EIS response
Updated: Monday, July 05, 2010 | 
Printer Friendly Version
| 
|
|
Future Structure of Schools Management in Scotland Call for Evidence by the Scottish Parliament Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee Evidence from the Educational Institute of Scotland
1. The Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc Act 2000 The relationship between Scottish Government and Local Authorities in the delivery of Education in Scotland is set out in the Standards in Scotland’s Schools etc Act 2000. Section 2 of the Act sets out the duties of the Education Authority in providing School Education. Section 3 sets out the main focus of this through raising standards in schools. It defines the role of Scottish Government in paragraph (1) as follows: "The Scottish Ministers shall endeavour to secure improvement in the quality of school education provided for Scotland; and they shall exercise their powers in relation to such provision with a view to raising standards of education. The role of Local Authorities is set out in section 3 (2) as follows: "An education authority shall endeavour to secure improvement in the quality of school education which is provided in the schools managed by them; and they shall exercise their functions in relation to such provision with a view to raising standards of education” The Act also sets out the responsibility of Scottish Government in setting National Priorities in Education. Thereafter it sets out the Local Authorities’ responsibilities in setting out improvement objectives on an annual basis. The relationship in this between national and local government has been described as follows: "While it has been left to schools and authorities to implement the national priorities, the legislative framework requires them to formulate improvement and development plans accordingly. Arguably, the thrust of this Scottish Parliamentary thinking represents genuine inclusiveness in thinking, backed by imperatives and controls. This constitutes a familiar combination of a typically Scottish appeal to democratic sentiments allied to firm central direction of policy.” (Humes & Bryce "The Distinctiveness of Scottish Education (2008)) The EIS has historically supported the role of Local Authorities in Scotland in the delivery of Education at a local level. In this respect the EIS supported the terms of the 2000 Act. The central reason for EIS support for Local Authorities in this role is support for democratic accountability at a local level. In line with this policy the EIS opposed the Conservative Government proposals in the 1990s in its "opting out” agenda. The EIS also had serious reservations about the setting up of the school boards, which were seen as a "stalking horse” for opting out and embryonic boards of management, and welcomed their removal in the 1990s.
2. Key policy developments in relation to education Since the Teaching Profession for the 21st Century Agreement (TP21) in 2001 the EIS has had close involvement with the Scottish Executive/Government in most of the key policy developments in relation to education. This means that the EIS has had some input to most policy initiatives over the past decade. The change of Government in 2007 did not substantially change this relationship. A tension which has developed, however, is that many national policy developments promoted by Government in Scotland and supported by the EIS have not been successfully delivered at local authority level. There are a number of reasons for this. Some are issues of policy and priority from the local authority perspective, and some are issues of funding. At the heart of this tension lies the determination of local authorities to decide their own policies and priorities across local areas of service delivery including, specifically, education. At the time of the Labour/Liberal Democrat coalition there was some protection to areas of service through elements of ring fencing of funding. Since 2007, however, the Concordat arrangement between Scottish Government and Local Authorities has strengthened the power of local authorities to determine their own priorities which are not necessarily those of National Government nor for that matter the EIS. The following are a number of areas where Government Policies supported by the EIS are not being fully delivered at a local authority level.
It has also meant that class size commitments made by National Government (and supported by the EIS) have not been met by many Local Authorities. • Class Sizes Resistance to implementing such policies is in part explained as reasons of cost and in part through arguing, spuriously, that reduced class sizes do not necessarily result in education benefits. • Nursery Education In recent years the number of nursery teachers employed by local authorities has declined and in many cases, where there is access, this is on little more than on a nominal basis. • Additional Support for Learning Act It is difficult to see how the terms of legislation will be seen as being properly met without real commitment to the wording and spirit of the legislation. • Assessment and Testing Yet many authorities still believe in the importance of holding test data on pupils. There is evidence that some authorities will still be testing on the old 5-14 levels in session 2010-2011. Others continue to make use of a variety of forms of commercially produced testing / assessment materials. • Delivery of a Curriculum for Excellence Such an approach compromises the delivery of a Curriculum for Excellence (CfE), the success of which is largely predicated on encouraging the growth of autonomy within the profession, consistent with the Outcome and Experiences developed at a national level and published in Building the Curriculum 3. While some of these issues are part of inevitable tensions between two tiers of government, there are serious fears currently that the budgetary crisis which faces the country will compromise still further the delivery of shared national policy objectives at a local level. The tensions between national and local government have led many to question whether the current model of delivery through local authorities is the best means of delivering education at a local level. Despite the tensions, EIS continues to believe that a model with clear local accountability should not be departed from lightly.
