Key Stage 4 Performance Tables

Michael Gove Excerpts

Tuesday 31st January 2012 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

Professor Alison Wolfs’ wide-ranging review was published on 3 March 2011. She found that too many young people are studying courses that offer no basis for progression to further study or to meaningful employment. Some of these courses “counted” in Performance Tables as being equivalent to a number of GCSEs and were being taken at the expense of core subjects, valued most by employers, colleges and universities.

Professor Wolf concluded that incentives provided through the school performance tables were, at least in part, responsible for this situation and recommended that the tables be reformed. The Government accepted these recommendations. In future, school performance tables will:

include only those qualifications that are of a high quality, are rigorous and enable progression to a range of study and employment opportunities; and

count each of those qualifications as equivalent to one GCSE only and exclude qualifications that are smaller than GCSEs.

The Department for Education consulted extensively on the characteristics and process to be used to identify qualifications for inclusion in school performance tables. The Department’s response to this consultation, setting out Technical Guidance for awarding organisations, was published on 27 October 2011. Today the Department will announce which of the qualifications awarding organisations submitted for review meet the new standards. These are listed below.

In addition to GCSEs, established iGCSEs, and AS level qualifications and their equivalents, which will continue to be included in Performance Tables, a further 125 qualifications have also been approved as meeting the required standards. Of these, 70 are at level 2 and are included in the 5+A*-C GCSEs (or equivalent) including English and Maths measure of performance. The remaining 55 are at level 1. The latter will not be included within this measure, but do count towards a number of other indicators.

These changes will apply to courses taught from September 2012 and first reported in school Performance Tables in 2014.

The reforms represent a significant change to the measurement of school performance. The number of non-GCSE/iGCSE qualifications that will count in the 2014 Performance Tables will fall by 96%.

Focusing on a core of high quality and rigorous qualifications will also free up curriculum time. Teachers will have more freedom to exercise professional judgment in developing a broad and balanced curriculum and ensuring that this reflects the particular needs and abilities of their pupils. A wide range of other qualifications have been accredited by Ofqual for teaching to 14 to 16 year olds and approved for use in schools.

In March 2012, the Department will publish an updated version of this list. This is likely to include a small number of additional qualifications accredited by Ofqual by the beginning of March. An equalities impact assessment will be published alongside this. Both will be subject to annual review and the list of qualifications that will be included in the 2015 Performance Tables will be published in November 2012.

School Travel Pathfinder Schemes

Michael Gove Excerpts

Monday 23rd January 2012 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

I am required under section 80(1) of the Education and Inspections Act 2006 (EIA 2006) to prepare and publish, before 1 January 2012, an evaluation of the operation and effect of school travel schemes approved under schedule 35C to the Act.

The School Travel (Piloting of Schemes) (England) Regulations 2007 made provision for the piloting of the school travel schemes and listed the information which local authorities were required to include in their applications to pilot such schemes. As none of the schemes submitted fully met the criteria, none of the schemes was approved, and consequently there is no evaluation to publish. I am therefore proposing, by means of an order under s80(2) EIA 2006, to provide for the cessation of the school travel scheme provisions in section 508E and schedule 35C of the Education Act 1996. The order will specify 1 August 2012 or a date shortly after on which the provisions are to cease. 1 August 2012 is the earliest date cessation can be effected under s80(3) EIA 2006.

Oral Answers to Questions

Michael Gove Excerpts

Monday 16th January 2012 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

Most local authorities are forecasting an increase in primary pupil numbers over the next five years. Based on data published by the Office for National Statistics, the school-age population is expected to rise during the rest of the decade. My Department will continue to provide capital funding to meet that need.

[Alec Shelbrooke]

Will my right hon. Friend outline to my constituents in Elmet and Rothwell the proposals that are in place for the excellent primary schools in the area, should they need to expand to meet the predicted increase in school numbers?

[Michael Gove]

My hon. Friend is fortunate to have many outstanding primary and secondary schools serving his constituents, and those will be able to expand under the changes that we have made to the admissions code. We have also increased the amount of money available to meet what is called basic need—the growth in primary school places—and we have done so by making efficiencies from the old Building Schools for the Future programme, which, while nobly conceived, was often poorly executed.

[Heidi Alexander (Lewisham East) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State will know that in London the demand for extra primary classes is acute—64% of all the additional places required across the country are in London. How can it therefore be right that in the basic needs allocation London got only a third of the funding available when it has two thirds of the need?

[Michael Gove]

The hon. Lady, as ever, makes an effective case on behalf of her constituents. We looked at the original formula that we inherited for the allocation of money to areas where population growth was forcing schools to expand. We changed it, in consultation with London Councils and the Mayor of London. The new formula that we used was fairer to London, and it was welcomed by Jules Pipe, the mayor of Hackney, on behalf of London Councils, and by the Mayor of London, but no formula is ever perfect, and we continue to look to ensure that Lewisham students can continue to benefit.

[Mr Stewart Jackson (Peterborough) (Con)]

The Secretary of State will know, I hope, that the vast bulk of the new entrants for primary school allocations in Peterborough for September 2012 are foreign children whose first language is not English. In his ongoing review of funding, will he concede the resource implications of that and assist a small number of local authorities, such as Peterborough, that face serious teaching and resource allocation issues for children whose first language is not English?

