively of all – in David Shenk’s The Genius in All of Us, the evidence shows that hard work, application and properly directed activity can produce phenomenal results in almost any individual.

    If an individual has the will, if we as society have the will, we can achieve far, far more than we may have ever imagined.

    Shenk shows us that genes do not immutably dictate our destiny – it is the interplay between what we inherit and the environment and culture in which we grow up which determines what we become.

    He, and Syed, and Gladwell, all prove with countless examples that effort and application can generate success in almost any field. And if children are educated in an environment where hard work is expected, where every child is assumed capable of success, and no excuses are allowed for failure, then children will succeed – from any background.

    What Shenk, Syed and Gladwell believe is what the best schools ¬ in this country and across the world – are putting into practice.

    In King Solomon Academy in Lisson Grove – in the top 10 per cent of the most deprived schools in London – it is expected that every student – every student – will make it onto higher education.

    The school hours are longer – the homework is demanding – the expectations pitched deliberately high. Children study Shakespearean tragedies in depth, Jane Austen, Aldous Huxley and Primo Levi.

    In Pimlico Academy – which again draws students from some of the toughest parts of London – every young person is equipped with a level of cultural literacy designed to make university natural. They study the Renaissance architecture of Brunelleschi and Bernini alongside the role of Archbishop Laud and Henrietta Maria in provoking the English Civil War.
    In Thomas Jones, a primary, children who are ten and eleven – again drawn from some of London’s most challenging areas – are called scholars and taught what scholarship means – through the medium of works by Dickens, Wilde, Blake, Larkin, Matthew Arnold and Tennyson.

    These high expectations – and the hard work required to meet them – generate not just statistically astounding results, they also transform the lives of children from the poorest homes.

    They are given access to the same cultural heritage wealthier children expect as of right, they are capable of exceeding the performance, in any test of knowledge or ability, expected of far wealthier children, they are set for success in any field.

    It is because we cannot allow children to suffer – when we know they can achieve so much more – that we are pressing ahead with our reform programme.

    And it is because all of you I know are dedicated to making opportunity more equal that I am so grateful for your support in this work.

    The World at an inflection point

    And lest anyone think we should slacken the pace of reform – let me reassure them – we have to accelerate. Over the next ten years the world we inhabit will change massively. We are at an inflection point in the economic and educational development of nations.

    Technology will change out of all recognition how individuals work, how we teach and how students learn. Millions more across the globe will go onto higher – and post-graduate education.

    Globalisation will see the number of unskilled or low skilled jobs in this country diminish further and the rewards to those with higher level qualifications continue to soar further ahead.

    We cannot ignore, wish away or seek to stand aside from these developments. Not least because they promise a dramatic step forward in the unleashing of talent, the fulfilment of human potential and the reach of our creativity.

    So we need to have an education system equipped for that world – one which equips young people for all its challenges – and opportunities.
    We need to cultivate higher order thinking skills and creativity.
    We need to be adaptable and fleet-footed. We need to welcome innovation and challenge as a way to ensure we lead rather than meekly follow.

    And it’s a consciousness of the changes which are sweeping across the world which drives our education reform programme.

    We need to ensure every child achieves their fullest potential because we need every mind motivated to succeed if our society as a whole is to prosper.

    The five pillars of reform – a vision beyond 2020

    And it’s an awareness of the scale of reform needed which is driving change in each area of our policy programme.

    In funding
    In human capital
    In the curriculum and qualifications
    In accountability

    And in the structures we create to drive innovation and excellence.
    In funding – we must over the next ten years move away from a system in which no-one ¬ literally no-one – can explain why schools receive the sums they do. Where pupils with the same needs in different parts of the country receive wildly differing sums for their education. Where the amount spent to help the poorest is arbitrarily distributed and where accountability for how money is spent is opaque and confused, to a much more rational system with a set amount for every child – related to their age – and course.

    With an additional sum – the pupil premium – for every poor child and special support for schools in exceptional circumstances or children with special needs. Money should more transparently follow students, schools should be freer to expand, and accountability for what is done with that money must be clearer. If we move to such a system – the unfairness of our current funding arrangements will become a thing of the past.

