Are Ministers responsible?

Posted on August 19, 2020 by John Howson

Should the Secretary of State for Education resign over the exams fiasco? I guess your answer depends upon your view on the doctrine of ministerial responsibility.

Back when I was a mere lad studying at the LSE, the leading case on the subject was only about 12 years old. This was what has become known to historians as the Crichel Down affair. It resulted in the resignation in 1954 of the then Minister of Agriculture following a public inquiry that was critical of his Department over the handling of parcel of land acquired for wartime use, I think for an airfield.

Mr Dugdale resigned, telling Parliament that “I, as minister, must accept full responsibility for any mistakes and inefficiency of officials in my department, just as, when my officials bring off any successes on my behalf, I take full credit for them.”

Such resignations, although honourable, are rare, and most Ministers tend to try and tough it out after something has gone wrong that is until their continued occupation of ministerial office becomes such an embarrassment to the government that the Prime minister makes it known that they should quit. Many, of course, don’t survive the next reshuffle.

This is a Prime minister that can be ruthless when he wants to be, as we saw in the run up to last year’s general election. However, I guess there have been so many mistakes this year since the start of the pandemic that any loss of a single cabinet minister might trigger demands for other heads to roll. Perhaps as with the changes to PHE, Ofqual’s days are numbered, and, perhaps, it will be returned to the DfE, much as happened to teacher training a few years ago.

What happens with the GCSE results between now and the weekend, and the cost of any bailout of universities resulting from the fallout of the A level –U-turn may well seal the fate of Mr Williamson.

Following on from the Crichel Down affair, the then Home Secretary, Sir David Maxwell Fyfe, suggested that ministers should not be held responsible for actions that they did not know about or of which they disapproved. However, they still needed to tell parliament what has happened, so that the legislature can discussed with full knowledge of the facts. I expect the Education Select Committee to hold a hearing sooner rather than later. At present, all we have is trial by media.

Ought the Secretary of State have known about the consequences of a policy of preventing grade inflation when there were no examinations to mark? Is knowing in principle, but not asking about the consequences a defence? The court of public opinion seems to think not. If it became clear that a minister had been briefed of the consequences, resignation would seem inevitable.

More likely we will lurch towards the beginning of September with the hope that re-opening of schools would be another disaster. If it is, then surely changes will be necessary.

Since writing this post, the Head of the Qualifications Agency has departed, as has the Permanent Secretary at the DfE. This is the highest civil service post in the DfE. By early evening on the 28th August no Minister has resigned.

A Failure of Leadership?

Posted on August 17, 2020 by John Howson

Christmas 2019 must have been a wonderful time in the Prime Minister’s household. A stunning election win just weeks before; a new family member on the way and our exit from Europe assured.

How different, it must seem now. On March 20^th, as schools were locked down, I wrote on this blog:

How a Prime minister deals with a crisis sometimes seals their fate. Chamberlain did not survive the switch from phony war to Blitzkrieg, and Eden paid for the shambles of Suez with his job. How our current Prime Minister handles the next few weeks will seal his fate. I never thought I would be writing these lines, especially in a situation where the current government has such a large majority. But even a large majority cannot protect someone in Number 10 Downing Street if both the opposition and significant parts of his own Party want a change of leadership.

We haven’t reached that state yet. But, just looking at how the government has handled the school situation in England this week leaves me wondering, as a political opponent, how much more his own Party will take? Why was the list of key workers not available on Wednesday? COVID-19 PM’s Suez? Posted on March 20, 2020

Since then we have had the PPE crisis; the care homes testing fiasco along with the test and trace debacle. Admittedly, there was firm leadership over self-isolation requirements for travellers from Spain, France, the Netherlands and some other countries. But, even that leadership has too often turned into a communications disaster.

Now we have the Prime Minister seemingly abandoning his own Education Secretary to his fate. Leadership means either sacking him or backing him, not disappearing from sight. It is not for me to suggest a way out, but here is what I would do now:

Honour predicted GCSE Grades

In this exceptional year, employers, colleges and schools should honour all teacher predicted grades for this year’s cohort of GCSE Students. Oxfordshire County Council Liberal Democrat Group believes such an approach provides clear leadership. Examinations at 16 are no longer an exit point from learning for the overwhelming majority of our students, and they should not be penalised by decisions taken in the interest of smoothing out a time series of achievement.