[Michael Gove]

My hon. Friend has bravely and rightly drawn attention to the fact that inward migration flows have had a particularly strong effect on his constituents. On the current changes to education funding, upon which we are consulting, we propose to include additional funding for those schools that have a significant number of students who have English as an additional language.

[Stephen Twigg (Liverpool, West Derby) (Lab/Co-op)]

How many primary school places could the Government fund with the money that the Secretary of State has proposed be spent on a new royal yacht? Does he regret his rushed decision in 2010 to abolish the Labour Government’s primary capital programme and would it not have been better to have reformed that programme to focus on the serious shortage of primary school places?

[Michael Gove]

The hon. Gentleman should have been careful to look at the charts and to navigate out of rocky waters, because the letter that I wrote to the Prime Minister on 12 September clearly stated that I agreed, of course, that the project for a royal yacht—the Future Ship Project 21st Century—was one where no public funding should be provided. I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman has once again allowed himself to be misled. I support that project because it would provide opportunities for disadvantaged youth from across the country to learn new skills and to take part in exciting new adventures. It is typical of the unreformed elements—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I am extremely grateful to be educated by the Secretary of State, but I do not think that the yacht will provide additional primary school places, which is the subject matter under discussion.

[Stephen Twigg]

Indeed, Mr Speaker. The Government have found £1.2 billion for new places, half of which is being spent on new free schools. Although 90% of the extra places that are needed by 2015 are in primary schools, the majority of the new free schools announced late last year are secondary schools. Instead of his dogmatic and ideological preference for his pet project, would it not make more sense to allocate the whole of that £1.2 billion to meet the serious shortfall in primary school places?

[Michael Gove]

I am grateful for your advice, Mr Speaker, but I always try to answer the questions that I am asked by the hon. Gentleman—I know that that is sometimes a novel approach, but I believe it to be right.

It is also right to remind the hon. Gentleman, as he reminded the readers of The Observer on Sunday, that the last Labour Government wasted money on Building Schools for the Future. As a result of eliminating that waste, we have made £500 million available this year, and £600 million next year, for primary school places for which they never provided. They failed to look ahead and navigate a way through hard times, and now that there is a captain at the helm who knows in which direction to take this ship, I am afraid that we need less rumbling from the ratings who want to mutiny below deck.

[Charlotte Leslie (Bristol North West) (Con)]

5. What recent progress his Department has made in implementing the proposals in the special needs Green Paper; and if he will make a statement.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr James Gray (North Wiltshire) (Con)]

9. How many special schools have converted to academies in (a) North Wiltshire constituency, (b) the south-west and (c) England since May 2010.

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

Special schools became eligible to apply for academy status in November 2010 and to become academies from 1 September 2011. There are 16 special schools now open as academies in England, four of which are in the south-west, and of these one of the first to become an academy on 1 September 2011 is in North Wiltshire.

[Mr Gray]

The Secretary of State is absolutely right to praise the Springfields academy in Calne, one of the very first special schools to achieve academy status, but does he agree that, although in Wiltshire we have a very helpful and supportive local authority, elsewhere it might be much more difficult for special schools to achieve academy status? What can he do to remove the slightly tortuous and bureaucratic process that the Springfields academy had to go through in order to make it easier for other schools in the same position?

[Michael Gove]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising the case of the Springfields academy, which is an outstanding school that does wonderful work for children with behavioural, emotional or social difficulties and those on the autistic spectrum. I am also grateful that the local authority has been so constructive. As he points out, some local authorities are not so constructive. We are working, gently but firmly, with all local authorities from London and elsewhere to ensure that their schools see the benefits of academy status.

[Claire Perry (Devizes) (Con)]

There are other mainstream schools in Wiltshire that would very much like to become academies. St John’s school in Marlborough, of which I am a governor, has been trying to become an academy for over a year. The Department has been very helpful in the process, but as we approach the last furlong it feels more and more like wading through treacle. Is there anything I, the other governors and the staff can do to get to a decision so that we can move forward with the programme?

[Michael Gove]

No school is better governed in Marlborough, or indeed in Wiltshire, than St John’s. As a result of my hon. Friend’s impassioned advocacy, I will ensure that the necessary posteriors are kicked.

[Nic Dakin (Scunthorpe) (Lab)]

10. What recent assessment he has made of the effect of reductions in central Government funding on the provision of out-of-school child care.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

Today, one of the powers contained in the Education Act 2011 comes into effect: teachers will no longer be required to give 24 hours’ notice before imposing a detention on a child who breaks school rules. That is a useful new weapon in their armoury in the constant battle to ensure that all children are well behaved and that all students can learn.

[James Morris]

What advice would the Secretary of State give to parents in my constituency, where the teaching unions are consistently telling them that if their school converts to an academy or co-operative trust, it will lead to less local accountability and parental control?

