Lib Dem pupil premium to give massive boost to schools
Unlike a lot of parliamentary candidates, I have a full time job which I am trying to do whilst campaigning. I work in the NHS, for a mental health organisation which provides services to Bury as well as other areas around here.
My wife-to-be (on 7th August) Tamsin is not only a PPC-widow but is also a full time public servant - she’s a primary school teacher, which means that we both get to moan about the state of public services at home! What annoys me is that I’ve been elected as a Councillor to try and fix them, so she gets to finger-point a bit more than I do, but neither of us run the show so that’s OK!
We were having a chat the other day in Nando’s, a place where I suspect high-charged political discussions are few and far between. But in between munching on my peri-peri chicken pieces and those nice nuts they have there, I got all philosophical and asked her what one thing she would do if she was in charge of education for the day. She said that she’d lower class sizes, which surprised me a bit because if I was in charge of education for a day I’d hack into the computer systems and give myself twelve degrees and a PhD, and then I’d remove all the A-Level records of that beautiful girl who turned me down when I was 17.
But she is clearly a lot more sensible than I am.
There are two things interesting about her answer though. First, that out of everything that anyone talks about regarding education - the gap between rich and poor students, discipline, grade inflation, skills shortages etc - she picked class sizes straight away. And second, that she followed it up with “ooh, no wait, maybe something else…” and then listed lots of other things she’d like to change, before finishing with “But we don’t have the opportunity.”
At that point we had to leave to go and see Cirque du Soleil, and so our conversation had to end because she wanted to talk about clowns. That’s a shame because I could have told her about the Lib Dem education policy, which was outlined by Nick Clegg last weekend.
We propose an investment of £2.5billion in schools, to reduce class sizes and achieve many of the things that Tam and lots of other teachers want to see. That equates to an extra £2,500 per pupil for the million pupils on free school meals in this country. This “pupil premium” would raise the amount spent per pupil in the state sector to that in fee paying schools.
Imagine what teachers could achieve with that kind of additional funding!
Our plans would get rid of anomalies which exist under Labour now, like catchment areas with different funding arrangements which means that needy kids in some areas don’t get the funding they need.
This money isn’t going to be given lightly, but what we will do is cut the reins between schools and the government to let the people who know schools best - the highly skilled and dedicated teachers who are frustrated under the current system - the opportunity to innovate. We invite teachers to re-invent the curriculum to challenge and stretch. We say to teachers, cut class sizes in your school if that’s where you think the money should be spent. And we ask teachers to make sue that this money means that more children achieve well at school.
I genuinely believe that this approach, a pupil premium where it’s needed most, is the fairest and most sensible way to give teachers what they want, and to give pupils what they need from our schools.
Rick
2 Comments
have your say
Richard,
An interesting post… although I do think that the girl who turned you down when you were 17 is somebody you should try your very best to forget about. After all, if she hadn’t done so, you might not be having those animated conversations with Tam in Nando’s, and making plans for August 7th.
But…a few questions for you:
Firstly, whilst it makes sense to make class sizes smaller, would this not mean that more teachers would be needed? And if so, this would make inroads into the proposed £2.5 billion, surely? And whilst that extra cost would not decimate the proposed figure, I imagine that it would have quite an effect.
Secondly, my logic says that, if class sizes are made smaller, then the number of classes would become bigger (possibly to a ratio of around 4:1). And that would impact on school-building programmes, perhaps quite dramatically. How would this be funded?
And finally… the birth rate in this country is, (I believe) going up quite dramatically. According to some statistics, 2009 was the highest birth-rate figure for around 50 years. This means that the pressures placed on pre-school, and infant, teaching is going to increase. 4-5 years down the line, those same pressures will make themselves felt in the older age groups. If that’s the case then, whilst smaller class sizes is a laudible aim, achieving it is going to cost considerably more, year on year.
It makes perfect sense to allow teachers and school governors to choose how they spend their money, but if they can’t physically achieve what they would like to do, it becomes something of an empty gesture. Why not stop spending more and more money on building prisons, and starting investing in new school buildings?
You’re right - smaller classes means more teachers, which is something schools can spend the money on if they want. Same with any alterations to buildings that may be required. It’s fine if it decimates the proposed figure - that’s what it’s for!
I’m not sure about a 4:1 ratio (a class of 30 would become a class of 7 or 8 at that ratio, which I don’t think is going to work), but you’re right that it would have an impact on school buildings. This would need to be worked out, but again it’s the money being made available in the places where it’s needed most that’s the important thing.
To be fair on Labour, the Building Schools for the Future programme has seen huge numbers of new schools built. Sadly though, it’s a very bureaucratic process often meaning hundreds of thousands are needed up front to bid for cash. This needs to change.
I think you’re right about prisons, but that’s another topic entirely. The current system clearly isn’t working. Too many people in prison when they would be better rehabilitated and more meaningfully punished in the community. Recidivism remains too high, and this needs to change too.