Students starting in September will need support whatever the grades they were predicted to achieve, and using teacher grades to determine futures is the fairest method possible.

In the longer-term, Liberal Democrats want an assessment of the cost and effectiveness of retaining public examinations at sixteen over more local forms of less expensive assessment.

Finally, we acknowledge the hard work of teachers, parents and many others in supporting our young people and adult learners during this challenging period in our history.

It is up to Tories what they do about the government, but the people will speak when elections return in 2021. A Prime minister that understands the history of this nation will know the portents.

Well Done Worcester

Posted on August 15, 2020 by John Howson

Inequality isn’t just about 2020 hindsight

Congratulations to my former college, Worcester, for deciding to honour all the offers it made this year. Had it done so in the past, it might have stoked the controversy about unconditional offers. But that was last year’s debating point about university admissions. Indeed, the debate about whether offers should be made on predictions or actual grades has rumbled on for years without reaching a conclusion, other than the status quo.

I find the interest in social mobility that has been awakened by the use of the prior attainment achieved by schools and colleges in the decision-making process by the regulator an interesting sign of the times. After all, such disadvantage for some groups was present even when examinations were actually taken.

Why has this blog been so strident over the years about teacher shortages? One reason is that stark differences in the knowledge and experience of teachers can affect learning outcomes. A quick glance at the distribution of vacancy adverts for the limited supply of teachers of physics demonstrates a pattern that favours certain types of schools and leaves others rarely advertising for such teachers. Of course, some may respond to vacancy adverts for a ‘teacher of science’, but when offered the chance to teach their subject, many would, I guess, rightly prefer to do so. For physics, you can substitute mathematics, and a host of other subjects.

This is however but one form of difference between schools and their pupils in preparing for examinations. The ability of parents to afford revision classes, if the school chooses not to offer them, and to provide top up tutoring for parts of the syllabus not covered for any reason is another unfairness.

I write from personal experience on how sixth form life can change outcomes. My own GCE results at age sixteen were mediocre, not good enough to be allowed into some sixth forms these days. Yet, two years later, my grades at ‘A’ Level were 2Bs and a C, with a pass in a special paper. Might I have been downgraded this year?

The government appointed Social Mobility Commission has highlighted the inequalities in the education system for years, but it takes a pandemic to rocket the issue up the national agenda. Even then, the focus is on a narrow point resulting from the unique circumstances of school closures and a lack of examinations. Few seem to have broadened the debate to discuss the more general point about equality in our education system. Class still rules: OK.

Has the switch to a centrally controlled Academy system, from the former devolved and locally accountable system of schooling helped or hindered social mobility. To the extent that councillors were as little interested in the issue as are politicians at Westminster it has probably made little difference. However, the view of individual heads of school, like those of individual Oxford colleges can and does make a difference.

Might the Secretary of State become the first political casualty of the pandemic? Next week’s GCSE results, and how they are handled, will probably seal his fate. Certainly, his Minister of State had a rough ride on the BBC’s Any Questions last night.

Happy Birthday

Posted on August 9, 2020 by John Howson

Today is the 150th birthday of the 1870 Education Act. This was the Act of Parliament that established State Schools in England for the first time. There had been funding for schools before this date, but 1870 marked the start of a State education system.

However, there was no requirement in the Act to send children to school, and there still isn’t. Parents must educate their offspring, but it is up to them how to do it. If they make no provision, then the state school system is the default catch-all option: parents cannot simply ignore the issue of education once a child reaches statutory school age.

It is perhaps symbolic that the Prime Minister has chosen today, probalby unknowingly, .to talk of the new term and a ‘moral duty’ to get all children back to school.

As I said in an earlier post, I worry not for the children, but for those they come into contact with both at home and at school. High risk teachers should be deployed working with high risk and self-isolating children that cannot attend school by using the developing technology to offer appropriate learning strategies available to all.

Much also needs to be achieved with those that have fallen behind over the past five months so that they can catch-up without just facing a diet of just English and mathematics.