[Michael Gove]

I would advise parents in my hon. Friend’s constituency to listen to their very shrewd and effective elected Member, who has consistently pointed out that academy status means not only more resources for students but greater flexibility for teachers and heads and higher standards all round. It is an increasingly welcome aspect of the political consensus that is emerging around academies that so many Labour Members are flocking to their banner.

[Kevin Brennan (Cardiff West) (Lab)]

Can the Secretary of State give the House an absolute assurance that neither he nor his special advisers have deliberately destroyed or deleted e-mails relating to Government business that he has sent or received through private e-mail accounts?

[Michael Gove]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that question. As he will be aware, we changed the information and communications technology curriculum just last week, and many of us were brought up when the old ICT curriculum was in place and may not always have been as handy with the cursor as we should have been. However, every single aspect of communications policy in the Department for Education has been in accordance with the highest standards of propriety, as laid down by the Cabinet Office.

[Mr Rob Wilson (Reading East) (Con)]

T2. My right hon. Friend may remember our discussions about how to help independent day schools increase the number of places available to our brightest, yet poorest, children. In the light of today’s impressive report by the Sutton Trust, will he re-examine my proposals to open up those schools to access based on merit, rather than on the ability to pay?

[Michael Gove]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend, who has been a consistent advocate for helping disadvantaged children to access excellent schooling. I am encouraged by the work that the Sutton Trust has done, but it is important that we ensure not only that individual children of merit have access to the best schools, but that all children from disadvantaged circumstances have better education. That is why I want to see private schools playing a larger part in the academies programme.

[Graeme Morrice (Livingston) (Lab)]

T4. The Co-operative Education Trust Scotland and other co-operative education bodies are doing fantastic work across the UK to support schools and to embed co-operative enterprise education into their curriculum. How are the Government ensuring that schools promote the co-operative model as a viable option for young people who are thinking about starting their own business?

[Michael Gove]

First, let me pay tribute to the work of the co-operative movement. Since it started in Rochdale, many of us have been inspired by its achievements. I believe that the academies programme and particularly the free schools programme provide an opportunity for the ideals of the original co-operative movement to be embedded in our schools. The idea that all work together for the good of their community and for the fulfilment of higher ideals is one that Government Members wholeheartedly applaud.

[Mr Speaker]

I call Mr Adam Holloway. Not here.

--- Later in debate ---

[Mrs Linda Riordan (Halifax) (Lab/Co-op)]

T6. The Prime Minister said before the election that there would be no return to selection at 11, so why are the Government making it easier for grammar schools to expand by taking away the rights of local parents to object?

[Michael Gove]

We are allowing all good schools to expand. I am an unalloyed fan of all good schools, whether they are comprehensive or selective. No new selective schools will be created under the coalition Government, but all successful schools have the right to expand, and any parent who believes that any school is in breach of the admissions code has an expanded right to complain to the schools adjudicator. Good schools doing a better job for more students: that is what the coalition delivers; I am amazed that the hon. Lady objects.

[Mark Pawsey (Rugby) (Con)]

T5. Last Friday, I had the great pleasure to visit Paddox primary school in my constituency, which is an outstanding school where significant improvements have been made in recent years. Parents have told me that much of the positive atmosphere at the school is attributable to the drive and ambition of the head teacher, Brenda Oakes. Does the Minister agree that strong leadership provided by head teachers such as Miss Oakes is essential in delivering a first-class education to all our children?

--- Later in debate ---

[Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab)]

T8. As we approach Holocaust memorial day on 27 January, how is the Secretary of State ensuring that lessons from the Holocaust and other genocides, including in Cambodia, Rwanda, Bosnia and Darfur, are taught in free schools, academies and other schools not bound by the national curriculum?

[Michael Gove]

I am grateful for the hon. Lady’s point. Let me pay tribute to my predecessor, the right hon. Member for Morley and Outwood (Ed Balls). His decision to increase funding for the Holocaust Education Trust was one of many good things that he did, and I was honoured to be able to honour a pledge I made before the election to secure its funding. The trips that it offers to schools of all kinds help to ensure that we remember, and that that indescribable evil is never repeated. Let me take this opportunity to affirm the importance of all MPs meeting Holocaust denial and relativisation head on. Any attempt to undermine the singular historic evil of that crime is utterly wrong, and we should unite in condemning it.

[Angie Bray (Ealing Central and Acton) (Con)]

T7. Having opened just last September, the West London free school has had more than 5,000 visits from interested parents, its places are now heavily over-subscribed and it has just applied to set up a new, free primary school. Does my right hon. Friend agree that that all goes to demonstrate just how enthusiastic parents are about these new free schools?

[Michael Gove]

My hon. Friend makes a brilliant case. The West London free school was attacked and criticised by many on the left of the political spectrum. Fiona Millar said that the idea would never take place. Now it is the single most popular and over-subscribed school in the London borough of Hammersmith and Fulham, providing a superb education of a comprehensive kind for all children. I recommend it to you, Mr Speaker, for the future.

[Mr Speaker]

I am extremely grateful to the Secretary of State for his helpful advice. I was not asking for his advice, but I am grateful for it anyway.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Gove]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for asking that question. I hope to speak to the lead member for children’s services in Essex county council later this afternoon and I shall raise the issue with him. If I do not get satisfaction, I will pursue it. Let me take this opportunity to congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his well-deserved knighthood.

