Yes, full of holes, is the 200+ page report.
If you look at Appendix 4, it indicates that improvement is more or less guaranteed after change to two-tier…mmm, let’s look at that conclusion more closely…
Appendix 4: “Thus four of the five authorities showed some improvement in GCSE performance following change, although that in Warwickshire was small and has subsequently been lost.”
What the DCSF data actually show is that in four out of the five authorities cited in the Council Officers’ report GCSE performance fell during and after the change to 2-tier. Exactly the opposite of what they hide by only looking at the 2008 data.
During the change over to 2-tier MK GCSE results fell to 10% below the England average. 5 years of decline before MK recovered in 2008 by spending considerably more per pupil than in Bedford’s schools. And this was in an authority where only 1 year group was changed and no schools were closed…a much easier task than we have here in Bedford.
During the change over to 2-tier Merton GCSE results fell to 13% below the England average. 4 years of decline before Merton recovered in 2008.
Buckinghamshire changed between 1998-2000. From 1997 to 2008 GCSE passes have fallen 7.3% compared to the national average.
Only in Bradford has the GCSE pass rate improved compared to the national average, albeit from an incredibly low base, around 13% below the national average.
Warwickshire’s results stayed fairly stable, hovering around the national average, although results were only available for a limited period after change here.
So what this shows is that in only one authority, which was underperforming terribly, have results improved after a change to two-tier.
This change has been presented as inevitable because of our terrible underperformance at GCSE (wrong), because change will lead to improvement (unlikely), and because everybody wants the change (err…not true at all).
The only way for you to stop this is to contact the councillors, preferably by phone as emails can be ignored.
Save Middle Schools - The Blog 
Interesting game you can play with statistics. Watch, the government will start using just next year’s public debt figures to cover up the fact that we’ve gone so far into the red as to be crimson as a nation over the past 18 months!
…and as for archaic systems. I know it has been mentioned before but in Birmingham they are creating 2 14-19 academies. The architect of this idea is none other than Lord Kenneth Baker, the man who introduced the very national curriculum which apparently makes three tier education anathema in modern society!
His rationale is very clear; we need to keep children in education until 19 and the current model is not fit for that purpose!
http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6026973
Please could anyone explain to me what on earth are our North Beds Councillors voting for? From reading the consultation, it seems option 1 is three tier and option 2 is three tier! Whether or not, you change the age range of the pupils at the present Lincroft, surely, the so called transfer problems still exist? How on earth will those teachers at Sharnbrook in Sharnbrook get to know the pupils at Sharnbrook in Oakley in preparation for GCSEs. When is Brain Glover going to tell the truth and admit that at the end of year 9, pupils will be travelling on shiny yellow buses to a new school, with unfamiliar teachers. Using the same name and uniform cannot hide this fact!
Beware North Bedfordshire, you have been deceived! ED
Ed,
North Beds councillors are voting for a complete mess!Make sure they know it and get them to realise that parents- who vote for them- will want answers when the mess unfolds in the future.Ring your coucillor and find out how they are going to vote and why.
Why is it that Council Officers and the Education Elite in Bedford Borough can mislead, spin, use advertising and sales techniques to force their “opinion” on Bedford’s population without anyone questioning their motives? What is going on?
hi all
well a very holy report indeed, have had the time to read it and its(is lies allowed on here) if not half truths, spin, and the simple fact that most of the replys said lets keep the exsiting system, if you read down and get to the qustions asked, in the various debates held did any one answer a single question that was put to them, as i saw my question at mark rutheford, and the more i read it, the answer is know were near what was asked and seem the same for all outhers to, all a can say is if anyone from local govenment read this pleasr rember votes count in all elections
one last comment tonight, if this goes aheadm it will be like watching a plane crash in slow motion, with our children being slowly wiped out one by one as there one chance of a qualty education dissapires like the money will also evoprorate all so quickly, all to be left with is the scattered remains of any hopes of a good job, if you want a chance to see the what is to come look back 35 years at the last time we changed, trust me i was there, and it was not a pretty sight, or closer to home look to northampton today
In a nutshell, what our education officers and some councilors are proposing is a complete change to our whole school system in Bedford Borough, with years of massive disruption for everyone connected.
To what end?
None of the arguments that have been given by them for an educational change have now actually stacked up and we now realise that these arguments were given to conceal a hidden agenda.
The true motivation for this is not for the advancement and welfare of our children and our children’s education, but the desire to secure BSF funding at all cost and for all that this would entail.
The Government has acknowledged that BSF funding can be provided for either system, so why have we not seen a report with an alternative view, reflecting a clear vision to retain and improve the existing infrastructure.
Quite simply, they would have us believe that £300 million (if available) spent on 22 Middle & Upper Schools (divided £13.5 million) would be too diluted and therefore to difficult for them to be able to show their clear vision needed to secure the grant.
They would prefer that they used the £300 million (if available) on 7 Secondary Schools (divided £42.86 million) that would then allow them to show a clear vision to BSF and also leave them a lasting testament.
£300 million could be injected (if available) into the local economy whichever way our school’s were organised. Only perhaps that would not be such an attractive proposition to the people who would really benefit most from a change.
Do we as parents really want our children to go to super-sized Secondary Schools like ‘Sharncroft’ (2800 pupils) or ‘Rutherham’ (1820 pupils).
We now realise that changing our Lower Schools into Primary Schools will be extremely costly for all taxpayers in the borough and as in every other LA where this change has happened, other services to the public will be considerably affected.
We have had vital information kept from us which is now finally emerging, not from the education officers, but from parents, teachers and other candid people who are genuinely concerned with the way in which this whole exercise has been conducted.
Finally, what ever happened to ‘Parental Choice’ in Bedford Borough?
just one point, the funding is now divide by 6 and that new bedford accamdme (john bunyan to you and me)is supposed to be a PFI project so no longer a upper school if you beleve the council blurb there for no having any bsf funding, and the new proposed accadamy will cost at least 70 mil or so that could upset the apple cart a bit so if BSF goes to JB as well will leave a lot less for the rest, May the squabbaling begin,