"Raising the Bar" needs to look at the difficult real issues on the ground to succeed

Raising the Bar website

Suffolk County Council continue to be frustrated by the exam table performance of Suffolk at 11 and 16. Leader of the County Council Mark Bee says “Suffolk is stuck”. So the County Council have launched an inquiry called “raising the bar” with a Commission chaired by Matthew taylor, Chief Executive of the Royal Society for Encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce’s (RSA).

The commission now has its own website and yesterday launched a “call for ideas” with Matthew Taylor quoted as saying:

The aim of the Raising the Bar programme is to make sure young people in Suffolk have the best possible chance to succeed at school, and get great jobs, in a fast-changing world.

At the moment, Suffolk's young people are falling behind, with lower exam results than most of the rest of the country. Employers often tell us that Suffolk's young people are leaving school without the skills they need. We want to make new things happen quickly.

People in Suffolk are already excited about this work and are developing new ideas to transform learning in Suffolk. But we need more ideas and this is an important opportunity for people to share their views.

This kind thing always has the danger of looking like a gimmick, being seen to do something rather than really do something but Matthew Taylor is certainly a well respected figure who lends some credibility to the commission.

Indeed the aims of the inquiry, or “themes” as they are called are things that everyone would I think want to support:

1. Creating a truly excellent, and constantly improving, school system
2. Schools and employers working together to ensure children can progress in work and in life
3. Creating a culture of learning and high expectations across Suffolk

So I think that at the very least "raising the bar" needs to be given a chance despite its rather corny name.

But if it is to really succeed in tacking these issues in Suffolk I think there are some rather difficult real world issues that need to be grappled with. I give a few examples below:

• Much of Suffolk is rural and the needs of rural Suffolk are distinct from the more urban parts of Ipswich and Lowestoft. A “one size fits all” solution is not going to work
• Suffolk actually has many high achieving schools. These aren’t any worse because of a County average and the tendency to make sweeping statements like “Suffolk is stuck” does not really help
• The County Council has already proposed SOR move to two tier as something that should improve performance but this is unfinished and has caused a great deal of uncertainty and difficulty in the affected areas
• The impact of free schools and academies needs to be honestly assessed rather than being ignored for political reasons
• Funding needs to be addressed. Suffolk is also low in the league table for funding and I cannot see this helps trying to raise attainment 
• Issues such as transport are vital particularly in the rural parts of Suffolk
• Suffolk County Council has not always provided strong strategic leadership over the last few years. Schools feel somewhat abandoned knowing the County cannot provide the support it used to but not knowing what the County want them to do. Neighbouring Norfolk has been more clear on strategy

These are just a few examples. I intend to respond myself to the call for ideas with some suggestions of my own that I hope will be helpful and I would encourage others to do so also. The consultation closes on 2nd November and you can reply online at the Raising the Bar website.

Seckford chain plan in ruins as they confirm no further bid for Stoke by Nayland

The Seckford Foundation’s plans for a chain of Free Schools across Suffolk lay in ruins today after they confirmed they would not repeat their failed bid for a third school in Stoke by Nayland.

Seckford are still planning a bid for Ixworth but there are many in the Ixworth area that would agree with the views quoted in the EADT by a unnamed local parent in Stoke by Nayland:

One parent, who asked not to be named, said he was “happy” to learn that the trust would not be re-submitting its plans as he could never see it obtaining permission from the Department for Education.

He said: “Risking another application by Seckford at Stoke-by-Nayland was not desired by many parents and I am appreciative to Seckford for listening to our community’s wishes.

Those who support a free school at Ixworth - and it is certainly a popular idea in that area - may well feel that a bid from anyone other than Seckford would stand a better chance of DfE approval.

The problem is of course their track record in Beccles and Saxmundham where they have failed to get “bums on seats”. This does not stop Seckford making a further outlandish claim in their latest leaflet to Ixworth parents that:

The Seckford Foundation Free Schools Trust has already opened two successful Free Schools at Saxmundham and Beccles. Both schools are holding open evenings on 10 October (Saxmundham) and 11 October (Beccles) from 5.30 to 8.30pm. You are welcome to come to see our philosophy in action. (my emphasis)

If these schools are a “success” then I would hate to see what Seckford think failure would look like. Both schools opened considerably short of their planned pupil numbers and in the case of Beccles it became a national example of free school failure with the “Beccles 37” going down in educational history.

In fact you could even take issue with the claim that they are two schools as to all intents and purposes they are largely operating as a single school with shared leadership with staff and pupils moving between sites.