[Mr Dennis Skinner (Bolsover) (Lab)]

Now that the Secretary of State for Education has accepted Bolsover Labour party’s campaign for a new school at Tibshelf—a most unlikely Minister, I agree—will he tell us who will bear the cost, how much central Government will pay and how much the council taxpayer will have to pay?

[Michael Gove]

The hon. Gentleman has been a fantastic campaigner on behalf of Tibshelf school and, as he has often pointed out in this House, the school has had to be kept aloft by pit props and is not fit for purpose. We want to ensure that the priority school building programme, to which I think he refers, will provide the resources from the Department for Education’s budget, but we will work with the local authority to ensure that we refurbish the school appropriately. I should stress, however, that final decisions on each school in the programme will not be made until at least next month.

[Laura Sandys (South Thanet) (Con)]

I had a very good morning on Friday when I went to two infant schools. Both say that a larger number of children are coming in with speech and communication problems. What measures will we take in response to Jean Gross’s communications strategy, and how will we make it a priority to support those children at a very early age to resolve such problems?

[Mr Geoffrey Robinson (Coventry North West) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State will be aware of my ongoing correspondence with him about Woodlands school in my constituency, which is held up not by pit props but by equally unsightly and unacceptable scaffolding. It seems that the school will be denied any access to the priority school building programme by an anomalous set of circumstances. It does not need extra places, yet the state of the buildings means that it obviously needs priority status and access to funds, but it has been denied that as more than 30% of the buildings are listed. What can the school do? We are due an answer. May we have it soon?

[Michael Gove]

When we had to close the Building Schools for the Future programme, it was inevitable that a significant number of schools in urgent need of repair would be just the wrong side of where the line was drawn. I know that in Coventry a number of schools are in desperate need of refurbishment. The priority school building programme is designed to ensure that as many schools as possible qualify and we will not be able to make an announcement until next month because we want to be absolutely sure that marginal cases such as this school, as it appears from the information the hon. Gentleman has shared with us, are fairly treated.

[Mr Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight) (Con)]

The Minister is well aware of my support for steps taken to prepare young people for apprenticeships and the world of work, but is he aware that an arbitrary decision about payments due for academic work undertaken in apprentices’ own time towards their qualification might threaten the ability and willingness of small employers, such as Amazon World in my constituency, to take them on?

[Ian Austin (Dudley North) (Lab)]

A university technical college for Dudley would not only transform the education available in the town but help address the skills shortage and rebalance the economy while encouraging young people to pursue careers in high-tech manufacturing. I am sure that the Secretary of State will be as pleased as I am that a bid has now been submitted for the Aston university technical college in Dudley. Will he take this bid from me today and ensure that it is approved as early as possible so that we can get the changes made that we need in Dudley?

[Michael Gove]

I shall take the bid and look on it sympathetically. I know that the Prime Minister, as a Villa fan, would want me to do everything possible to satisfy the hon. Gentleman.

[Andrew Bridgen (North West Leicestershire) (Con)]

Is the Minister as concerned as I am that some teachers in schools today qualified only after re-sitting their basic numeracy and literacy tests on multiple occasions—in some cases, more than 30 times—and what steps will he take to ensure that this is not repeated?

--- Later in debate ---

[Michael Gove]

“Lessons from Auschwitz” is a model project, and I am so delighted that in the new year’s honours list the chief executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust, Karen Pollock, received a long-overdue award. She is one of the unsung heroes of British education, and her work has been absolutely fantastic. I recommend to all Members the opportunity to attend the forthcoming Merlyn-Rees memorial lecture, which the trust is organising and which will remind us all of the timeless enormity of that evil and of the need to remain vigilant to this day.

National Curriculum in England (Information and Communication Technology)

Michael Gove Excerpts

Wednesday 11th January 2012 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

I am today announcing my intention to launch a public consultation on my proposal that the national curriculum programmes of study and associated attainment targets and assessment arrangements for information and communication technology (ICT) in maintained schools in England should not apply from September 2012.

There is a significant and growing base of evidence, not least from Ofsted inspections, that demonstrates that there are persistent problems with the quality and effectiveness of ICT education in schools. Evidence indicates that recent curriculum and qualifications reforms have not led to significant improvements in the teaching of ICT, and the number of students progressing to further study in ICT-related subjects is in decline. Furthermore, the ICT curriculum in its current form is viewed as dull and demotivating for pupils. Its teaching may not equip pupils adequately for further study and work, may leave them disenchanted or give rise to negative perceptions that turn them off the subject completely. At the same time we know that the demand for high-level technology skills is growing, and many employers in the IT industry are concerned that the way in which ICT is taught in schools is failing to inspire young people about the creative potential of ICT and the range of IT-related careers open to them.

However, we also know that ICT teaching in schools can be done well. There are numerous positive examples of schools that are leading the way in developing new and exciting visions for ICT, and of industry-led initiatives which are invigorating ICT teaching in schools. In order to facilitate more innovative ICT provision in schools, I am proposing to make provision under the 2002 Education Act to disapply the existing ICT programmes of study and attainment targets at all four key stages, and the associated statutory assessment arrangements at key stage 3, from September 2012.

