Salaries in vacancy adverts: not an issue for most schools

The government has been reminding employers that they will need to included salary details in job adverts. On the face of it, this isn’t an issue for most Vacancies published by schools, at least not for teachers and school leaders. Most of those vacancies come with the salary level attached.

However, there are a few multi academy trusts that still insist on advertising headteacher vacancies with the wording ‘a competitive salary’.  I have pointed  out in a previous post that such a phrase can be off-putting, as potential candidates don’t know what it means in reality and whether or not it is worth going to the trouble of applying. They will now have to fall into line and add a cash salary to their vacancy advert.

There remains a grey area over both salary points and TLRs (Teaching & Learning Responsibility Points). The former is easier to understand than the latter. Salary scales can change with pay rises, but the new salary levels need the agreement of the Secretary of State before they can be implemented. As a result, at certain times of year, the current salary might not reflect the future amount to be paid. Using the salary scales allows applicants to  see both current and future pay levels, and thus seem justified in an advert to me.

The issue of TLRs is both more complicated and less justified to me. What is the amount of TLR 2.1 or 2a or 2i or any other non-cash descriptor? Some universal agreement on how these salary additions are represented in non-cash terms, so  they can be fully understood by candidate’s from outside the school, would be useful. Of course, candidates can ring up and enquire, but the sense of the government’s position is that they shouldn’t need to do so.

What of other benefits that sometimes appear in adverts, from health care to salary uplifts and car allowances, should these be included in the job advert and, if so, should a real or notional cash sum be attributed to them if the spirit of the government’s announcement is to be adhered to, and not just the letter of the law?

Fortunately, the government hasn’t mentioned holidays, as schools, with their employer-driven form of flexitime would be hard put to be honest about how much holiday a teacher might really expect, contrary to the ‘naysayers’ that still complain about ‘long holidays for teachers’. My analysis of the real position on teachers’ holidays has been  one of the most viewed posts on this blog. Holiday advice – no use for teachers | John Howson

For senior leaders, publishing the starting salary allows for comparison with the salary on offer by other schools of similar sizes by potential candidates either currently or in the recent past. Using that information from vacancies advertised for headteachers since August 2025, I have suggested that headteachers of small primary schools are under-paid. Are Primary Headteachers underpaid? | John Howson

Fundraising Officer: MAT offers a new role

This post may annoy some of the people I know and admire. If so, my apologies. However, the advert below raises some interesting questions in my mind.

Fundraising Officer – About this role

This is a hands-on role where you will have the opportunity to build your fundraising experience and make a real contribution to the MAT’s ability to increase funding for key educational priorities and initiatives. You will also be helping to build the culture of philanthropy across the MAT’s community, managing resources, administration, and communications across the network.

You will be pivotal in researching and applying for funding from grant-making bodies, and also supporting the freelance fundraising consultant to build meaningful relationships with potential donors, local businesses, and other stakeholder groups.

You will also be responsible for managing the day-to-day running and support of the Trust-wide CRM fundraising database, ensuring best practice, alongside developing, and supporting the user base across the school network.

Working  with our freelance fundraising consultant, and reporting into the Trust’s CFO, the medium- to long- term goal is to ensure that the Trust continues to build a strong and dynamic fundraising community, alongside increasing the amount of philanthropic income used to support important areas of educational need.

Firstly, what would happen if a local authority advertised such a role to support maintained schools? Might some other political parties, question the use of public money to help raise cash for  education projects? However, at least it would be used locally.

Secondly, how far should the remit of Multi Academy Trusts run? Should they be funding projects that aim to improve the lives of the children that either attend or will attend their schools rather than focus on the actual schooling? What of MATs with schools spread across a wide area. Should funds raised in one area by available to use anywhere, as with  other charities?

Thirdly, what happens if a number of the MATs in the same area all decide to employ such a person? The unregulated landscape of MATs, where ‘many flowers already bloom’ raises questions about overheads and the cost-effective nature of the funds already being used to support so many different small-scale education enterprises, all with limited local democratic oversight.

Of course, I am an unreconstructed supporter  of local government taking the lead in education for a locality. There are already many posts on this blog reflecting my views about democracy and education at the local level.