Cash strapped local authorities need to consider retaining uniform grants for those pupils attending schools requiring special clothes whose parents are unable to afford the cost of this specialist clothing. Schools should also make uniform optional, and not mandatory, in the present climate, and certainly not use it as a means of discrimination against certain pupils.

The government must also not forget further education and apprenticeships. Those with long memories will recall the TVEI scheme of the 1980s. Perhaps it is time to create a 20th century version, so that no young person leaves education without some offer of continued education or employment.

Local authorities should investigate how much cash they have taken from maintained primary schools through the Apprenticeship Levy that is currently sitting in bank accounts and set up task forces to ensure it can reduce youth unemployment locally. There is no point in giving the cash back to government. The same is true for the MATs.

MATs, diocese and local authorities should also review the level of school balances. Now is the time to spend them and not to leave them in the bank doing nothing. It is just a rainy day, but a monsoon of unimaginable proportions. If head teacher need convincing, then offer suggestions for how the cash can be spent.

Finally, I have suggested before that the class of 2020 that graduated as teachers all be offered work in view of the steep decline in vacancies that has led to many not being employed for September.

Let us celebrate this special day in the history of education in England by working to provide the children of today with the best possible education in these unprecedented times.

Some subjects may still be short of teachers in 2021

Posted on August 7, 2020 by John Howson

The covid-19 pandemic has come too late in the recruitment round to ensure that all teacher preparation courses for graduates in all subjects will recruit enough students for September 2020 in order to ensure enough teachers for September 2021 vacancies.

On the basis of the July data from UCAS, the number of ‘Placed’, ‘Conditionally Placed’ and ‘Holding an Offer’ applications were sufficient in biology; Business Studies; English; history; music; physical education; religious education; art and modern languages to reasonably expect the DfE’s Teacher Supply Number to be reached. The percentage in art and design is the highest number recorded for more than a decade. The primary sector should also exceed its target set by the DfE.

On the other hand, computing and geography might meet the target with a few more acceptable applicants during the summer. However, it seems unlikely that chemistry; design & technology; mathematics and physics will meet the desired number this year. There simply haven’t been enough time to attract applicants, unless that is there is a stream of highly qualified applicants between early July and the start of September.

Interestingly, 24% of applications in physics were in the ‘Placed’, ‘Conditionally Placed’ and ‘Holding an Offer’ categories by mid-July 2020. This was the same percentage as in 2019. The figure for mathematics was also 24% in both July 2019 and July 2020. In Chemistry it had dropped from 25% in 2019, to 23% this year, although there were nearly 600 more applications for providers to process, so the final percentage might be higher.

In music, the percentage in the ‘Placed’, ‘Conditionally Placed’ and ‘Holding an Offer’ categories by mid-July 2020 was 32%, one of the highest for any subject, and up from 26% in July 2019. Physical education, not a shortage subject, has seen their percentage increase from 20% in July 2019 to 24% in July 2020.

So, 2020 looks like being the best year for recruitment into training for teaching for five or six years, but it seems unlikely that all subjects will meet their targets. However, there may well be a glut of both physical education and history teachers entering the market in 2021, unless all the vacancies lost this year by schools either retrenching or not needing to recruit appear again for September 2021.

Would I take on the extra debt to train as either a PE or a history teacher? Well, I would certainly look at the employment record of the course offering me a place this year and check with TeachVac www.teachvac.co.uk what the job situation is like in these subjects, especially in view of any debt to the government that will be incurred by joining the course. After all, we don’t know what might happen to interest rates and repayment terms as the government seeks to manage the economy over the next few years.

More want to be teachers

Posted on August 6, 2020 by John Howson

Last week, UCAS published the July data regarding applications to postgraduate teacher preparation courses. There was a flurry of interest in the data, including a press release from the Education Policy Institute (EPI), the leading education think-tank. In a later post I will consider some of the points raised by EPI. At this point it is merely worth noting that this blog pointed out the increase in applications some months ago.

So how large has the increase actually been since the pandemic transformed the labour market in England? Back in March 2020, the number of applicants for these courses in England was running at the same level as in 2019, across both primary and secondary courses.