Under this proposal ICT would remain a compulsory subject within the national curriculum, subject to the outcomes of the national curriculum review. However, schools would be freed of the requirement to adhere to the existing programmes of study, attainment targets and statutory assessment arrangements.

By disapplying the ICT programme of study from September this year schools will be able to offer a more creative and challenging curriculum, drawing on support and advice from those best positioned to judge what an ambitious and forward-looking curriculum should contain. I am encouraged by the work of subject organisations and others on how universities and business can develop high quality computer science qualifications. I am keen to explore how Government can continue to facilitate this.

If, having listened to the views expressed in the public consultation and subject to the will of the House, I decide to proceed with the proposed disapplication of the ICT programmes of study, attainment targets and assessment arrangements, it will represent an interim measure that will be effective from September 2012 until September 2014, when the outcomes of the national curriculum review will come into force. The status of ICT within the school curriculum is currently being considered by the national curriculum review alongside that of all other national curriculum subjects (aside from English, mathematics, science and PE), and I will bring forward proposals later this year.

The public consultation on this proposal will commence shortly and run for 12 weeks. A consultation document containing full details of this proposal and how interested parties can respond to the consultation will be published on the Department for Education website. Copies of that document will also be placed in the House Libraries.

Reform of the Teachers' Pension Scheme (England and Wales)

Michael Gove Excerpts

Tuesday 20th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

On 2 November the Chief Secretary to the Treasury made a statement to the House setting out an improved offer on public service pensions to public sector workers (Cm 8214). This offer provided a more generous cost ceiling for scheme-specific discussions to work within, and protected all those within 10 years of their pension age from any further change. This generous offer was conditional on the Government and trade unions reaching agreement by the end of the year, including in the teachers’ pension scheme, bringing to a conclusion talks that have lasted since February 2011.

Since 2 November I have been engaged in detailed and intensive talks with the teacher and lecturer trade unions and employer representatives. I can now report to the House on the heads of agreement on the scheme design for the teachers’ pension scheme to be introduced in 2015, on which talks have concluded. The Government have made it clear this sets out their final position on the main elements of scheme design, which unions have agreed to take to their Executives as the outcome of negotiations on the main elements of scheme design. This includes a commitment to seek Executives’ agreement to the suspension of any industrial action on pension reform while the final details are being resolved. Further detailed work will take place in the new year and Executives will consult members as appropriate.

The agreement includes changes to the Government’s reference scheme to reflect the priorities of the teaching profession in relation to early retirement and other issues, consistent with the need to remain within the Government’s overall cost ceiling.

The agreement reached allows for further discussions on variations to the balance between the accrual rate and the career average revalued earnings revaluation factor within the limits of the Government’s cost ceiling.

The core parameters of the new scheme are set out below:

a. a pension scheme design based on career average;

b. a provisional accrual rate of 1/57th of pensionable earnings each year, and the resolution of outstanding issues not covered by this agreement.

c. revaluation of active members’ benefits in line with CPI + 1.6%.

d. normal pension age equal to state pension age, which applies both to active members and deferred members (new scheme service only);

e. pensions in payment to increase in line with prices index (currently CPI);

f. benefits earned in deferment to increase in line with CPI;

g. average member contributions of 9.6%, with some protection for the lowest paid;

h. optional lump sum commutation at a rate of 12:1, in accordance with HMRC limits and regulations;

i. spouses/partner pension in accordance with current provisions;

j. lump sum on death in service of three times FTE salary;

k. ill-health benefits the same as those in the current open scheme;



l. actuarially fair early/late retirement factors on a cost-neutral basis except for those with a NPA above age 65, who will have early retirement factors of 3% per year for a maximum of three years in respect of the period from age 65 to their NPA; and

m. an employer cost cap to provide backstop protection to the taxpayer against unforeseen costs and risks.

The Government Actuary’s Department has confirmed that this scheme design does not exceed the cost ceiling set by the Government on 2 November. Copies of the heads of agreement and GAD verification have been deposited in the Libraries of both Houses.

National Curriculum in England (Review)

Michael Gove Excerpts

Monday 19th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

Over the past year the review of the national curriculum in England has been looking at curricula in the highest-performing, and fastest-improving, jurisdictions internationally. Today I am publishing a set of initial findings and recommendations.

The review team’s work has uncovered a consistent theme: these high-performing jurisdictions set materially higher expectations in terms of what they believe children can and should master at different ages. This comes as no surprise. Over the past 10 years our education system as measured by performance in the OECD’s PISA international league tables has deteriorated significantly. If our schools, and young people, are to become internationally competitive again we must learn from the best in the world.

The recommendations made by the review’s expert panel set out the scale of the challenge we face, and raise fundamental questions about educational practice in this country. For example:

The expert panel recommend that we learn from the approach to assessment and pupil progression used in many high-performing jurisdictions, including the most successful south-east Asian education systems, which ensure that every pupil has mastered the subject content before the class moves on to tackle the next part of the curriculum. They express concern that our existing assessment model assumes that a certain proportion of young people will never be able to master crucial curriculum content, leading to an unjustified lowering of expectations.