However, in terms of this post I do have to declare an interest. More than 30 years ago, in the 1990s, when Local Management of Schools meant devolved budgets, and the control of assets passed to schools, I created a Module in the post-graduate programme for teachers studying at Oxford Polytechnic, as it still was then, called ‘Marketing & Public Relations in Education’.  At least one deputy head that took the module then created a new role at the school where he worked just to increase income by marketing the school facilities during the holidays and at weekends. At the same time a school near Heathrow developed a clubhouse for users of its sports facilities when not being used by the school.  Income from the use of school facilities has become an accepted route to increase school funds. This new role takes the concept further into ‘funding for key educational priorities and initiatives’ more widely, and not just for one school’s benefit.

As MATs are exempt charities, presumably funds raised can benefit from charity law regarding contributions. I am sure that local authorities would look at establishing a charity for similar projects, if they don’t already have such a charity, if this source of fund-raising by MATs were to spread beyond one innovative MAT.

The DfE is going to be hard-pressed to secure funding for schools in the next spending review. It would be a real tragedy if HM Treasury decided that this type of fund raising by MATs should not only support new initiatives but also core projects such as SEND, where funding is desperately needed.

Let me know what you think in the comments.

Schools and the Spending Review

The budget yesterday revealed that the DfE’s budget for education won’t be able to escape the government’s need for savings Budget 2026: everything schools need to know | Tes The current projections are for an average 2% fall from 2028-29 according to the tes article. As I mentioned in yesterday’s blog post, capital spending will also not be immune from cuts. This is despite the dire state of many school buildings.

What follows are my own views on future spending, not those of any political Party, and certainly not those of the Liberal Democrats, of which Party I remain a member. I offer then up for debate, at a time of crisis in the national finances.

Firstly, the school estate. One obvious way to improve the quality of the school estate is to use the reality of falling rolls to remove some of the worst schools from the estate. In the past, when there was a coherent system for forward planning for schooling, based around local authorities responsible for their ‘place’, such system could quickly have identified how to rationalise a system where capacity exceeded need.

This process wasn’t always easy, as the recent article about falling rolls in Haringey that I posted on researchgate showed. (PDF) Policy Process and Pressure Groups: Falling School Rolls in Haringey

‘Save of Schools’, is still a popular slogan for local politicians. I though this issue through in my one attempt at drama based around a primary school facing falling rolls ‘Heading Off’. Not great drama, but allows the issues around falling rolls to be discussed. Post | Feed | LinkedIn

In the present system of maintained schools, academies, foundation schools and the remaining voluntary aided and controlled schools, where is the forward planning taking place? Should the DfE appoint a commission charged with a review of the estate, and how it might be rationalised?

Such a commission might need to look beyond just the condition of the estate to also address the thorny question of the size of post-16 provision and any relationship between size, the range of curriculum on offer and the level of outcomes. It is easy to duck this challenge in a divided system where the ‘buck’ can be past to another group, whether politicians, MAT boards or regional directors at the DfE.  It is a measure of good government that it is prepared to make hard choices. I wrote  a blog about this issue earlier in the year. Are small sixth forms a good idea? | John Howson

Pupil teacher ratios have been under pressure for some time. On a per pupil funding model, retaining the present funding model could save the government considerable amount of cash as school rolls fall. However, at the school level, fewer pupils make it hard to fund salary increases, where funding is calculated on an ‘average’ overall salary bill.

As I have pointed out before, schools with an above average salary bill, and falling rolls face reals funding issues. MATs can ‘vire’ between their schools, usually through increasing the overhead charge on each school and rebating to help schools with deficits: but is this the right approach?

Rationalising the use of funds for schooling will inevitably collide with the principle of parental choice if closing a popular school is the most sensible way forward. So be it. After all, the original concept of ‘parental choice’ in Section 6 of the 1980 Education Act did contain the get out clause of ‘prejudicial to the efficient use of resources’. Parental choice was never an absolute right.

