School sounding cuts

[mrz]

Will your child's school face cuts to budget?http://www.schoolcuts.org.uk/#/

I have a feeling some of the better funded schools have a lot of fat to cut

A feeling. Is this policy based evidence at play here?

Believeitornot, I agree that some teachers (not all) deserve a pay rise. So called 'super heads' are over paid. Not sure anyone has pissed money on a wall.

We've had dramatic austerity measures - Have we? what are those? must have passed me by. Can you give link?

Why not all teachers? Those that don't perform well enough? Well that's for performance related pay to sort out.

You want me to link to the cuts in public spending.....

spending cuts

If you read the article it states that funding for schools has been protected. If you actually look at the graph, the department for education has had cuts. And we've had increases in international development, education, health and the cabinet office.

Sorry I said increase in education - that was a typo as I wasn't concentrating.

Also this is jnteresting

Spending on education has fallen proportionately.

Why not all teachers?
Well I am not in a position to decide, the teachers who are doing well should be rewarded, the ones who are not shouldn't be.

That link is confusing because the IFS has said "Recently, the proportion going to schools has increased, with schools having been protected from the government's recent spending cuts". So I dont know who to believe.

Suppermummy02

why do they have to provide a 'better' education. Why not the same education at less cost?

Define "same education", are you talking about top end state schools or bottom end ones?

PP have already proved that some don't understand the issues in deprived areas or the issues in affluent areas.

and surely if we are to replace the current system it should be with something better, not just a cut price failure.

the teachers who are doing well should be rewarded, the ones who are not shouldn't be.

Could you define this as well?

Teachers doing well always comes down to exam results.

I'm a great teacher the year I'm teaching top set, and a rubbish teacher the year I teach bottom set.

Suppermummy02 perhaps Figure 1a. Education spending in real terms (£ billion, 2015–16 prices), 1953–54 to 2014–15 and Figure 1b. Education spending as a share of national income (%), 1953–54 to 2014–15 makes it a little clearer?

One point to make, there is not mention of how much of the spend in more recent years has gone towards set up costs for new free schools and academies.

noble

I agree with that its down to exam results, but as you say having a top set/bottom set defines our teaching ability. But as I think (and I think you agree) that results don't make a good teacher, its is so much more.

I am wondering what Suppermummy02 thinks a good teacher is.

I am wondering what Suppermummy02 thinks a good teacher is

Not sure why this is relevant but I would a) leave that for a head to decide and b) look at the progress made from Y7 to Y11 of the children they are teaching.

Its irrelevant whether its the top of bottom set, its about how much you teach them.

Of course it's relevant whether they're top or bottom set because that directly effects how much you can teach them.

Kids often end up in low sets because they have slow processing speeds or working memory issues. They just don't learn as much and as fast as a top set. So a teacher will make more progress with a top set (pay rise!) than with a low set (competency procedures!).

ok, maybe I used the wrong word, its about how much progress you are able to teach the children to make. Nothing to do with what set they are in.

Bottom sets make less progress.

And sometimes progress can't be measured. I've got a kid in Y11 who has been refusing to come to school, refusing to work in lessons. Last week he not only stayed in my class all lesson but actually answered a question. That's major progress but on paper he has gone backwards.

Suppermummy02

its about how much progress you are able to teach the children to make. Nothing to do with what set they are in

So what would be a good measure of progress?

Free schools in areas with existing schools dilute the market so you end up with low capacity at all schools - which then leads to cuts in funding in all schools and inevitably cuts in teaching staff, which then has the knock on effect of reducing the educational offer so you end up with failing school schools of all varieties due to school school saturation of the market. It's basic economics and common sense - if 5000 places exist for 4500 children across 10 schools, most schools will be on average athe 90% capacity. Introduce another 500 place school and the capacity increases and per pupil funding into the individual school falls.

Thatwaslulu

That idea might be logical but that's not how people behave. An area with school places at a few under performing schools might not appear to have a need for a free school. However parents might be moving house, children travelling long distances out of area or using private schools to avoid the under performing school places.

Open a good new school and parents can stop moving house, travelling out of area or going private and the new school doesn't reduce numbers in other schools in the area. Catchment distance might be changed but that means it might be easier for families to use a school that you previously needed to live 800 m away to get into.

Or to use your example, excess places are created, the pupils will gravitate to the best of the schools available and the worse performing one can close. Which makes best use of the budget whilst selecting the best possible education.

Suppermummy02 I'm in an area where all the secondary schools are heavily over subscribed. The one Free school in the area has been undersubscribed for four years in a row. Two of the oversubscribed schools added an extra form this year. Two other oversubscribed schools in area are adding an extra form next year. The majority of parents are obviously not seeing the Free school as an option they wish to consider and to a large extent the free school is being used to allocate school places to those who don't get any of their CAF preference (a bit of a dumping ground really), even then a number are going private, moving house or travelling outside the area rather than send their children to the free school.

the pupils will gravitate to the best of the schools available and the worse performing one can close.

As it stands now, In my area the free school will be the one most likely to close.

Summer

You have to take a bit of time to read the detail to work out what's going on.

Key sentence: But more recently, in a climate of overall public spending cuts, real-terms spending on education has fallen. The coalition government froze non-investment spending on schools

Non investment spending will be teachers, resources etc.

The government is committed to freezing cash budgets. What that actually means is that they will get cuts. Eg to use an extrem example, if I gave you £10 5 years ago, and £10 today you'd have the same 'cash' but you couldn't buy the same things because of inflation. So the reality is that you've had a cut. Same for schools.

