Anthony Seldon – A summary of his thoughts – with comments

ANTHONY SELDON – SCHOOLS UNITED Ending the divide between independent and state

SUMMARY AND COMMENT
Chapter 1 A Uniquely British Problem
Chapter 2 A History of Attempts to Address the Independent/state school Divide
Chapter 3 Independent and State School Solutions Abroad
Chapter 4 The Four Level Solution
CHAPTER 1

He deals with
• the funding gap issue, reflected in lower pupil-teacher ratios , higher level of teacher qualifications and higher capital expenditure.
• Access to universities through middle classes accessing the best schools and the best results
• Accessing top jobs.
Conclusion :- ‘the divide in educational and economic opportunities between the rich and the poor has been widening rather than declining over the past decades’. It is ‘palpably unfair’ and ‘hugely inefficient’.

CHAPTER 2
He identifies 4 types of solutions proposed during last century to bridge divide:
• Retain. Leaving status quo is broadly the solution of the traditional right
• Reform. Devising ways to male independent schools more ‘open’ has been the solution offered by the more moderate right and left
• Remove. Abolition. Prescription of far left
• Replace. Progressive centre seek a ‘needs blind access’ solution.
He then goes through the century identifying the proposal regarding reform – post first World War, Fleming Report and Education Act 1944, Abolition of Independent Schools 1950s and 1960s, Public Schools Commission and Newsom Report 1968, Assisted Places Scheme 1980-1997, Open Access Scheme. He analyses why these came to nothing :-
1. Unwillingness of government to commit money
2. Tenacity of independent schools
3. Flawed reforms
4. Recognition that abolition of them is a denial of human rights
5. Lack of political will

CHAPTER 3
He has an interesting section on the optimal mix of state and private provision where findings prove that’ national systems that have a higher share of privately managed schools perform better’ and that this competition ‘ lifts up the performance of all schools’.
He then analyses the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program and the voucher System in Sweden, concluding that the impact of such schemes has a positive impact as well as improving the performance of those not directly affected. They improve accountability and introduce real choice for parents of low means.

CHAPTER 4 THE PROPOSALS
1. State schools emulate the best features of Independent Schools

Those listed are, per se, nothing new to us as independent schools, but are worth emphasising
.
• Holistic education
• Character education
• Leadership
• House Systems
• Boarding
• Long School Day
• Uniform and Behaviour
• CCF
• Service and volunteering
• Parental Involvement

2. Independent Schools bond with state schools.

This touches the whole area of partnerships, which, he says, can consist
• of loose ties ( opening up sports facilities)
• ‘ more meaningful relationships ( master classes etc)
• a more ‘structural level of engagement’ (Federations, teaching schools)
• ‘an even greater bond’ ( sponsoring an academy, setting up free school)

The final proposal is at the nub of what he wishes, and he tends to understate and not know enough about partnerships ( the ISSP Conference was wide-ranging in its examples, and showed how far things had gone- most of it under the radar ( even of Anthony(!)).

