Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effectiveness of policies and programmes to tackle social inequality in the UK; and what evidence exists to demonstrate that children and young people living in poverty and low-income households have been enabled by those policies and programmes to overcome the barriers to social mobility.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Social mobility is a top priority, and the department is taking action to remove barriers to opportunity at every stage of the education system. The department has set out a 10 year ambition to boost children’s early reading and communication skills. We have invested more than £15 billion in the pupil premium to support the most disadvantaged pupils and we are reforming technical education. The evidence shows we are closing the educational attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and others, as measured by the disadvantage gap index, by around 13 % at key stage 2 and 9.5 % at key stage 4 since 2011. As well as increasing the proportion of disadvantaged 18 year olds entering full-time higher education from 13.3% in 2009 to 20.2% in 2018.
The department has invested over £137 million in the Education Endowment Foundation to help schools use the pupil premium in ways that are proven to have a positive impact.
We are committed to tackling the root causes of poverty and disadvantage and we are making good progress. Nationally, there are now over a million fewer workless households, and around 665,000 fewer children living in such households compared with 2010.
Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what representations they have received about the implications of introducing tests for children aged four; and what their response has been to such representations.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Following positive feedback on the proposal made in the 2017 primary assessment consultation, we committed to introducing the reception baseline assessment (RBA) at the beginning of the reception year to form the baseline for primary school progress measures. The consultation received 4,165 responses including representations from headteachers, teachers, teaching unions and sector experts. A majority of responses demonstrated clear support for moving the baseline assessment to reception. It is important to note the RBA is not a test - it is a short, teacher-led assessment and it will provide practitioners with valuable one-to-one time with their pupils within the first few weeks of reception. The full consultation response is attached and can also be found here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/644871/Primary_assessment_consultation_response.pdf.
Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the education benefits for children and their families of the introduction of tests for children aged four.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
The reception baseline assessment (RBA) will enable us to create school-level progress measures for primary schools which show the progress pupils make from reception until the end of key stage 2. Progress is an important measure - it will give schools credit for the important work they do with their pupils between reception and year 2 and will give parents better information about which schools may help their children to make the most progress. The RBA is not a test - it is a short, teacher-led assessment and it will provide practitioners with valuable one-to-one time with their pupils within the first few weeks of reception.
We have worked closely with early years practitioners, schools and other education experts to develop the RBA, and continue to do so. All aspects of the assessment’s development have been informed by an extensive evidence base of early years research.
Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the vulnerability of pupils being admitted to Pupil Referral Units as a result of schools removing them before their GCSE results count towards league table ratings.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
The law is clear that a pupil’s name can only be deleted from the admission register on the grounds prescribed in regulation 8 of the Education (Pupil Registration) (England) Regulations 2006 as amended.
State-funded schools can exclude pupils, either permanently or for a fixed period, for disciplinary reasons, and the department supports schools in using exclusion where this is warranted. Exclusion on any grounds other than discipline is unlawful. Where a pupil is asked to leave the school, the formal exclusions process set out in the school exclusion guidance must be followed. Schools may not exclude pupils because of their academic attainment or ability.
Local authorities are responsible for arranging suitable full-time education for permanently excluded pupils, and for other pupils who – because of illness or other reasons – would not receive suitable education without such provision. Pupil Referral Units (PRUs), like all schools and colleges, have a legal duty to safeguard children. Ofsted inspects PRUs under the same inspection framework as mainstream state-funded schools.
Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of the decrease in school spending per pupil in England on pupil educational achievement between 2009 and 2018.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) figures show that school funding was protected in real terms per pupil between 2010-11 and 2015-16, and protected in real terms overall between 2015-16 and 2017-18. The department is committed to protecting funding in real terms per pupil across 2018-19 and 2019-20, with core funding for schools and high needs rising from almost £41 billion in 2017-18 to £43.5 billion in 2019-20. The IFS figures also show that real terms per pupil funding for 5 to 16 year olds in 2020 will be more than 50% higher than it was in 2000 and more than 70% higher than in 1990.
The department have also introduced the national funding formula to distribute this funding more fairly. Since 2017, the national funding formula has given every local authority more money for every pupil in every school, while allocating the biggest increases to the schools that have been the most underfunded.
Primary school children achieved their highest ever score in the most recent international reading tests in 2016. As at August 2018, 86% of schools have been rated good or outstanding, compared to 68% in 2010.