By May, there were 4% more applicants (1,240); by June 8% (2,520) and by the July figures some 15% more than in July 2019 (5,560) at a total of 41,770 applicants for both primary and secondary courses, compared with 36,210 in July 2019. Whether the increase might have been greater had more courses still been accepting applications is an unknown question.

Nationally, applicant numbers increased by 26%, by this July compared with July 219, although the increase in the North East was just 21%, whereas, in London, applicant numbers this July were 35% above the 2019 number.

The percentage of applicants recorded as being in the three categories of ‘Placed’ ‘Conditionally Placed ‘or ‘Holding Offer’ varied from 86% of the 4,270 women applicants in the 21 and under age groping to 52% of men in the 40 and over age group. Overall, 68% of men were in the three groups compared with 77% of women applicants. Both men and women, the percentage in the ‘Placed’ and ‘Offer groups declined with age.

In terms of applications, as opposed to applicants, SCITTs had the highest percentage in the ‘Placed’ and ‘Offer groups, at 36% compared with 17% of applications for School Direct Salaried places. This percentage fell to just 14% for these School Direct Salaried courses in the secondary sector. Higher Education primary courses had 33% in the ‘Placed’ and ‘Offer groups and 28% for their secondary courses.

These seem quite high figures in terms of applicants ‘Placed’ and ‘Conditionally Placed’ as in both cases this means an offer has been made to an applicant. I wonder how often more than eight out fo ten applicants are offered places on courses?

In the next post I will consider what these numbers mean for applications in individual subjects and whether the supply problem that has faced schools over the past few years has now been solved for September 2021?

PTRs: an update

Posted on July 23, 2020 by John Howson

The publication of the 30^TH Report of the School Teachers’ Review Body (STRB) Report earlier this week contained the usual chapter on the state of the labour market for teachers. As is often the case, the DfE provided a set of data with their evidence that found its way into the relevant chapter of the report.

One such table was for the Pupil Teacher Ratios for Qualified Teachers, by primary and secondary sectors for all state-funded schools

The STRB table appears to have used data from the School Workforce Census up to 2018. The 2019 data presumably appeared too late to be included in the Report, but I have added it to the Table for the purpose of completeness.

Pupil to teacher ratio (Qualified) within-schools for ‘Pupil-teacher ratios’
	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019
LA maintained nursery and primary	21	20.9	20.9	21	21.1	21.3	21.7	21.5	21.3
LA maintained secondary	15.6	15.5	15.7	15.8	16.1	16.4	16.7	17.2	17

* see foot of post for link

Curiously, the data from the DfE site on the School Workforce Census for Qualified teachers in 2018/19 differs from the numbers in the STRB Table as the extract from the DFE site reveals.

Table showing Pupil to teacher ratio (Qualified) within-schools for ‘Pupil-teacher ratios’ from ‘School workforce in England’ in England between 2018/19 and 2019/20
	2018/19	2019/20
LA maintained nursery and primary	21.3	21.3
LA maintained secondary	16.7	17

https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/data-tables/fast-track/bf13ef14-3069-4638-a489-d31a2248e984

I don’t know the reasons for the apparent differences between the two datasets. The new method of producing statistics on the DfE site makes time series data more of a challenge to create for those used to the former presentation. I am sure that the new system will allow for easier interrogation of the data, one the initial challenges have bene overcome. However, it does alter the dynamics of the relationship with the data if you can only ask pre-set questions, and cannot eye-ball the dataset for possibly interesting patterns that have not occurred to the statisticians in the civil service.

There are couple of odd anomalies in the Secondary PTR data for 2019. Two unitary authorities, Portsmouth and Telford & Wrekin, are recorded as experiencing very large changes between 2018 and 2019. In the case of Portsmouth’s data about Qualified Teachers in the secondary sector, the PTR went from 16.7:1 to 18.5:1 in one year. This is well outside the normal degree of change.

In the past there have been errors recorded in the PTR tables. Indeed, one year a Volume of Statistics of Education – Teachers had to be recalled as there were so many mistakes. More recently, a glitch resulted in mistakes for some local authorities in Yorkshire and The Humber Region appearing in one version of the table.

Finally, it is worth noting the relationship between school funding and PTRs. The direction of travel is a good lagging indicators of how well schools are funded, especially now that funding is so closely related to pupil numbers.