The international evidence shows that all successful jurisdictions expect pupils to study a broad curriculum to 16, built around a core of academic subjects. The expert panel argue that England narrows its curriculum for the majority of pupils too early.

The evidence identifies the higher expectations of pupils in maths, English and science in high-performing jurisdictions. For example,

In Singapore, pupils are expected to know all their times tables and related division facts by the end of year 4; here our national expectation is at year 6.

Pupils in Singapore are also expected to learn about plant and animal cells in year 6, including how cell division forms the basis of growth, while we leave this until secondary.

All high-performing jurisdictions—like Singapore, the Canadian province of Alberta and the US state of Massachusetts—have a separate section on grammar in their curricula with clear standards which must be met.

Poland, a fast-improving education system, has high expectations in their recommended reading, including Homer, Chekhov and Shakespeare alongside great works of Polish literature.

The panel also recommend that we should look again at the “key stage” structure of the curriculum which they argue can lead to a lack of pace and ambition at key points in pupil’s education.

It would, of course, be wrong to conclude that England should simply import systems used in other countries wholesale. But it is absolutely clear that these findings challenge fundamental tenets of our current system.

The expert panel also raise crucial questions about the complex interaction between curriculum and qualifications in secondary schools. Evidence shows that what is taught is determined as much, if not more, by examinations as by the national curriculum. This means we need to consider GCSE reform alongside the development of the new curriculum.

As the recent revelations in the Daily Telegraph have confirmed, far-reaching reform to our examinations system is vital—and must be considered in parallel with changes to the secondary curriculum. While immediate action is needed to deal with the improper practices that have been revealed, we need also to take the opportunity to ensure that deep-seated problems with how GCSEs have been developed and delivered can be addressed. We must ensure that qualifications support excellent teaching that develops in pupils a broad and deep understanding of the subject.

In light of the far-reaching and complex nature of the expert panel recommendations, and to allow for more radical reform of both curriculum and qualifications, I have decided to change the planned timetable for the introduction of the new national curriculum. Instead of new curricula for English, mathematics, science and PE being introduced from 2013, and the remainder in 2014, the new curriculum for all subjects will be introduced in 2014.

The longer time scale will allow for further debate with everyone interested in creating a genuinely world-class education system; teachers, governors, academics, business leaders and parents, as well as giving schools more time to prepare for a radically different and more rigorous approach.

A detailed timetable for the conduct of the remainder of the review, as well as a refreshed remit, will be published in the new year and copies will be placed in the Library of the House.

Alongside this statement I am publishing a suite of documents which, taken together, provide a summary of the findings to date of the review. This suite includes:

The report of the review’s expert panel setting out their recommendations in relation to the framework for the new national curriculum;

A summary of the evidence gathered about curricula for English, mathematics and science in high-performing jurisdictions;

A research report that looks at subject breadth in the curricula used in other education jurisdictions; and

A summary report of the responses to the review’s call for evidence.



A copy of each of these documents has been placed in the Library of the House.

New Schools

Michael Gove Excerpts

Wednesday 14th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

I am committed to responding to calls from employers for an education system that develops the future work force with the skills they need. Business leaders say that equipping young people with employability skills—such as punctuality, good communication, reliability and teamworking—should be a top education priority for the Government.

Studio schools offer academic and vocational qualifications, but teach them in a practical and project-based way. Study is combined with paid work placements with local and national employers that are involved in the school.

I am pleased to confirm today that 12 new studio schools have been approved with a view to opening in September 2012:

Education Funding

Michael Gove Excerpts

Tuesday 13th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

Today I am announcing details of education funding for 2012-13. My announcement includes the dedicated schools grant (DSG), funding for 16-19 education and training and capital funding for maintained schools, academies, the voluntary aided sector and 16-19 provision.

School funding

As set out in the “Consultation on School Funding Reform”, issued in July, we will continue with the current methodology for funding schools in 2012-13 through the dedicated schools grant (DSG). The underlying school budget will be kept at flat cash per pupil for 2012-13.

To protect local authorities with falling pupil numbers we will continue with arrangements to ensure that no authority loses more than 2% of its budget in cash terms.

Although the overall schools budget will stay at the same level on a per pupil basis before the addition of the pupil premium, the actual level of each school’s individual budget will vary. It will depend on local decisions about how best to meet needs and priorities. This does mean that some schools will see budget reductions, either because they have fewer pupils or local changes to funding distribution. To protect schools from significant budget reductions, we will continue with a minimum funding guarantee that ensures no school sees more than a 1.5% per pupil reduction in 2012-13 budgets (excluding sixth form funding) compared to 2011-12 and before the pupil premium is added.

Details of these arrangements, including per pupil funding for each local authority, are being sent to local authorities today and have been published on the Department for Education’s website.