He is critical of our slowness to sponsor. ‘For too long they have raised objections, including lack of expertise, lack of time, and purported parental objections’ We need to realise that that the twentieth century is very different from the past, and that the political, and indeed moral landscape has moved beyond an era in which it was acceptable for the better off to perpetuate their privilege by attending excellent schools without tangible expression of their wider sense of social responsibility’. ‘Governing bodies have not responded to the calls from politicians over the last 15 years with the generosity of spirit exhibited by their predecessors in years gone by when the schools were founded)
So there – take that on the head!!
Independent Schools open their doors
Proposal – all independent schools offer 25% places to those from the least affluent quartile in the country. Similar to Aps, but targeted at the least privileged. Government would cap grant at 50% maximum of what it would have paid to send child to state school. Selection is guaranteed, but is only briefly mentioned.
The advantage of taking them from the last quartile ( even if they are very bright) is that it will still leave plenty of talented young people in the state schools.
3. Popular State Schools to be means tested
He sees this as most radical, since it ‘breaches the principle of free schooling for all’. He believes that this is now an anomaly however, with university top-up fees cited as a good example to follow. He sees it as the only way to break the middle class ‘stranglehold’ of top state schools. The more parents ear, the more they would pay : so, for example, a combined income of more than £200,000 would pay the full price. At least a quarter of these places would be non-fee paying to retain social balance. Another advantage is that therefore this idea brings more money into the state system.
COMMENT
The book is short ( 64 pages) so easy to read, but it has much behind it to unpack.
It reveals real lack of understanding of our type of schools, and the culture of them. He underrates ‘town schools’ and also understates the academic stringency of our schools.
He also fails to understand the real financial and time pressures with regard to academies and free schools, which shows why we are not willing ( general) to go down that route.
He lambasts us for not getting involved, but our experience is that we are rebuffed at every stage, and there is no real willingness to engage only to dictate – this is the way we want to go ( as in academies).
The lack of awareness of possibilities with partnership is frightening.
The real positive here is that partnerships/ bridging the gap is being given prominence – thanks Anthony – so we need to be in a position to help fill the gap with suggestions. 2014 is going to be a crucial year for the debate!

Stephen Smith January 23 2014

INDEPENDENT STATE SCHOOL PARTNERSHIPS

These partnerships were initially started by the Blair Government, and indicated a significant shift in strategy – work WITH the independent schools, rather than have them sitting on the sidelines. The standard approach from all governments since has been – we will concentrate on improving the state schools, you ( the independent schools) get on with doing what you do so well. In fact this was explicitly told me by a former Tory Minister of State. In essence, all parties remain uncomfortable with the situation and have not really worked out how to deal with it. Party members of all persuasions send their children to independent schools – because they suddenly realise that, for their children as with all children, there is only one chance in education. This actually isn’t true, but it seems to be so as a parent. The Labour Party struggles with the whole concept of people paying for education independently : it seems to be a lift up the ladder too far, too easily, and the ‘old boys’ network’ is regularly mentioned. The Conservatives know that it is a weak point for them, since it feeds once again into the ‘posh schools’ producing the ‘posh politicians’. The LibDems probably appreciate grammar schools more than most, surprisingly – at least that was the evidence at a LibDem Conference where FIDS was invited to present. The main issue is how do you ensure equality of opportunity without establishing too much central control. In practice, local areas of education are very inconsistent, in the same way as the NHS is, and it is difficult to establish such consistency with so many variables. Independent Schools can help : the partnerships originally established have mostly continued, despite the government’s withdrawal of funding. The conference next week will seek to push forward the partnerships agenda, in the hope that we can show at the grassroots that cooperation is possible in many areas – and might even develop into some kind of structural arrangement.

GOVE AND BLACKADDER

The problem with this debate is the general ignorance of commentators re what actually happens in a History lesson. It is too easy to snipe at ‘trendy left teachers’ because many teachers across the whole range of schools will have used Blackadder.

As a general principle, we are looking at GCSE – that is 14-16 year olds. You are immediately faced with how to access something very significant, and I can quite understand some teachers using the Blackadder series as a taster to arouse interest. The problem here lies whether you are then colouring their views of the events before seriously studying them, but one always has to accept that these pupils have generally seen these episodes already.

In teaching GCSE History you always teach pupils to analyse the SOURCE of the material, so one could use an episode and ask questions about the attitudes expressed and explained, thus raising the issues of bias at the root of this series.

One other technique (particularly useful when approaching Christmas!)- show episodes at the END of the course, when the students have studied the material so can make more informed judgments. In all instances it is not necessarily the material which is at fault, but the responsibility of the teacher and their own use of the material.

If Mr Gove’s criticisms lie more with the fact the students of this age are insufficiently mature to weigh up judgments, then please think again – you could not be more mistaken!