Day 183 – The Cost to Communities

Following on from yesterday’s “green” blog, communities may find there are more knock-on effects, especially in rural areas. When the money runs out, the spectre of closing smaller village schools and combining them into much bigger primary schools sited where the middle schools used to be could become reality.

That would really show efficiencies of scale. It would also show a complete and utter lack of understanding of why many people choose to live in the countryside.

Day 182 – Environmental Cost

One of the costs of change that hasn’t been explored fully is the potential environmental cost. Why are we going to pull down existing buildings rather than refurbishing and re-using them? What environmental consequences might there be with new larger schools and pupils travelling greater distances to them? How many more car journeys will there be across Bedford each day?

This isn’t a decision that will just affect children, schools and families – it will affect all of us in our daily lives.

Day 181 – Primary Funding

It takes massive sums of money to change an authority’s schools from three tier to two tier. Redeployment of buildings and of staff (600 redundancies are planned in Bedford Borough) takes a vast amount of resources in itself, which is perhaps why BSF programmes have been beset by bureaucratic overspend, especially on consultants’ fees – £350M, even if it does exist, may well be insufficient for the task ahead.

Where, of course, funding is practically non-existent, is in the lower-primary switch. Estimated at a maximum of £60M in the consultation document, with £30M of borrowing against future capital receipts, this is a woeful underestimate of the true cost. Remember, this is the same number of pupils being subsumed into lower schools as into upper schools, and it is intended to cost about 1/6.

The real scandal is that Bedford Borough is that any shortfall in funding for the change to two-tier is going to be taken from the Dedicated Schools Grant. Read our letter to Chairs of Governors from September 1st.

This, of course, is in addition to the national £2 Billion cut in schools’ budgets from 2011.

Schools are under enough financial pressure as it is – why would we subject them to a very uncertain future by creating potential chaos?

Day 180 – It’s the Economy Stupid!

Another issue (raised repeatedly by Alistair Burt during the past six months) has been whether BSF funding is guaranteed.

Critically, nobody will assure him that £350M will be forthcoming. More worrying, nobody knows just what may happen in the next 18 months as a new Government comes into power.

What is certain is that public finances are in a shocking state – the country is £175 Billion in debt and last week there were rumours of more “quantitative easing” by the Bank of England…another £50 Billion was mentioned, which is getting on for another £1000 of debt for every person in Britain.

Every part of the public sector is already notified of cuts from 2011. The “Golden Age” of public funding is over and schools are already looking at a 2% cut in funds, without the ball and chain of funding the lower to primary switch from their own budgets.

BSF was seen as the Golden Goose for Bedford Borough – but it won’t be laying those golden eggs for much longer and there is a very great risk that funding will be pulled or reduced in the middle of a change to two-tier.

This would be disastrous, as underfunded change in Northampton and Oxford has demonstrated. Suffolk are so worried by these events that they have curtailed their school reorganisation in the middle, leaving whole areas in limbo.

Bedford Borough needs to act prudently at this time – a move to change every school at once is too risky, aside from being too disruptive and unlikely to lead to school improvement.

It would be much better to bid for BSF funds targeted at transforming underperforming schools in disadvantaged areas and upgrading specific facilities in other areas that are in a desperate state of repair.

Evolution not Revolution

Day 179 – BSF Spin

About 12 months ago, Chris Hilliard and the late Graham Last negotiated in principle a sum of £350M of BSF funding for Bedford Borough. Brian Glover, appointed to continue this work, then ensured that any capital receipts would be retained by Bedford, instead of 50% being returned to BSF as in usually the case.

Whether or not this money will exist under a new Government, we have always recognised that this was magnificent and all those involved should be commended for their professional efforts.

However, where we disagree is how this information appears to have communicated, or indeed spun.

It was allowed to become “public knowledge” that the £350M was apparently linked to changing to two-tier. Furthermore, that we would be unlikely to receive funding to remain three tier as this would not demonstrate a “transformation” of our schools. The late Frank Branston implied or stated this in public several times.

Nadine Dorries then made a crucial intervention by gaining permission for an Adjournment Debate on July 6th, where she and Alistair Burt received assurances from Iain Wright (the Schools’ Minister) that BSF funding was not linked to any particular school system, that three-tier bids have been successful recently, and that the Government’s position on school systems is that it should be a local decision made by local people – nobody has ever shown that one system is better than another.

The problem is that many parents who filled in the School Organisation Review didn’t realise this; in fact many of them probably still believe the spin which came from those in positions of power. So how relevant are the results from the review when it is published on Nov 4th?