The “Consultation on School Funding Reform” set out proposals for the funding system from 2013-14. I am grateful to all those who have responded to these important issues. I am publishing today a report on the consultation responses: there was a good deal of consensus around some proposals, such as the factors to include in both any national and local formulae, and the need for careful transitional arrangements. However, the responses also reflect a variety of views over some of the key aspects of the system. We are now working on developing further proposals in the light of the responses.

Funding for 16-19 provision

The Young People’s Learning Agency (YPLA) is today publishing a statement setting out the funding to be made available for 16-19 education and training for 2012-13. The funding statement shows that the Government plan to fund an increased number of places as we approach the raising of the participation age. We plan to fund 1,577,000 places in the 2012-13 academic year compared with the 1,543,000 learners we expect providers to have recruited in 2011-12.

Transitional protection was introduced in 2011-12 in order to help schools and colleges to manage unit cost savings that need to be made. We will continue to provide transitional protection for these policy changes for 2012-13 and will continue to make this available until 2015-16.

Capital funding

Today’s capital announcement covers funding for 2012-13 and includes allocations for basic need (funding for additional pupil places), maintenance and devolved formula capital. This is a further one-year allocation. This will enable me to reflect, for subsequent allocations, the rapidly changing situation in local areas on both demographic growth and numbers of schools converting to academy status.

At a national level, overall capital funding remains the same as last year—£800 million to address the shortage in pupil places and £1.4 billion for maintenance, including £200 million for devolved formula capital. I have agreed however to change the methodology for allocating funding for pupil places to better reflect local need.

Funding for pupil places needs to take account of the capacity of schools. For this reason, I have agreed that basic need allocations for 2012-13 will be decided using both numbers on roll and capacity data. That is, it combines the two methodologies used in 2011-12 for allocating basic need funding. Moving to this method will result in changes in levels of funding for some local authorities. Because of this, I have introduced a protection so that no local authority will receive, in 2012-13, less than 80% of the funding they would have received had we taken the same approach as taken for 2011-12.

This allocation does not include the additional £600 million for basic need allocated to my Department in the autumn statement. I am considering how best to allocate this funding. I will also consider how we can improve the collection of local data on pupil numbers and available school places so that allocations for the remainder of the spending review period are better targeted towards need.

Maintenance funding for local authorities will remain at the same level as last year and will be allocated in the same way. Some local authorities will see a reduction because their maintained schools have converted, or are about to convert, to academy status. Local authorities should take into account the maintenance needs of all maintained provision, including Sure Start centres, when deciding how to prioritise this funding.

I can also confirm the same funding levels for the locally co-ordinated voluntary aided programme (LCVAP) as in 2011-12 and we are taking the same approach to its allocation.

Devolved formula capital will remain at similar levels to last year so that the limited capital available can be more strategically targeted.

We have retained £276 million centrally to meet the maintenance needs of academies. This amount is based on numbers of academies already open and those due to open in the coming months. We expect local authorities to honour any commitments they have made to fund projects in their maintained schools, including where those schools may be intending to become academies during the next year.

The academies central fund next year will be administered in a similar way to this year, and we will provide further details early in 2012 when we are ready to receive applications for funding. We will also consult with sponsors and academy chains to explore options for giving them more flexibility to address the maintenance needs of their whole academy estate.

Capital funding for 16-19 provision

Over £107 million of capital funding will be available in 2012-13 to meet maintenance and building needs of sixth form colleges and demographic pressures for new 16-19 places in schools, academies and sixth form colleges.

Some £59 million of this funding will be allocated to the sixth form college building condition improvement fund (BCIF) in 2012-13 to address priority building condition needs within the sixth form college sector. All sixth form colleges will remain eligible for devolved formula capital (DFC) and it will remain at the same rate as 2011-12.

In addition, I want to ensure that funding is available to meet the need for additional places where there are demographic pressures in schools, academies and sixth form colleges. I have therefore made a further £44 million available in the coming financial year for basic need funding for additional places for 16-19 year old students in these areas. This funding will also support the provision of new places in mainstream settings, including in FE colleges, for students with learning difficulties and disabilities.

The Capital Review

The consultation on the capital review ended in October and I intend to publish a final Government response to their recommendations in January 2012.

The Priority School Building Programme

Finally, I would like to update the House on the latest position on the priority school building programme (PSBP). Partnerships for Schools (PfS) is currently reviewing applications to ensure there is a fair and rigorous selection of schools for admission to the programme. Until applications have been fully assessed, I will not be able to announce which schools will be in the programme. I understand the high level of interest in this programme and expect to be able to make an announcement in the new year.

More details about today’s capital allocations are being sent to local authorities and will be published on my Department’s website at: www.education.gov.uk.

A list of resources associated with today’s announcement can be found at annex A and I shall also make copies available in parliamentary Libraries.

Annex A

Accompanying documents

Dedicated Schools Grant

Dedicated Schools Grant: Technical note for 2012-13

Dedicated Schools Grant calculator

Dedicated Schools Grant Q & A

Work book containing:

A summary of the Guaranteed Units of Funding (GUFs) for 2012-13 for each local authority;

Details about how the GUFs for 2012-13 are calculated;

A flow diagram showing how the 2012-13 GUF allocations are calculated.