In a recent post, I asked whether breakfast clubs were meeting their stated aims or whether they were providing free childcare to working families? Might a small charge for those pupils not on free school meals raise some income to help defray the cost to the Exchequer? Not a popular move, but perhaps employers might be willing to help with a tax break. Are Breakfast clubs just a new form of extended school day? | John Howson

Will falling rolls also save money  on SEND? My recent post about the London boroughs and the trends in requests for EHCPs does suggest that the number of requests should reduce with falling rolls even without any assessment of current approaches to funding. This might be a considerable saving, especially if some of the burden  from the former High Needs block  placed on schools. EHCP requests and falling rolls | John Howson

However, against all these savings there are areas where expenditure should, in my view, be increased. I have campaigned for 16-18 travel to education to be free across the country, and not just in urban areas. This is now one for mayors and their counterparts in strategic authorities to take on board. Extend education free travel to 16-18 year olds | John Howson

Then there are the grants not uprated for inflation since 2014. The grant for music is the one best known to me at present, bit there are no doubt still other grants that need a review and updating.

I was also disappointed to see no mention of youth services in the budget. Despite falling rolls, this is an area where more spending is needed.

Finally, I would restore the training grant to all trainee teachers. It is both wrong to pay some trainees and not others and to retain the historical fiction behind tuition fees to place trainee teachers in a different category to trainee army officers and trainee civil servants. Why aren’t all trainee teachers paid? | John Howson

I will also end by reminding readers that the millions the DfE has spent on a teacher vacancy service could have been saved with a bit of commonsense. The present service isn’t free to schools with the administrative costs not being large but being unnecessary. I closed down TeachVac when I took on the role of Cabinet member in Oxfordshire in 2023, but a service that costs nothing to the DfE should still be possible.

The Geddes Axe remained long in the memory of public sector workers, but  I hope that better targeted and rational cuts rather than an across-the-board swipe at a sector will be the order of the day over the remainder of this parliament.

Cut in spending on schools seem likely both to save the wider economy, and to support defence spending for the next war. If Russia wanted to send a message to Europe as a whole, attacking an offshore island that has strongly supported Ukraine is sadly no longer an unthinkable thought.

Missing from the budget

Education didn’t really feature in the budget.

I had hoped that there might be help for 16-18 year-olds in rural areas to access education. Instead, the Chancellor announced that he would help families with younger children through the Bus Fund.

Line 67 Bus Travel: Fund free bus travel for children aged 5-15 in England  from 1 August 2026 until 31 August 2026.

I am sorry he didn’t pick up on the 16-18 issue in rural areas, as it is something I have been campaigning about for years now.

The Chancellor also announced a cut in Red Diesel: Reduce duty rates by 3.7p-per-litre from 15 June 2026 to 1 July 2027 Will that help local authorities with their school transport bills? Sadly, I k not. Another missed opportunity?

Other mentions about education in the budget needed hunting out.

6.122 Books for children – The government will provide £5 million a year for three years from 2027-28 to increase the provision of books for pre-school children, supporting organisations such as the Dolly Parton Imagination Library and BookTrust.

Saldy, that won’t buy many books. For example, if 100,000 children qualified, they would receive £5 worth of books each. Hopefully, the books will circulate, so each child will have access to many books per year. But that approach increases overheads, so I am surprised not to see a match-funded scheme that could leverage more cash for the project.

6.124 School Physical Education (PE) & Sport funding – Funding to the Department for Education will increase by £60 million per year to contribute to the cost of new PE & Sport partnerships, due to be rolled out in England in 2027.

No mention of uprating the music grant by inflation. The grant hasn’t been uprated since 2014, along with a couple of other grants in the DfE’s budget.

Capital spending on education projects is likely to fall as the Treasury raids capital budgets to help fund extra defence spending. The capital spending ‘outurn’ in 25/26 was £6bn, and is expected to £8.1bn in 26/27, before falling back to £7.5bn for the next three years to 2029/30. Hope possibly for schools still awaiting the  removal of ‘bad concrete’, but not much sign of a replacement policy for schools that are time expired, especially as s costs have been increasing due to inflation.

Teachers will be glad to know that on page 34 of the Budget book the government is aware that

‘ DfE’s AI lesson-planning tool is saving teachers an average of around three hours a week, reducing administrative burdens and freeing up more time for teaching and other school responsibilities.’ Budget 2026 – Breathing Space for today, Fresh hope for the future

Overall, a very dull budget for education that will give little confidence to the sector.

Finally, the retention of business rates is good for many communities, but not for university towns such as Oxford, where students don’t pay Council Tax, and the universities often avoid business rates. Hopefully, the overnight levy will at least allow some income from conference visitors and tourists to the city.

EHCP requests and falling rolls

Have requests for EHCPs passed their peak? It might be expected that where a local authority was starting to witness a shrinking school population that this might also be noticeable in a decline in requests for an EHCP.