To make things even worse, local authorities are being removed from involvement in schools. This is terrible - they will have a better idea of local populations and pressures (e.g. From housing developments etc) but can do nothing at all if they need new schools. This is why free schools have been an overall not a success because they are not in areas of need.
I used to live in Bromley and we had a few free schools set up but they were not full as they were not needed. Local authority schools could (and did) adjust and expand to absorb the majority of extra pupils.

Also with the removal of mandatory parent governors, schools have less of a direct accountability link to parents. Pushy parents help schools do better.

In my view the government is making serious mistakes by a) reducing spending in real terms b) destroying the morale of the teaching force and c) removing accountability for schools at a local level.

MumTryingHerBest, so more places are needed if all the other schools in your area are so oversubscribed. I imagine a new school will find it really hard if the council uses it as a dumping ground, sounds like they are setting it up fail.

Believeitornot, I do get that the schools budget is frozen in real terms and the money is worth less over time. I am just pointing out that the British public needs to accept tax rises because until then we all have to live within our means. Which includes schools.

I for one am not bothered about removing LAs from schools, they are just a costly bureaucracy. Likewise mandatory parent governors, what do they actually do, in what way are they directly accountable to parents?

If a council needs new school places in an area due to demand they can open a Free school/Academy or help current schools expand, what does it matter what the school is called?

Suppermummy I imagine a new school will find it really hard if the council uses it as a dumping ground, sounds like they are setting it up fail.

The school has had four years to persuade parents that they should include it on their CAF form.

The council has no option but to place those who do not get any of their preferences in that school because it is the nearest school with spaces available. It is an obligation they are expected to fulfil.

There is no point in setting up huge numbers of new schools offering choice if no one wants what the school is offering.

Suppermummy02

I take it that you are unable to define a good measure of progress.

I for one am not bothered about removing LAs from schools, they are just a costly bureaucracy. Likewise mandatory parent governors, what do they actually do, in what way are they directly accountable to parents?

How are they a costly bureaucracy? Local authorities are more likely to have a better handle on local need and know where the money should go.

Parent governors are there to represent parents. They are not accountable to parents - they ensure that schools are accountable.

Academies are less accountable to parents because they're a step removed from the local community. In chains especially, the board of governors for an individual school will not be directly accountable for the performance of the school. Actual accountability lies with the board of the academy chain which is a step removed from the school itself.

The academy is primarily concerned with hard targets and can be ruthless as they're run like a business. A business' prime aim is to make money.

Re budget cuts - living within "our means" is always the aim of government. And most governments have a bucket of funding which comes from tax and borrowing. If you check, you'll realise that before the 2008 crisis and subsequent recession, the UK's finances were not in that bad a shape actually.
The current government could choose to invest. Invest in our future - so better spending on education. Not cutting.

Also if it did more to improve the morale of teachers, instead of treating them all as if they can't be trusted, then we would be in a better position when it comes to improving schools.

It is an absolute disaster having a profession which is so vital having difficulty in recruiting. Imagine if you were a business and you couldn't recruit the staff? What would you do? You'd make it an attractive place to work at the very least. And you can do that without chucking money. You can do it by improving conditions.

If a council wants a new school it can invite someone to set up a free school or academy. It cannot do itself.

MumTryingHerBest, If the school is a bad school it should be closed, but it sounds like your saying the area does need more places. I am only pointing out the chicken and egg situation of a school persuading families to use it when they get all the 'dumped' children. Maybe Free Schools should be exempt from having to take 'disruptive' children until they become established.

BoneyBackJefferson, I am not an authority on measuring educational progress, I dont know how it should be done, dont we pay people to work that out?

Believeitornot, LAs are they a costly bureaucracy because they take a percentage of the school budget. Then when it comes to spending that money councils manage to pay ten times more than things cost, from changing light bulbs to fixing potholes or building schools. Better to circumvent councils and give schools the money direct.

Parent governors represent parents, if by that you mean they represent their own views. In what way do they hold schools to account? They have neither the expertise or authority to veto head masters decisions and I have never know or heard of PGs doing so.

Academies are accountable to parents because if they dont get parental support they are closed down.

The academy is primarily concerned with hard targets - You mean like good grades for its pupils?

living within "our means" is always the aim of government - No, plenty of politicians/governments advocate borrowing more and more money, as if they are father Christmas, and buy everyone's vote with the intention of letting future generations pay it all back.

The current government could choose to invest - Yes they could and its nice language but the real risk is that increasing our debt massively in the hopes that their is some return, some time in the distant future, is a big gamble. I remember the seventies when we had to get bailed out by the IMF, and I dont want Britain to become like Greece.

If a council wants a new school it can invite someone to set up a free school or academy - Has any council ever been unable to get someone to run a school it needed?

Better to circumvent councils and give schools the money direct.

www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2016/06/4m-fraud-at-another-of-goves-favourite-academy-chains

www.theguardian.com/education/2016/mar/28/perry-beeches-academy-chain-stripped-schools-critical-finance-report

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2620205/Academy-chain-founder-paid-wife-28-000-Officials-criticise-series-dubious-financial-practices-including-20-000-fact-finding-trip-New-York.html

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/three-are-arrested-amid-claims-of-fraud-at-one-of-the-governments-flagship-academy-schools-9236439.html

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10064242/Extravagant-academy-school-bosses-blow-thousands-on-luxury-hotels-and-first-class-travel.html