SMS calls on councillors to use their judgement on this rather than accepting the official version of events. The fates both of our children’s education and the Borough’s financial future are in your hands.

Day 176 – Educational Half-Truths (4)

Continuing our theme this week…most of the arguments pro two-tier are based on half-truths. This is an excellent way to mislead, because the unwary recognise the half that is true and fail to spot the logical inconsistency in the other 50%.

Example number 4:

Pro two-tier: Secondary schools are so much better because they match their teaching to the National Curriculum Key Stages.

Pro three-tier: So do lower and middle schools – the National Curriculum is a continuous and hopefully progressive journey, not distinguished necessarily by age but by natural development.

This, of course, is the same National Curriculum that is being dismantled piece by piece by the current Government…not to say what the next Government will attempt to do to Schools.

Michael Gove for example seems very keen to change things, and I’m sure he won’t stop introducing new initiatives just because Bedford is busy changing school system !

Read more educational arguments under the Summary tab above – back on Monday looking at finance (or rather the lack of it).

Day 175 – Educational Half-Truths (3)

Continuing our theme this week…most of the arguments pro two-tier are based on half-truths. This is an excellent way to mislead, because the unwary recognise the half that is true and fail to spot the logical inconsistency in the other 50%.

Example number 3:

Pro two-tier: GCSE choices are very difficult in Year 9 because teachers don’t know the children well enough.

Pro three-tier: Teachers in secondary schools of 2000 pupils do not “know” their pupils very well at all. They turn up each September with almost entirely new faces in each of their classes and start from scratch again, learning new names and adjusting to new personalities. That’s if the teachers themselves aren’t new themselves…in fact it’s probably a struggle to know the names of all one’s colleagues in such large schools !

As for GCSE choices, Secondary Schools rarely begin to think about these until the start of Year 9 and there are now also a range of post-14 options, many of which are not taught to younger pupils, so these would be unfamiliar to everyone.

GCSE choices are always concerning for children and parents – and there is no reason why the process cannot start in Year 8 as part of the transition to upper school – it’s a pretty flimsy reason on which to base massive disruption of a generation of schooldchildren.

Day 174 – Educational Half-Truths (2)

Continuing our theme this week…most of the arguments pro two-tier are based on half-truths. This is an excellent way to mislead, because the unwary recognise the half that is true and fail to spot the logical inconsistency in the other 50%.

Example number 2:

Pro two-tier: Two transitions are more disruptive than one.

Pro three-tier: Not if they are managed properly. Two smaller well-managed transitions between smaller, medium and larger schools ensures that children have the maturity to cope with change.

On the other hand, one harsh disruptive move from class-based teaching in Year 6 to subject-based teaching in Year 7, in huge schools of 2000 adolescents and young adults, can leave vulnerable young people emotionally disturbed for months if not years.

When this happens with three year groups at once (planned for Bedford in September 2014 or 2015 when Years 7,8 & 9 will all move at once), most of the new secondary schools will be struggling under the weight of nearly a thousand new pupils in one intake. In other schools in other authorities, this has caused standards to plummet for a generation.

Parents and teachers of middle (and prep) school children all over the country recognise the value of middle years education in producing rounded and confident young people.

Perhaps it is only bureaucrats and politicians without direct parental experience of the system who don’t recognise this.

Day 173 – Educational Half-Truths (1)

Most of the arguments pro two-tier are based on half-truths. This is an excellent way to mislead, because the unwary recognise the half that is true and fail to spot the logical inconsistency in the other 50%.

Example number 1:

Pro two-tier: there are practically no middle years training courses in the country, therefore teacher recruitment in Bedford is doomed.

Pro three-tier: This fails to recognise that most middle school teachers choose to teach in a middle school and, once in the system, are extremely happy to stay there. Far from being a dead end in a career, middle schools offer opportunities for leadership in human-sized organisations that would otherwise not exist for many teachers.

It also avoids the real positive of middle schools, which is the vibrant and creative mix of primary generalists and secondary specialists, something that is very modern indeed. In a truly two-tier system, primary and secondary go their separate ways and “never the twain shall meet”.

This then leads to one very harsh transition between sometimes very small primary schools and massive secondary schools – which in the end is much more disruptive than two smaller well-managed transitions.

Teachers don’t look at the whole country when they choose their jobs – they tend to teach in areas in which their family lives, where they studied, or where their partner works. Very few make large geographical moves more than once or twice. Teacher recruitment problems are a huge red herring.