What becomes of the Seckford chain is not yet clear but I cannot see the DfE risking Seckford running another Free School until it can prove real success with its Beccles/Saxmundham venture. I still think there will be a free school in Ixworth - after all remember there was a deal between Suffolk County Council, local MPs and the DfE - but my money is on someone other than Seckford running it.

Bacton Middle proposes "all through school" as Stowmarket Consultation starts

Bacton Middle School

The next phase of the “school organisation review” (SOR) has begun in the Stowmarket and Stowupland areas. Suffolk County Council have published proposals that would in brief mean:

• Bacton, Stowmarket, Combs and Needham Market Middle Schools closing
• Expansion of Stowmarket and Stowupland High Schools (to 300 and 180 places per year respectively)
• Stowmarket High to use former Stowmarket Middle Site for Years 7 and 8 and current site for Year 9 upwards
• Combs Middle to be possible future primary school
• Needham Market and Bacton Middle to be sold (subject to DfE approval)
• All primary schools expanded to take Years 5 and 6

You can see the full Stowmaket and Stowupland consultation documents online.

However Bacton Middle School are not happy with the proposals. At the same time as the first public consultation meeting was held at the school this week their Headteacher issued a lengthy statement complaining that their proposal for an “all-through” 3-18 (and beyond) school has been given a cursory mention in the consultation document (p10 of the Stowupland Consultation Booklet). This is what the consultation document has to say:

The “all-through” proposal was based on the existing seven schools retaining their age range and forming a federation with a single governing body and an executive principal. This would be consistent with the county council’s principles and would not need any investment in new classrooms. After much careful consideration the majority of headteachers and governors were not convinced that the “all-through” proposal would lead to higher achievement as it did not address the additional change of school. Nor was it thought that it was compatible with neighbouring systems and could lead to problems for families moving in and out of the area. 

Bacton Middle are not happy about this, the Head saying in a statement on their website:

The Governors’ proposal was for an “all through” model: a single learning community supported by other agencies, creating a seamless education for 3- 18yrs and beyond. Its strength would be in having one line of accountability and in removing any transfer dip that could be caused by changing school. It builds on existing collaborative working and this school is committed to working with other schools, whatever the outcome of this process. On page 10 of the booklet only a very brief mention is made of the all through proposal. Even though I took the opportunity to read and offer amendments to the draft, I would like it to be a matter of public record that the final printed details on page 10 do not accurately summarise Bacton Community Middle School’s Governors’ proposal. Important fundamentals of the proposal, which would address issues such as preparation for GCSEs, have been omitted.

Is this consultation about what schools want or what parents want?

In the past few months there were rumours that Bacton might become another location for a free school bid. It will be interesting to see what happens during the consultation period and if this is a serious proposal or just an attempt to “save” the Middle School.

I also wonder if the split site proposal for Stowmarket High might attract some criticism. At first sight it looks a lot like the existing system but with children staying in Primary School for Years 5 and 6 and they would go to the former Middle School in years 7 and 8 just like they do now.

This is certainly one to watch and I expect this together with the Ixworth Free School plans to dominate this Blog for the rest of this term.

Glemsford Primary debts written off by bank as huge leasing scam uncovered

Former Glemsford Head Liz Steele on Panorama
Direct Link to her speaking

This blog has covered the sorry tale of Glemsford Primary where a combination of a “too good to be true” deal and poor decision making left the school with half a million pounds worth of debt for laptops worth a fraction of the cost.

The saga cost the Headteacher Liz Steele and her IT Technician son their jobs and the Governing Body were also removed by Suffolk County Council.

Following an investigation by BBC Panorama (that you can catch on iPlayer if you missed it) a huge leasing scam has been uncovered affecting up to 200 schools across the country. Some people appear to have made literally millions of pounds from these deals.

Panorama challenged the banks involved in financing these deals and as a result Clydesdale Bank have written off debts to 16 schools - including Glemsford. This is great news for the school and for Suffolk Council Tax payers who could have ended up paying this debt.

Former Head Liz Steele appeared on the programme (in fact the only Head to do so without concealing their identity). Ms Steele is understandably upset that her 40 year long career in education ended in this way and Panorama raise an important question. Are schools equipped to deal on their on their own with these kind of financial issues that would previously been handled by Local Authorities?

In the case of Glemsford clearly they were not. In the rush to give schools more “freedoms” it seems some schools are ending up with more autonomy than they can handle. Heads aren’t trained to manage budgets and Governors do not necessarily have the right experience either - Panorama citing this as a particular issue in Primary Schools.

It is difficult to imagine the DfE signing off photocopier and laptop orders from Whitehall and sadly it seems that some schools are just an easy target on the way to companies making a quick buck. This is yet more evidence of the “missing middle” in education. If Local Authorities aren’t going to fulfil this role then someone certainly needs to.