I have tested out this these for the London boroughs, based on the DfE’s data on total requests for an EHCP for each year from 2019 (pre-covid) to 2025, (the latest set of annual data published). Release home – Education, health and care plans – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

Column 2 shows the growth in request over the period from 2019 to 2026 (in one case a small decline) Column 3 shows the percentage increase over the period, ranked from smallest percentage increase to the largest. Column 4 is my interpretation of whether the borough is an inner London or an outer London borough

LA2013-2019% increasesubregion
1-3-38%inner
2345%inner
3129%inner
48418%inner
511521%inner
619523%outer
77236%inner
88537%inner
921039%outer
1010041%outer
1117842%outer
1211447%outer
1340055%outer
1429757%outer
1524358%outer
1629865%inner
1727665%outer
1819568%inner
1932172%inner
2035273%outer
2131380%outer
2215786%inner
2314687%outer
2453491%outer
2548895%inner
2629297%outer
27497101%outer
28395101%outer
29392105%outer
30501110%inner
31432115%inner
32345117%outer
33376133%outer

Thirty-two boroughs showed an increase in requests over the period between 2019 and 2025. Increases ranged from less than 10% in each of two inner London boroughs to seven boroughs with increases of more than 100% increase over the period between 2019-2025 (5 outer London boroughs and two inner London boroughs).

In 14 of the boroughs, the number of requests received by the borough in 2025 was not the highest for any years during the period between 2019-2025. Is that enough to suggest a trend? Possibly so, especially if the key point for many requests for an EHCP is around the transfer point form primary to secondary school.

Does the  distribution of the boroughs suggest that inner London boroughs have a smaller percentage of pupils requiring an EHCP, or perhaps a smaller percentage of parents initiating the process of requesting an EHCP? It would be helpful to rerun this exercise for particular types of EHCP and the age of the child at which they were requested. Might this deeper analysis help to explain some of the differences in the percentage increases between boroughs?

It is interesting that some London boroughs with a mix of selective and non-selective schools feature among the boroughs with the highest percentage increase over the period.

If data for individual schools is not available, then measuring the percentage of the borough in each IDACII cell might provide data on any clustering. A simpler way might be to use parliamentary constituencies, but both of these measure of requests suffer from a possible ‘parental choice’ effect. The use of boroughs more closely ties requests linked to residence not to school attended.

If I have a moment, I will look at the data for the top and bottom 20 places regarded by the Children’s Commissioner in her recent report as the best and worst places for children to grow up.

Falling School Rolls: not just a London problem?

Over the next few years, schools across England will be forced to come to terms with falling pupil numbers. As I indicated in an earlier set of posts on this blog, falling rolls can either be managed by the market, through parental choice and selective school’s decisions on their capacity levels without recourse to other local schools, or can the reduction in numbers be managed through some form of innervation, either by the DfE or by some local body, such as a local authority or an elected Mayor.

How pressing is the problem for secondary schools at present? I have looked at a random selection of schools, almost all secondary schools, that have advertised so far in this autumn term of 2026 for a teacher with expertise in music. The usefulness of looking at music is it is a subject where any vacancy is unlikely to be covered by someone else already on the staff. This is because of the subject knowledge needed.

The data for the schools with vacancies has been compared with the DfE public database that contains columns for a school’s ‘number on roll’ and ‘school capacity’. It is not clear how often this data are updated, or when it refers to, but there don’t seem to have been any changes between the beginning of September and this week, so it may be reasonably recent.

The following table for the different regions of England reveals an interesting picture

LOCAL AUTHORITY REGION20%+ SPARE PLACES19%- 10% SPARE PLACES9% TO  5% SPARE PLACES5% SPARE PLACES TO 4% OVER CAPACITY5%+ OVER CAPACITYTOTAL
EAST ENGLAND102104
EAST MIDLANDS2233111
LONDON14211422
NORTH EAST010102
NORTH WEST021317
SOUTH EAST111036
SOUTH WEST2180011
WESTMIDLANDS12115
YORKS & HUMBER012025
ALL REGIONS81419201273

Of the 73 schools with a vacancy record – about just under 2% of secondary schools, so a reasonable opportunity sample – 41 already had more than 10% spare capacity; 20 had between 5% spare capacity and 5% over capacity, and might be regarded as working at capacity;  12 schools were more than 5% over capacity. Of this last grouping, three were selective schools, and another a highly regarded specialist school.  Seven of the 12 schools were either in London or the South East.