Good schools will always attract good teachers, whatever the system. Many of our schools are already very good or outstanding – so why aren’t we targeting resources at the challenging schools rather than looking to change a whole system?

Day 172 – In the beginning…

Do you remember in the dim distant past (5 months ago) when the School Organisation Review (public consultation) was published? Do you remember the core arguments made in favour of change?

1. Bedford’s GCSE results aren’t very good.
2. Our three tier education system must be the cause of this.
3. There is £350M available for secondary buildings if we can show transformational change.
4. Therefore we must change to two-tier to improve results and get the dosh.

Someone trained in logic would have a field day with this chain of reasoning. It is nonsense from start to finish.

1. Results can always improve but we are in line with the national average, perform better than authorities of similar size and demographics (Milton Keynes and Swindon for example), and have some outstanding schools with none failing.
2. The Government has admitted that no credible source has ever shown that one system of schooling is better than another – it is much more to do with quality of teaching and leadership. Northamptonshire is now almost completely two-tier and still struggling.
3. Does anyone truly believe that from 2011 there will be a third of a billion pounds available for knocking down serviceable buildings and throwing up some more…? And where is the money coming for the lower-primary move?
4. Even if the money is available, there is no necessity to change school system to access BSF funding – again, the Government has admitted this.

The truth is that this was a non-consultation, a huge waste of public money, based on logical inconsistencies and misleading arguments. It was a nonsense then and it remains a nonsense now.

SMS calls on our new Mayor to show that he really understands the needs of Bedford Borough and to reject any proposal to move to two-tier immediately.

Day 169 – And the winner is…

Sometime today, the new Mayor will be elected. Whoever that may be, they deserve congratulations for winning what might turn out to be a close race, and also every good fortune in their new position of responsibility – and to balance the books in Bedford Borough they are certainly going to need a lot of fortune !

The School Organisation Review will be the first serious policy decision over which the new Mayor has influence. We can only hope that he (or she) uses their newfound influence to stop this educationally disruptive and financially ruinous decision.

On Monday this blog will return to the educational and financial arguments against change – as the serious work to Save Bedford’s Schools restarts in earnest.

Day 162 – Vote for a Three-Tier Mayor

Yesterday, SMS informed its supporters of its position on the Mayoral Election. The email is reproduced below in its entirety. Should you wish to receive a copy of it so you can forward it around your networks, email us at save.middle.schools@googlemail.com and we’d be delighted to oblige.

——————————————————————————–

Dear SMS Supporter and others,

Please forward this email onwards so that we can reach as many voters as possible. Newcomers to the details of the debate should read https://savemiddleschools.wordpress.com/summary/ if they need any more convincing !

Many of you have asked us how you should vote in the forthcoming Mayoral election. Our response has always been that we are not a political party, but a single issue campaign group and that you should vote for whoever you think will do the best for Bedford rather than their own or their party’s interests. However, if you wish to vote on this single issue, the positions of the three leading candidates as we understand them are given below.

Don’t forget that you have two votes under the voting system, and your vote may be transferred to your second choice candidate in the “second round”, where the top two contenders go head-to-head on combined first and second votes. Second votes may win this election.

Your votes may make the difference between electing a pro three-tier or a pro two-tier Mayor.

Parvez Akhtar (three-tier): (and pictured on his leaflet outside Alban Middle School’s “Save Our School” sign)
“As a dad of children in local lower, middle and upper schools, I know how important it is we get this decision right. I believe our three-tier schools have served us well. The case for change hasn’t been proven and there’s now massive uncertainty that the Labour Government would give us the money needed for a reorganisation – but here’s my personal guarantee: parents’ views will have the real role in my consultation process that many feel they don’t have now.”

Apu Bagchi (three-tier):
“I will put the brakes on the borough’s expensive school reorganisation programme and invest more to improve the educational attainment of all our children. If the predicted public spending squeeze really starts to bite, I don’t want to see the local taxpayer having to bail out a scheme that will create massive disruption for teachers, parents and a generation of our school children.”

Dave Hodgson (two-tier):
“My position is that I would like to see the system in Bedford Borough change to two-tier.”

Our (very informal and unscientific!) private polling suggests that this will be a very close contest between these three over two rounds of voting and that the other candidates are not in the running, but for the record Tony Hare supports three-tier strongly, James Valentine supports two-tier and Eve Robinson-Morley would like a referendum of those affected by the decision.

Thousands of voters have signed our petitions – please make sure they get out and vote pro three-tier on Thursday October 15th.

