Clause 78

Part of Education and Skills Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 1:15 pm on 28 February 2008.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Nick Gibb Nick Gibb Shadow Minister (Education) (Schools) 1:15, 28 February 2008

That is a suspicion that the most cynical would have. When there are statistics available that show that, while educating only about 10 per cent. of the population, independent schools achieve 65 per cent. of the A-level A grades in the sciences, there could be a view that the way to remove those benchmark comparisons is to lower the standards in the independent sector. That is if the people who oppose private education cannot abolish it altogether, which is the view of a minority.

The ISC document goes on to say at paragraph 79,

“we do question why it is necessary for there to be a standard to this effect and the way in which this proposal has been presented has particularly caused concern amongst member schools.”

To quote from paragraph 81, the ISC’s particular concern is that if the standard

“is being introduced to cope with poor management in a minority of non-ISC schools, it might be argued that any standard aimed at this problem would be far lower than the standard already being applied in ISC schools.”

It adds:

“it would be disappointing if, because of the reason for its introduction, the Government was to set a standard far lower than that.”

The other main concern expressed by the ISC about the new management standard is that of homogenisation—the point my hon. Friend the Member for North-East Hertfordshire was alluding to. It says:

“ISC would have a fundamental objection to any standard which sought to impose particular styles of leadership or a framework or criteria which required schools to conform to one organisation’s view of how schools should be managed. The RIA, for example, refers to schools being required under the new standard to appoint particular teachers.”

The Independent Schools Inspectorate itself therefore opposes this new management standard. Page 9 of its written response says:

“We do not agree with the proposal as drafted.

The ISI framework for inspection already includes a requirement to make judgements and report on the quality of a school’s leadership and management. Evidence from inspections shows that the management of most ISC schools is of good quality, much of it excellent...Clear mechanisms are already in place under the ISI/ISC system for ensuring that any required improvements are made by the school following an inspection.”

As the ISI goes on to say:

“If no other mechanism can be found for dealing with the small number of schools needing improvement then the management standard would need to be written in such a way that it did not weaken the expectation of high standards already required in ISC schools.”

Finally, it makes the important point that

“The standard should not require schools to operate a particular style of management, and care should be taken to reflect the very diverse nature of schools within the sector.”

The concern of the independent sector about this new management standard is best summed up by Jonathan Shephard, the chief executive of the ISC, who, in response to a question from the hon. Member for Yeovil, said:

“There is a concern about creeping regulation and Ofsted-isation... if you have Ofsted imposing a management standard on all independent schools, then the way in which the schools are run will tend to conform with that standard. You may or may not like independent schools... but they do educate children at all levels of ability in a very good, effective and workmanlike way. They do that because they are able to be flexible and responsive and they have to answer to... parents, children and universities. If you get a one-size-fits-all, increasingly prescriptive manner from Ofsted...you may lose that flexibility and independence and that is a very serious worry.”——[Official Report, Education and Skills Public Bill Committee, 22 January 2008; c. 86, Q195.]

I am astonished by the hostile reaction to this proposal from the very respectable and statutory body, the ISI. It is very surprising that the Minister and the Department are proceeding with this measure, given the opposition to it from the ISI, the very body that will be charged with implementing and enforcing it. I wonder whether this reflects the hostility to the independent sector from the Minister or the Department or whether old Labour is simply exerting its influence in the dying months of this Government. Amendment No. 123 seeks to delete the new standard from the Bill. I hope that, on reflection, the Minister will give it his support.