These products can be found online at:

http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/adminandfinance/financialmanagement/schoolsrevenuefunding/settlement2013pupilpremium.

Funding Reform

Analysis of consultation responses.

These products can be found online at:

http://www.education.gov.uk/consultations/index.cfm?action=conResults&consultationId=1756& external=no&menu=3.



Capital investment

A table of capital allocations.

A technical note explaining the methodology used to calculate these allocations.

These products can be found online at:

http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/adminandfinance/schoolscapital/a00200794/schools-capital-allocations-for-2012-13.

Review of Teachers' Standards

Michael Gove Excerpts

Monday 12th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

Sally Coates is today submitting to me the second and final report of her independent review of teachers’ standards.

I established the review in March this year. Chaired by Mrs Coates, principal of Burlington Danes Academy, it brought together leading head teachers, teachers and other educational experts. The review was tasked with establishing new standards that are clear, unequivocal and easy to use, and which can support teachers’ professional development and performance management.

The review’s first report, submitted to me on 14 July 2011¹, recommended that a single new set of teachers’ standards should be established to replace the existing standards for qualified teacher status and the core professional standards. I accepted those recommendations, and the new teachers’ standards will come into effect in September 2012².

The Government welcomed Mrs Coates’s recommendations to establish streamlined new teachers’ standards that set out very clearly and concisely the elements of high-quality teaching that should be expected of every teacher. The new standards place a welcome emphasis on the importance of good subject knowledge, behaviour management, and meeting the needs of pupils of all abilities and aptitudes. We are committed to raising the quality of teaching in all our schools, so that pupils and their parents can be confident that they are receiving the highest quality education. Clear and rigorous standards play an important role in ensuring that high quality of teaching that all should expect.

The review’s second report is now recommending that the existing post-threshold, excellent teacher and advanced skills teacher standards should be discontinued as standards. Further, the review recommends that a new master teacher standard should be introduced to define the characteristics of the most effective classroom teachers.

We welcome the proposal to establish a new standard that identifies and recognises those teachers who are demonstrating excellent practice in the classroom, and who are making the most significant positive impact on their pupils. The proposal of a single master teacher standard has the potential to bring much greater simplicity and clarity to what is at present a complex and highly bureaucratic system of standards.

My Department will now take forward further work to explore the implications of discontinuing the current post-threshold, excellent teacher and advanced skills teacher standards. This will include asking the school teachers’ review body to consider the implications for teachers’ pay.

The first and final reports of the review are published on the Department for Education’s website:

http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/teachingandlearning/reviewofstandards

Copies of both reports, and of my correspondence with Mrs Coates, have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

¹http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/r/first%20report%20-%2012%20july%202011.pdf

²http://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/l/letter%20from%20michael%20gove%20to%20sally%20coates.pdf

Academies Funding Transfer

Michael Gove Excerpts

Thursday 8th December 2011 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Michael Gove)]

I am today publishing a consultation setting out my “minded to” decision in relation to the academies funding transfer for 2011-12 and 2012-13.

The decision has been reached in consultation with the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and takes account of the responses received from local authorities to our consultation, issued in July 2011, about the basis for the decision.

The decision takes account of the need to ensure that both academies and local authorities are funded fairly for the pupils they provide services for and the responsibilities which they hold. We have also considered how best we can ensure that the amount transferred better reflects the distribution of academies between local authorities.

We plan to make changes from April 2012 to the methodology for calculating the level of the transfer to ensure that the amount transferred properly reflects the services which transfer to academies from their local authority. We will do this in two ways. First we will, in future, only take account of net expenditure on education services; and secondly, in areas where some responsibilities remain with the local authority, we will only use a proportion of spend in those areas to determine the amount to be transferred.

To provide financial stability and certainty to local authorities we will cap the maximum amount to be transferred in 2012-13 at the level of the top-slice of formula grant which has been announced by the Department for Communities and Local Government. In addition we will make a calculation for each authority in January 2013 of the costs of the local authority element of local authority central spend equivalent grant (LACSEG) based on the number of academies in each authority. Where the costs calculated for an authority are below the amount top-sliced from formula grant, we will make a specific grant payment to that authority equivalent to the difference between the costs and the top-slice.

To provide further certainty to local authorities we plan to make no changes to the previously announced top-slice for 2011-12 as we believe that taking action to redistribute costs at this stage in the financial year would cause unnecessary turmoil and instability.

This arrangement, whilst providing financial certainty and stability to local authorities, means that the Government will continue to provide a considerable amount of double funding in this area. Given the poor value for money which this provides the taxpayer these arrangements should only be seen as transitional.

The Government are committed to resolving the double funding of local authorities for services which devolve to academies permanently from 2013-14. As part of the local government resource review, we will explore removing the funding for these services from formula grant into the budget of the Department for Education. In this option, the Department would then a administer a grant to authorities and to academies proportionate to the number of pupils for which they are responsible according to a national rate. We plan to consult, jointly with the Department for Communities and Local Government, in 2012 on how we could put our commitment permanently to solve this issue into effect.

I have placed copies of the consultation paper in the Vote Office and the House Libraries.