Of the schools with the most spare capacity, only one was in London, and the other seven were spread across five of the other regions, suggesting that parental choice might already be playing a significant part in how full to capacity certain school are even today.

Only two of the 22 schools with the most spare capacity are church schools: both are  Catholic schools. One Church of England school features in the list of most over-subscribed schools. That school is in London, and may have benefitted from a  closeness to the Elizabeth Line, and TfL’s generous transport policy for travel to and from school.

The real issues to come will be both protecting schools in rural areas that serve an area where closure would mean an excessively long journey for some pupils and ensuring all schools can offer what is regarded as the whole curriculum up to age 16. What minority subjects is it allowable for a school not to offer at Key Stage 4?

One thing is certain, many schools with falling rolls will not be recruiting because of their budgets already being under pressure. Might some schools already have dropped music, so not be included in this sample?

I hope that local politicians across England are now asking Scrutiny Committees to be looking into the position locally, and whether any action will be needed, and, if so, by whom?

Are Breakfast clubs just a new form of extended school day?

Research published by the DfE Breakfast club early adopters: final report – GOV.UK provides some interesting insights into the government’s early adopters of their plan for a free ‘breakfast club’ in every primary school.

Some of the comments in the Report’s Executive summary suggest that food is not the real benefit to most families of such ‘breakfast clubs’, but an extension of the wrap around care offered by schools.

‘Parent awareness of provision was high (92%), primarily through school newsletters (36%) and apps (19%). The free breakfast club usage reflected family circumstances: 69% of aware parents reported their child attends, with higher rates among full-time employed parents (79%) and lower among free school meal eligible families (66%).

Enabling employment emerged as the primary motivation for use (53%), followed by child enjoyment (43%) and easier drop-offs (35%).

The free breakfast club sits within existing family routines rather than replacing them entirely. Nearly three-quarters (74%) of families report that their child usually has breakfast at home, though breakfast club users are less likely to eat at home than non-users (74% vs 94%). Current before-school arrangements varied considerably: 45% of families used the free breakfast club for childcare, whilst 41% had a parent or carer at home.’

All from the Executive summary, but with some re-ordering.

One comment that really interested me was that ‘Pupils exercised considerable autonomy in choosing what to eat, which activities to pursue, and how to interact socially, distinguishing free breakfast clubs from structured classroom time. Pupils showed strong engagement with both food and activities, although some attended primarily for social interaction and play.’

Clearly, there are some users of the ‘clubs’ that are there for the food. But, does this justify a universal service, especially with primary schools starting at so many different age groups from age 2 to age 5.

An interesting finding was that ‘Participation rates are higher among families not eligible for FSM (74%) compared to FSM-eligible families (66%), and among parents in full-time salaried employment (79%). The type of provision accessed varies by family circumstances. Most families (70%) exclusively use free breakfast club provision, whilst 16% combine free and paid provision, and 13% use only paid provision. Parents not currently employed are most likely to solely use the free provision (90%), whilst families with higher incomes are more likely to use paid provision either exclusively or in combination with free offerings.’ (page 48)

Also of interest was the higher take-up by parents of children with SEND

‘Parents of children with SEND demonstrate slightly different usage patterns, being more likely to send their child to breakfast clubs every weekday (49%) compared to parents of children without SEND (42%). This higher frequency of attendance aligns with findings from parent interviews, where parents of children with SEND describe breakfast clubs as particularly valuable for providing calm, structured morning transitions.’ (page 51)

In the interviews with parents, there was little mention of the attraction of the ‘free breakfast, only accounting for 8% of one of the top three choices, leading the report to state that:

‘Interviewed parents recognise the provision serves multiple purposes including providing childcare support, facilitating work routines, offering socialisation opportunities, alleviating financial pressures, helping their children settle into the school environment, and building confidence. This multifaceted nature of the breakfast club makes it valuable to families across diverse circumstances.’ (page 53).