Should the remaining shire counties be reformed into unitary councils in the autumn, as has been predicted, then 2020 might be the last time for some years that PTR data will provide anything like a reliable picture of staffing trends in schools across a whole swathe of rural England.

Click to access STRB_30th_report_July_2020.pdf

Primary sector: smaller in future

Posted on July 22, 2020 by John Howson

This is the time of year when the DfE updates its pupil projections. These are the numbers that identify the trends in the size of the school population. Changes in migration and in the birth rate are the two most important national drivers of the total school population.

Obviously, migration can have a more immediate effect on pupil numbers than changes in the number of live births. As a result, planning for changes in the birth rate is much easier than changes in migration. Let’s assume, for instance, that there is an influx of families from Hong Kong as a result of the changed political situation there. This might bring a sudden and unexpected influx of pupils. At the national level, such an influx might not be noticeable, but since migrants tend to cluster in communities, some areas might see a sudden increase in pupil numbers.

The government tries to plan for such eventualities by creating high and low variants of the different variables making up the pupil numbers.

Here are the headlines from the DfE analysis

Headline facts and figures from the 2020 national pupil projections

The nursery and primary school population has been rising since 2009 but has now plateaued, as the drop in births in 2013 feeds into the main school population, and is projected to drop for the whole projection period to 2030. The drop is steeper than previously projected due to lower births recorded since the end of 2016.
The secondary school population began rising in 2016 and is projected to continue increasing until 2024 before gradually dropping until the end of the projection period. The peak and then fall is primarily due to the lower births seen in 2013 and beyond, which start to reach secondary school age in around 2025.
The population in special schools has been increasing for a number of years, at least partly driven by the increase in the overall population, and this is projected to continue until 2024, before also very gradually dropping.

https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/national-pupil-projections

How steep will the drop in the primary school population be?

The low migration and low fertility variant produces a primary school population of 4,383,000, some 88,000 pupil less than the Principal projection. That could mean the need for between 4-5,000 fewer teachers across the primary sector unless funding was not tightly tied to pupil numbers.

Population of primary and secondary age in 2026

under the variant projections, England
	population in 2026	difference to principal
Projection	nursery & primary age	secondary age	nursery & primary age	secondary age
principal	4,471	3,218
low fertility	4,404	3,218	-67	0
high fertility	4,519	3,218	48	0
low migration	4,450	3,210	-21	-8
high migration	4,492	3,226	21	8
low population	4,383	3,210	-88	-8
high population	4,541	3,226	70	8
Source: national population projections (2020 model). Figures in 000s

https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/national-pupil-projections

However, at the other extreme, the primary population might be some 70,000 greater than the Principal projection. This would require more teachers, assuming funding is closely tied to pupil numbers.

In the secondary sector, there is less difference between the projections, as the pupils in the secondary sector by 2026 are already in the school system. Any significant change would be the result of changes in migration patterns.

Would I consider applying to university in the autumn to start an undergraduate degree in primary education in 2021? Well, there will still be a need for teachers, but if the birth rate continues to fall, perhaps as a result of concerns arising from the covid-19 pandemic and decisions on family size, then it might not seem as attractive a career is it did a few years ago.

Since most secondary sector teachers are prepared through postgraduate routes lasting around a year, there is less urgency to consider pupil numbers are a reason for evaluating teaching as a possible career.

Of course, if there is a drop in private school enrolments, there may be more pupils in the State sector, but also more teachers competing for jobs.

All this is at the national level for England. There are also regional differences to consider.

Covid-19 and schools: not risk free

Posted on July 22, 2020 by John Howson

Re-opening schools to all pupils during the continued covid-19 outbreak poses at least three possible threats:

To the pupils themselves

To the staff both working in schools and also transporting children to and from school

To family members of these two groups.

So, what do we know about deaths from covid-19. The NHS weekly data on the deaths of patients who have died in hospitals in England and have tested positive for Covid-19 are shown in the table below. All deaths were reported during the period up to the 15^th July 2020.