The removal of education in part or in whole from local authority control would also have a major destabilising influence within local authorities as education accounts for such a significant proportion of local authority budgeting.
We are mindful also of strong EIS commitments to the comprehensive principle within Scotland, including a commitment to the all through six year comprehensive secondary school.
There is a substantive evidence base that this model of education delivery contributes strongly to improving education standards in Scotland.
Measures of performance include the year on year improvement in the number of young people gaining SQA qualifications and also Scotland’s strong performance in international comparisons especially the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA).
However the EIS is aware of developments in England which include looking at other means of delivering education. This is an agenda which gained some momentum under the Blair/Brown Labour governments and it includes the setting up of Academies, in many parts of England mostly in the secondary sector.
It is an agenda that is now being fastracked by the new Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition through the introduction of an Academies Bill and the introduction of "free” schools, i.e. schools which operate outwith local authority control but are publicly funded.
The EIS is also mindful of agendas outwith the UK, for example the model in Sweden of delivering "free” schools especially in urban areas of that country.
In Scotland the whole agenda has gained particular focus because of discussions within one local authority area, East Lothian, on the possibility of the introduction of the community based management of schools.
In looking at alternative models of delivering education, the EIS has engaged with interested parties in a number of countries, for example through our engagement in Education International.
In particular we have engaged with the National Union of Teachers in England on developments in that country which are leading to a move away from local authority delivered education both in primary and secondary schools. We have also had a number of engagements with the main teaching union in Sweden (Lärarförbundet).
The EIS has set up its own working group on the future structures of school management in Scotland. The Group has considered the evidence from other countries and also received a detailed presentation from a senior representative of Lärarförbundet on the "free” school model in Sweden.
The Government objective in England is that Academy status would become the norm in secondary schools and would also develop in the primary sector.
If schools were to decide to move in this direction, this would bring to an end 108 years of local authorities running the vast majority of schools in England.
The previous Labour government had allowed academies to develop but had set a number of restrictions. The new Academies Bill which is progressing through the Westminster Parliament will remove these restrictions as part of the Government agenda.
Schools which are deemed to be "outstanding” by OFSTED (600 secondaries and 2300 primaries) will be fastracked to Academy status with effect from September 2010.
The NUT believes that the Academies Bill is "without a doubt the most serious threat to state education as we know it that we have faced”.
In essence opposition to the Government approach is that a re-structuring of the education system through Academies and "free” schools would lead to serious inequalities of provision across the country. If the government agenda is successful, it is likely to change the face of education in England.
It is scarcely surprising that this is not a serious agenda item within Scotland. The last time that something of this model was proposed was the time of the previous Conservative government when the then Secretary of State for Scotland, Michael Forsyth did bring forward proposals on "opting out” along similar lines which gained very little credence within the political or educational community within Scotland.
The OECD report on the education system in Scotland in 2007 stated that the biggest single issue facing education in Scotland was the endemic socio-economic factors which lead to inequalities of educational outcomes within Scotland.
There is little doubt that, put at its starkest, the adoption of an Academies model would widen still further the education attainment gap within Scotland which most political parties and the EIS seek to see reduced and ultimately closed.
|
T: +44 (0)131 225 6244, F: +44 (0)131 220 3151, enquiries@eis.org.uk