If the aim of the government was to encourage more employment among families with primary aged children, then the pilot seems to have been a success. But are they really ‘breakfast clubs’? The report’s recommendations acknowledge this issues:

‘Strengthen the programme narrative beyond breakfast provision. The evidence demonstrates that free breakfast clubs deliver multiple interconnected benefits that extend beyond food provision. The Department should consider strengthening the programme branding and communication strategy to reflect this broader value proposition. Rather than “breakfast clubs,” consider terminology such as “before-school clubs” or “morning clubs” that better captures the comprehensive nature of the provision. This re-emphasis should emphasise the programme as offering a supported transition into the school day (‘soft start’) that can foster pupils’ social development and cross-age relationship building while providing an opportunity eat a nutritious breakfast. To appeal to parents, it should also focus on the free breakfast club as enabling parental employment and reducing household stress. This positions the free breakfast club as one component of a holistic morning experience. This shift in narrative would help address the 49% of non-users who cite “lack of need” by demonstrating relevance beyond food provision alone’. (page 89)

More concerning to me is the fact that ‘FSM-eligible families (who show lower usage despite potentially greater need)’. Should helping these children to make use of the ‘clubs’ better fulfil the ‘breakfast club’ part of the original mission of such clubs?

The data for this sample was limited, and it was based upon an opt-in approach. I would be concerned if across England children eligible for free school meals were making less use of the free food on offer before school and also not joining in on what now looks more like an extended school day than an initiative to help families with their food bills.

Is the trade-off between extra childcare and more employment possibilities, especially for women worth the cost? I guess the government decided the answer to that question before it set up the pilot programme ahead of a national roll out.

Might there be another December general election?

The present opinion polling might make the possibility of a snap December general election more likely, especially if the Burnham Bounce continues, and both Reform and the Green Party drift downward in the polls. As a result, other Parties will be probably putting together a skeleton manifesto, just in case an election is called.

Here are my suggestions about an education section of a manifesto to the Liberal Democrats, the Party I support. These are my own views, and some are more controversial than others.

Raise free travel to school from 16 to 18

At present there is free travel to nearest school if over three miles, up to age 16. In London,  young people aged 16-17 can get free and discounted travel on all our transport services with a Zip Oyster photocard. 16+ Zip Oyster photocard – Transport for London In Birmingham, 16-18s get discounted tickets to and from an education establishment in term-time. In Manchester, Our Pass gives 16-18 year olds free bus travel* across Greater Manchester and Our Pass is not just a bus travel card – cardholders will have access to lots of opportunities, experiences and benefits.

Young people living outside the large urban areas deserve the same rights to access education.

An expert teacher in every classroom

Parents and pupils expect their teachers to be properly trained. Many are not, especially in schools in rural areas and disadvantaged areas where teacher recruitment is challenging. The policy would only grant certification (QTS) for limited areas, where a teacher has the appropriate knowledge and qualification. A school could use a teacher to cover a vacancy or long-term absence, but such teachers, if not qualified, would need emergency accreditation. This would last for no more than two school-years. During that time, the staff member would be expected to undertake appropriate certification through professional development paid for by the school. The DfE would be expected to publish a report to parliament each year on the use of uncertified teachers by schools. The term ‘teacher’ would be come a recognised reserved occupation term, in line with the situation on other professions

Free School lunches to eleven

All primary school children, and those in middle schools, would be entitled to a free school lunch. This extends the policy of free school meals for infant school pupils introduced by the coalition and announced at the Lib Dems Conference in Glasgow.

Renewable energy for all schools

Local areas would be offered matching funding for solar, wind and heat pump installations with the remainder of the funding coming from a ‘social’ bond’ open to local residents in the first instance.  Rural schools would be encouraged to become energy resilience hubs for their local community, providing emergency power sources when the grid isn’t functioning because of storms, flooding or other reasons. Rural areas already generate power for other parts of the country. This scheme would ensure a local payment scheme. As well as providing power for the school.

The curriculum

Any curriculum change would be fully staffed. The curriculum would ensure all pupils received the basic skills and knowledge, supported by funding to ensure all pupils, even with special needs, can achieve their maximum potential. The secondary school curriculum would reflect that fact that young people entering school in 2026 will be working into the 2080s.

Testing

Public examinations at sixteen would be replaced by cheaper national tests based upon sampling techniques. Pupil’s progress should not be determined by rigid rules. There would be a focus on raising standards by ensuring well-qualified teachers.

Testing for national standards would be retained at the end of Key Stage 2 and Foundation Stage to help identify the best use of resources.