    On human capital – we must continue the trend we’ve seen over the last fifteen years of recruiting more talented people into teaching – no education system can be better than its teachers.

    So we need to remove one of the biggest barriers to people staying in teaching – poor behaviour and discipline – which we’re doing with reforms to make detention simpler, exclusion easier and fairer, attendance easier to police and adult authority unquestioned.

    We also need to support the best students, particularly in disciplines such as maths and science, to come into the classroom – which we’re doing by paying them more.

    We need to ensure they are prepared better for the classroom – which we’re doing by reforming teacher training to reward those institutions with the highest standards.

    And we need to ensure there is high quality and well-funded continuous professional development – which we’re doing through the National College, Teaching Schools, the growth in academy chains and the work of organisations like the Prince’s Teaching Institute.

    And if we embrace these changes media and political criticism of professional standards in teaching will become a thing of the past.

    On the curriculum and qualifications:
    We need to encourage much greater creativity – led by teachers -which is why we’re allowing academies total curriculum freedom and stripping back prescription in the national curriculum for non-core subjects.
    We need to move away from an expensive and time-consuming culture of proliferating external examinations – modules, re-sits and retakes – towards fewer high quality qualifications overseen and conferred not by commercial organisations but by institutions of academic excellence such as our best universities.

    We need to see innovation in new areas such as computer science.
    And we also need to ensure a higher level of cultural literacy and greater familiarity for all students from all backgrounds with the best that’s been thought and written globally.

    And if we ensure we deliver these changes concerns about dumbing down and sheep and goat divisions between academic and vocational will become a thing of the past.

    On accountability:
    We need more data not less. We must move away from reliance on just one or two benchmarks to a rich and nuanced account of achievement. Every month, week, day and hour we have data about the economic performance of the nation.

    But for years we have only two reliable – and publicly shared – data sets about our children’s development – at 11 and 16 – based on levels which few parents understand or GCSE performance narrowly measured.
    We need to know more about how our children are doing. Which schools are succeeding – and why. Which pedagogies are working – and why. Which leaders are proving transformational – and why. And that data will of course be complemented by thoughtful inspection from professionals.

    Which is why I want Ofsted to be run by, with, and for school leaders.
    And why I think Michael Wilshaw is absolutely right to say he wants more and more inspection to be done by and with the people in this hall – not to them. And if we secure those changes then accountability as a crude filter will become a thing of the past and instead it will be a powerful means of continual self-improvement.

    And on our structures:
    I think we need to welcome innovation and flexibility. That’s why I am delighted so many of you have chosen to become academies – more than 40% of secondaries now enjoy academy freedom and now more primaries are applying than secondaries every month.

    That’s why I am delighted that free schools are up and running – and more are opening – led by great heads and pioneering new ways of teaching and learning.

    It’s why I welcome the injection of new thinking which has come into communities where under-performance has been entrenched as more and more academies – many represented in this hall – open their own free schools, sponsor existing schools and enter new partnerships and federations.

    Because access to the education children need is still rationed by the inflexible structures we all inherited.

    Just a few days ago we had the annual recording of how many parents had failed to secure a place for their child at the school they hoped for.
    Under the system we want to build – with good schools expanding, sponsoring others, new entrants providing choice and challenge and parents empowered to choose – the annual wrangle over admissions and the creation of fixed hierarchies of schools will become a thing of the past.
    But the thing which I wish most of all to consign to the past is the fatalism which holds that this country cannot be the best-educated in the world, the fairest and the most open.

    Because I know how offensive that is to the people in this room – how belittling of their talent, how dismissive of their ambition, how ignorant of the moral purpose which drives you to all work so hard.

    We all know the truth of the words of Martin Luther King in his letter from a Birmingham jail:

    Human progress never rolls in on wheels of inevitability – it comes through tireless effort – and without this hard work time itself becomes an ally of the forces of social stagnation. I am an enemy of all the forces of social stagnation.

    And there are no better allies to have in defeating those forces than all of you in this room. It is to defeating those forces that I know all your amazing hard and tireless work is dedicated – for which I thank you.