Age group	Pre-existing condition: Yes	Pre-existing condition: No	Unknown presence of pre-existing condition	Total


0 – 19 years	16	4	0	20
20 – 39	177	33	0	210
40 – 59	1,993	265	0	2,258
60 – 79	10,499	569	0	11,068
80+	15,082	508	0	15,590
Unknown age	0	0	0	0

Source england.covid19dailydeaths@nhs.net

Because it isn’t clear when covid-19 really started affecting the population, it is also worth looking at the ONS data for all registered deaths in 2020. Those in the 5-19 age groupings amount to 606 from all causes. This compares with more than 11,000 in the 55-59 age grouping and more than 15,000 in the 60-64 age grouping. Data is up to 3^rd July 2020. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/weeklyprovisionalfiguresondeathsregisteredinenglandandwales

School pupils may well catch covid-19 and transmit it, but it seems not to be fatal for school-age pupils in any numbers, even though every death is a tragedy for the family.

The ONS also report on testing in the community that excludes care homes, hospitals and other institutional settings. The commented that ‘Statistical testing also indicates that there is not enough evidence to say with confidence that community infection rates over the study period differ between age groups. However, when analysing the different infection rates by age, it is important to recognise that community settings do not include people in institutional settings, such as care homes.’ https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19infectionsinthecommunityinengland/july2020

However, the unweighted data does show lower percentages of young people testing positive for covid-19, but there are wide confidence intervals in the data. More age related testing is needed.

The threat is obviously greater to adults that come into contact with both children and other adults in school settings or by transporting pupils to and from schools.

Looking at the wider data, there are obviously some groups at higher risk than others, and school staff in these groups, whether teachers or support staff may need better shielding from possible infection. Perhaps the highest risk groups should not have contact with large groups of children until a vaccine is in place?

As I have said before, the system should be ‘hoping for the best, but planning for the worst’. It seems as if local lockdowns are almost inevitable through at least part of the next school-year, and planning to cope with such occurrences should be high on the agenda of officials.

For this reason, I have previously advocated a supernumerary scheme for NQTs without a teaching post for September. I still think such a move would be sensible.

Support school leaders

Posted on July 17, 2020 by John Howson

One of the more interesting aspects of the labour market in education at this time is the number of head teacher vacancies on offer. A quick search on the DfE’s web site revealed that 15% of the 168 vacancies listed today were for head teachers. To verify that number, it is necessary to remove all non-teaching posts – of which there are still quite a few- and separate out the genuine head teacher vacancies from other leadership posts that include not only other senior leadership posts, at deputy and assistant head teacher level, but also head of department vacancies.

This number of head teacher vacancies in late July is not exceptional, but normally one would have expected schools to have made arrangements for leadership during the next school-year that all too soon will be upon us.

However, recognising the huge strain that has been placed upon head teachers since the start of the covid-19 pandemic, and the universal lockdown of society, it would not be surprising if some head teachers were now starting to think of their future.

It is essential that head teachers, and indeed all staff in schools, can take a genuine break over the next six to seven weeks. The long autumn term is always a strain for everyone, even after a normal summer break. To start September not fully refreshed is to risk an education system that will just not function properly.

My concern about staffing in the autumn, following the collapse in vacancies since March, has led me to call for a scheme to provide support for newly qualified teachers unable to secure a teaching job. These new teachers are a resource we cannot afford to squander.

We have seen them invest in their training through the student loan programme. They entered into training as teachers in good faith. In some case making the decision to train as a teacher in the autumn of 2018, when applications opened. Dumping these individuals on the growing pile of the unemployed, while the interest payments on their student loans continues to mount up, is not fair.

As I have said in the past, we don’t treat trainee members of the armed forces or many other public services, including new recruits to the civil service, in this way.

If we lose even 20% of this year’s class of new teachers from the profession that will have a profound effect on middle and senior leadership recruitment in the years to come.

Should we see a surge in departures of head teachers, either in the autumn or more likely next January, then we do need to have the candidates in the system to step up and fill the roles that underpin the supply of new head teachers.

We might also start by looking at how many Executive Head Teachers there are overseeing MATs, and whether there is room for rationalisation, and some cost saving as a result.

This has been a challenging year for school leaders, and those responsible for policy must ensure that one of the consequences of covid-19 is not a breakdown in the leadership of any of our schools.