School Funding

In a period of declining school rolls, and parental choice, funding schools on a per-pupil basis risks under-funding disadvantaged schools. This is especially the case in areas where there are selective schools. Many of these schools are over-capacity, while the non-selective schools are required to function well below capacity, and with less funding as a result.

All schools should be funded to a level where they can deliver an appropriate curriculum. Improvements in technology should allow for actual salary funding for schools, rather than the average salary funding that disadvantages some schools with experienced staff, but falling rolls.

There is a case to be made for a universal secondary school and college system to meet the needs of all 11-18 year-olds

Effective post-sixteen education

Consideration would be given to how pupils could be offered a choice of routes and subjects that best meet their needs in a planned manner. With falling rolls, not all schools and colleges would be able to offer and effective curriculum for all.

Enjoying school

Most primary school children enjoy school, but attendance and enjoyment both drop off between the ages of 11-16. The current DfE opinion polling would be widened to take more account of the views of young people, and the challenges they face in a rapidly changing society where they will be voters before they complete their education, if the voting age is reduced to 16, as we support.

Every child has a right to education

The state does not require children to attend school, but to be educated. Home Schooled children often receive a good quality education, but along with those educated in private schools there should be a system of inspection and support. No child should ever be without a school. A virtual school for pupils either moving into an area or excluded from a school should enrol such pupils from day one to ensure no break in their education. Much can be learnt from the best of the virtual schools for looked-after young people.

Inspection

Ofsted needs reform, but to underpin a national assessment of schools there needs to be a local framework of advisors and inspectors that can support and encourage teachers and school leaders. No school should be surprised by any national assessment if it has been working effectively with  local teams drawn from school middle and senior leaders. Such teams also provide a career path for those interested in progressing carers in teaching and learning and not school leadership.

An education system for all

Falling rolls, a fractured operating system of academy trusts, local authorities and dioceses does not make for an effective local education system. Decisions are haphazard, and may create competing and poorly funded outcomes. In the short-term the current Schools Forums would be reconstituted as a local education planning forum to ensure resources are not wasted, and young people can receive the best outcomes from their time in education.

A new deal for teachers

Teachers’ contracts have barely changed in the last 60 years, apart from the directed working time of 1,265 hours for those not on the leadership scale. While other graduates now expect four weeks paid holiday, up to 10 public holidays, and not to work between Christmas and after New Year, teachers still work an employer-driven flexi-time, where periods when children are not in school are expected to compensate for long-hours worked during term-time. Such an imbalance makes recruiting staff, and especially graduates challenging and needs a comprehensive review by the School Teachers Review Body (STRB).

Funding schools for needs not pupil numbers

Following on from yesterday’s post about the report from the Children’s Commissioner on children growing up, I talked this morning to a head teacher about some of the issues which faced them on a daily basis. According to the Children’s Commissioners report, their school is in an advantageous area for growing up. https://www.childrenscommissioner.gov.uk/resource/the-childhood-lottery-the-hardest-places-to-grow-up-in-england/

Yesterday’s report worries me because small pockets of deprivation within areas singled out as successful by reports such as that from the Children’s Commissioner may not have the mechanism to deal with their localised problems.

The school whose headteacher I was talking to is part of MAT, along with another school in the same postcode. Across that postcode, are two maintained schools, (one VA/one VC), and schools in three other multi-academy trusts, one with six schools, one with three schools and two MATs with two schools each.

How do you manage strategy for the area in such circumstances. No doubt health and social services can have area boards, but who has the power to bring together schools to work out a common approach to local issues?

Probably not at present the local authorities, both upper and lower tier, although through its Children’s Services the upper tier authoritiy does manage, social services, youth services and youth justice. Should it once again be given strategic powers for local areas? Central government has tried such an approach with ideas ranging from Blair’s Education Action Zones (EAZs) to the Conservative government’s Opportunity Areas policy. Most of these failed to improve education outcomes for the localities where they intervened. Would a more local approach have succeeded? Certainly not without resources.

I am led to wonder whether the present funding formula for schools is fit for purpose during a period of declining rolls.  Pitting schools against schools to recruit pupils doesn’t guarantee schools the resources necessary to ensure pupils achieve outcomes: some pupils need more resources than others. This was recognised with the Pupil Premium, but seems to have been overlooked in terms of the failure of local decision-making that has resulted from a fractured system of decision-making.

