MPs question point of new schools

Analysis
By Gary Eason
Education editor, BBC News website

The education secretary visiting a would-be trust school

Many aspects of the government's plans have broad support - on improving discipline, for example - but it is the proposed "trust schools" that have caused controversy.

A large part of the reason for this is (ironically) a mistrust of the government's real intentions towards England's schools.

The rhetoric ahead of the White Paper's publication was not borne out by the reality of what is in it.

And in seeking to reassure people, Education Secretary Ruth Kelly has been stressing how little the powers of trust schools will differ from what many schools can do already.

One of her predecessors, Baroness Estelle Morris, has said Ms Kelly "has got to be straight and tell us exactly what is in this bill that will give schools greater independence".

It is unclear why new legislation is necessary to establish trust schools Commons education select committee

The Association of Teachers and Lecturers has described trust schools as "a solution to which there is no known problem".

The select committee refers to "the confusion that has bedevilled this White Paper" and calls for "urgent clarification".

It hands ammunition to those who suspect the bedevilling is likely to be in the detail, by complaining that detail is what is missing - even in the government's "prospectus" for trust schools.

If they are to be simply a variation of existing foundation schools, the committee's report says, "it is unclear why new legislation is necessary to establish trust schools".

The government "has managed to make a cause célèbre out of something which already exists".

Admissions

But having said that, the committee then disappoints those who would prefer the government to scrap the idea.

If trust schools are to go ahead, it stresses that they should work in partnership.

Thorpe Bay School is one of the few keen to adopt trust status

"We recommend ... the model of a federation of two or more schools as the preferred option for the development of the trust school concept."

Not only that, they should have a duty to spread good practice.

If trust schools in general are contentious, the thing that has caused most upset is admissions - the children they will take in.

Ministers have belaboured their "guarantee" of no further selection by ability.

The select committee has long been sceptical of the practical distinction between "ability" and "aptitude" in selection.

It repeats its call for the ending of selection by aptitude - allowed for 10% of pupils by some categories of specialist school.

Benchmarks

In proposing that local authorities should have to check on schools' admissions policies, the committee is addressing an issue raised by the schools adjudicators.

The adjudicators rule on admissions disputes, but can deal only with cases referred to them - they are not an inspectorate.

The chief adjudicator, Philip Hunter, has said they feel some local authorities are not as watchful as they should be of what is happening in their areas.

But the MPs also want local authorities to have a further duty to tackle existing social segregation in schools.

They say they should have to set "benchmarks" for how many children from poorer families the schools in their area should take in.

The choice of wording deliberately echoes the policy in higher education. Universities are set benchmarks for the number of state school pupils they admit.

There are no penalties for not meeting these, but some resent them as tantamount to attempted "social engineering".

The select committee seeks to go further - although Conservative members say they "disagree strongly" with the whole approach.

Sanctions

The main report proposes placing a duty on all schools "to promote social inclusion and community cohesion through all of their institutional policies and procedures, including their admissions policies".

Each local authority would have to report annually to the new schools commissioner on the social composition of secondary schools.

The commissioner "should also have sanctions where it appears that schools or authorities are not addressing these issues of inequality".

And the Labour and Liberal Democrat MPs take issue with a fundamental plank of government and Conservative policy - greater parental choice.

They say the government believes choice "will deliver general improvement through the individual preferences of individual parents".

"Taken to its logical conclusion, this suggests that the sum of individual preferences is the common good, which we do not believe is the case," says the report.

A teachers' union has complained about all the "politicking" around the White Paper.

And the MPs conclude with what they presumably feel is a note of realism.

"In the end it will be what happens in schools, whatever their designation, that will decide whether the attainment of disadvantaged children in our school system will be improved," they say.