Regards,

Save Middle Schools

Day 161 – Wootton & Beyond

Last night several members of SMS were at Wootton Upper School for the Mayoral Question Time organised by a group of Sixth Formers (incidentally they got the biggest round of applause of the night and deservedly so – good show guys!)

Chaired by Chris Gill of the BoS, the 6 Mayoral candidates answered questions from the audience on all the major issues of the campaign…transport, regeneration, crime and disorder, balancing the books etc…

…and generally we have to say they all gave very reasonable answers most of the time…but with the occasional exception there seemed to be very little difference between their answers…they even agreed with each other !

And then the schools issue came up. Here there was a clear difference.

Parvez Akhtar said that “The first thing that I am going to do is ring the Schools’ Minister and ask him whether he can guarantee the BSF money exists” and, later on, “It’s not going to happen”

Apu Bagchi said “I’m not in favour of change.”

Tony Hare said “If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.”

Eve Robinson-Morley said “I’d like a referendum of the people it affects”

Dave Hodgson said “I’m in favour of two-tier but I will accept the Full Council decision and there are other provisos”

James Valentine said “As a Labour Mayor working with a Labour Schools’ Minister I’ll be able to secure the BSF money”…mmm…maybe it won’t be a Labour Schools’ Minister for very long though…he also didn’t seem to realise that there is a huge underfunding in the lower-primary switch…very worrying James, you seemed so plausible and smooth, yet have so little in-depth knowledge of the issues…

What was obvious is that this is one of the only issues that divides the main candidates and that, in a potentially low turn-out, supporters of this campaign can make a difference to the final vote.

We will be emailing our supporters’ list later today in order to let them know our thoughts on the candidates’ views, and to encourage them to exercise their democratic right next Thursday.

Day 160 – Conservatives to cut public spending

Yesterday at the Conservative Party Conference, George Osborne announced plans (should he be in a position to implement them) to cut public sector bureacracy – cutting Whitehall budgets by a third which will then lead to massive job cuts.

Well, good luck with that one George – I’m sure Sir Humphrey will tell you he needs to employ 10,000 more staff in order to implement the cuts.

In all, the Conservatives are planning about £7 billion of cuts every year of the next Parliament.

Hands up who thinks £350 million to change school system in Bedford is a good use of public funds then…

Day 159 – Martin Bell’s visit

One member of SMS was at Apu Bagchi’s event last night to hear Martin Bell speak on behalf of the leading Independent candidate. Martin described himself as “just an old bloke who wants to make a difference” or something similar – well, hopefully he has made a difference to Apu’s campaign.

Starting as a 66-1 outsider, odds on Apu have now shortened to 8-1 or less, and, talking to people outside SMS (which we do occasionally), momentum is being carried into the final ten days of the Mayoral campaign by someone who would carry cross-party respect.

Martin’s support has obviously helped put Apu in the public eye. But Apu’s surge in the polls is more than that. It is a sign that the voting public are disaffected with party politics.

Steve Lowe (in the BoS) and others have said before that Bedford needed Frank Branston as Mayor precisely because he was genuinely and obviously his own man – a true Independent.

Apu Bagchi is not another Frank Branston – nobody is – but he is most certainly Independent, and experienced enough to be the calming hand on the tiller.

And Apu’s stance on schools? Don’t be silly – of course he wouldn’t embark on an expensive and unnecessary reorganisation when massive public spending cuts are just around the corner.

Day 154 – Meet the Mayoral Candidates

For those of you who like to hear (and see) the candidates opinions rather than accepting our (very slightly biased) interpretation…

Those nice guys at Heart Bedford FM have posted 3-4 minute interviews with all 6 Mayoral candidates including the question “Where do you stand on the School Organisation Review”…and their views are getting much clearer now.

Apu and Tony are very firmly in favour of retention with Parvez only slightly behind them.

James and Dave both support two-tier in principle, with many political noises from Dave in particular about changing his mind if the money isn’t there blah, blah, blah…SMS has been telling you this for months now Dave…you say you are a successful businessman…would you open new premises if your bank was about to foreclose on you?

Eve rather strangely dodges the question – surely, as the Green Party candidate, she would be appalled at the huge waste of ripping down existing buildings and the potential for 11 year olds to be transported large distances to huge secondary schools?

Anyway, some enterprising Sixth Formers at Wootton Upper School have arranged that you can see all the candidates and ask questions in a debate chaired by Chris Gill (editor of the BoS) next Wednesday 7th October 7:30-9:00. To register for the meeting email debate@wootton.beds.sch.uk with your name and any questions you wish to ask.