One example quoted to me was how trauma in pupils is addressed. This might arise because a parent was handed down a prison sentence, and the family name appeared in the local paper. How traumatic is that for a nine-year-old. Then, there are those living in overcrowded flats, sometimes in tower blocks. How traumatic is that to a seven-year-old.

All too often the simple administrative solution is to  create an EHCP for the child rather than to work with the school on funding to deal with the in-school issues resulting from the trauma, and to work to reduce exclusions that might result, even with an EHCP, and support better learning outcomes. Of course, all staff in all agencies are working under great pressure, so shortcuts can be an easy solution.

My thesis is that schools in a locality should once again be part of a system that acknowledges their needs, and that across a large administrative area, needs between schools may be different. Money is a help, but also a common set of values is also important.

What worries me is that a high percentage of schools in challenging areas are church or faith-based schools. What part are faith leaders playing in making sure that the schools they are responsible for serve their communities as effectively as possible. In the same vein, what part do local politicians play in ensuring the best outcomes for their residents?

Nationally as the Children’s Commissioner identified in her report, we need funding for targeted areas, but, in addition, we also need vision and the will to effect change on the part of both local and national politicians.  We need to create a school system capable of dealing with the challenges of all our children whether they are growing up in challenging area within a mostly great place to live or one of England’s deprived communities.

Growing up in England: The Children’s Commissioner’s Report

The Children’s Commissioner, Dame Rachel de Souza, has issued a comprehensive report on growing up in England. ‘The Childhood Lottery: The hardest places to grow up in England’ The Childhood Lottery: The hardest places to grow up in England | Children’s Commissioner for England The data comes from matrixes across the Commissioner’s six pillar of work

Health: health services and outcomes

Care: social care and outcomes

Community; policing, youth justice and services available to children in l where they live

Education: jobs and skills: schools and  post-16 plus educational outcomes

Family: housing, play , poverty and family life

Better world: the environment, children’s voices and citizenship

The data are for the 150+ upper-tier authorities, so London boroughs, metropolitan districts, unitary councils and the remaining shire counties. As a result, the authorities range in size from Rutland to Lancashire and Kent. Some areas are more homogenous than others: some are contiguous with health, police and other non-local government functions, while others are part of larger organisation for policing and health with policies set outside the local authority areas. Some functions are split between upper and lower tier authorities, such as housing and recreation facilities.

Despite these issues, that in some cases make the average for the authority not reflective of its different parts, and highlight some of the issues with dashboards, discussed in a recent post on this blog. Are dashboards useful? | John Howson this is a powerful report bringing together lots of useful data.

There are dangers here. Oxfordshire is ranked equal 11th with York, and the fourth best county to grow up in England. But, tomorrow, I will be at a workshop , initiated by an Oxfordshire-based multi-academy trust, aiming to improve the lives of children in the most challenging part of the county’s urban landscape. (The report classifies Oxfordshire as rural). The issues in this area would have been highlighted if district councils had been used as the data point instead of upper-tier authorities. Parliamentary constituencies, where most of this data is probably kept somewhere for MPs questions, might have been an even better and more equal frame of reference, allowing different between both Tottenham and Highgate within Haringey to have been judged separately.

Rural areas may also have a bit of a raw deal: you can’t count bus data where there are no buses. The data on childcare placement more than 20 miles from their home doesn’t discount kinship care that might be valuable, but not local in a large rural county.

However, it is easy to carp, and one cannot but praise the efforts of the Children’s Commissioner. The survey may also reveal how weakened local government has become. Take youth justice: how many councillors attend local committees to discuss approaches to this vital topic. Do cabinet members for Children’s Services even know that they often have this responsibility?

I was fortunate, when a Cabinet member, to have both a Director of Children’s Services and a Youth Justice lead that kept me informed, and allowed me to understand the importance of this area. On the other hand, the Health and Wellbeing Board was a challenge for me, as it covered so many different areas, and children’s health didn’t have a sub-committee. The fact that Oxfordshire is a Marmot County had nothing to do with me as a cabinet member for children’s services.

There are messages for politicians at all levels in this report, not only about childhood, but also into young adulthood. Sadly, many adults face the same problems, and solving those issues might also help future generations of children and young people growing up in a divided England.