Despite prioritising spending on schools and making the distribution of that funding fairer across the country, the department recognises that budgets remain tight. That is why the department is supporting schools and head teachers to make the most of their budgets and reduce costs on expenditures like energy, water bills and materials.
Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the research from University College London about reducing the attainment gap between poorer boys and their more affluent peers through earlier schooling.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
The University College London research indicated that disadvantaged boys benefitted most from receiving all 3 terms of reception education.
There are no longer local variations in the rules on when children can start school. The School Admissions Code requires the admission authorities for all schools to provide for the admission of all children in the September following their fourth birthday. Parents may, however, delay their child’s admission until a later point in the reception year if they wish.
We know that early education from age 2 has long lasting benefits for children and helps to promote a child’s emotional, cognitive and social development. That is why the government introduced 15 hours of funded early education for the most disadvantaged 2 year old children from September 2013. Eligibility was expanded in September 2014 to include children from low income working families, children with a disability or special educational need and children who have left care. In April 2018, the government introduced an earnings threshold for families on Universal Credit, equivalent to a net income of £15,400 per year, to ensure that the entitlement is available to those who will benefit most. The intention behind the £15,400 threshold was to extend our reach so that the most disadvantaged parents could access a place for their child.
Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what consideration they have given to the introduction of additional earlier age education to achieve better attainment and education benefits for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Evidence from the department’s Study of Early Education and Development and the Study of Effective Primary, Pre-school and Secondary Education is clear that good-quality early education at the age of two has a variety of very positive benefits for children. Both studies are attached.
All children have access to 15 hours early years education from the term after their third birthday. In addition the most disadvantaged children already have access to 15 hours a week free early education from the age of 2.
Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what consideration is being given to revising the advice given to independent schools about teaching respect for LGBT people; and what are the implications of such teaching for safeguarding young LGBT people who are subjected to homophobic, biphobic and transphobic bullying.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
A public consultation was held by the Department for Education from 14 March to 2 June 2018 on proposed guidance on the independent school standards, including those relating to the promotion of respect for other people. Responses to the consultation are still being considered.
The finalised version of the guidance will be published soon. The draft guidance issued with the consultation included advice that schools’ anti-bullying policies should refer to prejudice-based bullying.
Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment, if any, they have made of the salaries paid to heads or chief executives of academy chains; and whether there is any correlation between the salary levels of such heads or executives and improvements in standards of education in those chains.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Our reforms over the last 8 years show that autonomy and freedom in the hands of excellent leaders and outstanding teachers can deliver a world-class education. Academy status leads to a more dynamic and responsive education system by allowing schools to make decisions based on local need and the interests of their pupils. It allows high performing schools to consolidate success and share their good practice across their local area. This includes over 550,000 children studying in sponsored primary and secondary academies that are now rated good or outstanding, which typically replaced underperforming schools and that is, in part, down to our reforms.
There is no single performance measure that adequately captures the scale, breadth and challenge within the roles of academy chain heads. Many of the highest paid trust chief executives work in some of the most challenging areas of the country and cover a number of schools, and have been able to achieve significant improvements for the children in their trust.
We are clear that high pay in academy trusts must be justified with evidence of robust processes for setting salaries and reductions where appropriate. That is why we have already challenged 213 trusts paying either one person more than £150,000 or 2 or more people more than £100,000. Since this work began, 45 trusts have reduced salaries in their latest accounts return and this month I have written to 28 of the 213 trusts challenged in the previous round of high pay activity to further challenge where salaries have not been reduced. We remain fully committed to continuing and developing this challenge process.
Asked by: Lord Ouseley (Crossbench - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many state-maintained children's nurseries are in deficit; and what assessment they have made of the implications for the viability of such nurseries and for children's early years educational needs.
Answered by Lord Agnew of Oulton
Information regarding the finances of local authority-run maintained day nurseries is not held centrally. However, data on maintained nursery schools (MNS) are published as part of statistics on local authority and school expenditure. They show that in 2017-18, there were 80 MNS in deficit. Funding decisions, including the services provided, spend and how to manage deficits, are a matter for the relevant local authority and MNS to agree.
MNS make a valuable contribution to improving the lives of some of our most disadvantaged children. They experience costs that other providers do not, and we are providing local authorities with around £60 million a year in supplementary funding to enable them to protect MNS’ funding.
This arrangement is due to end in March 2020, and what happens after that will be determined by the next Spending Review. Owing to uncertainty over the exact date of the Spending Review, we are considering how best to handle transitional arrangements for a number of areas, including MNS.