Asked by: David Anderson (Labour - Blaydon)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether any monitoring by (a) her Department or (b) other bodies is carried out in schools to ensure that children are not overly exposed to electromagnetic fields.
Answered by Edward Timpson
The Department does not specifically monitor exposure to electromagnetic fields in schools.
We provide advice to schools on health and safety matters. Schools must take reasonable steps to ensure that staff and pupils are not exposed to risks to their health and safety by conducting a risk assessment and, if necessary, putting measures in place to minimise any known risk.
Schools should be aware that where concerns are raised that they can access the appropriate advice; Public Health England provides advice via GOV.UK[1] on exposure to electromagnetic fields in the everyday environment.
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/electromagnetic-fields
Asked by: David Anderson (Labour - Blaydon)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether her Department has conducted a workload impact assessment in respect of the introduction of the new Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 assessments.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The removal of unnecessary workload is a priority and is considered carefully when introducing any significant change for schools. Our primary assessment reforms have been designed to put arrangements for the majority of classroom assessment back into the hands of the school and to reduce the tracking burdens that national curriculum levels encouraged. We believe schools are best placed to decide how to assess pupils in line with their curriculum and that over time this should lead to a reduction in workload for teachers so that their efforts can focus on teaching.
Following the introduction of the new national curriculum and the removal of levels, we have developed new forms of statutory assessment at the end of Key Stages 1 and 2. The duty to report assessment at these points remains unchanged from previous years. We do recognise, however, that in this first year the new forms of assessment are used pupils and teachers will be adapting their approach. Significant reforms take time to embed and the best way to prepare pupils remains to focus on teaching the new national curriculum, which schools have been doing since September 2014.
Throughout the introduction of our important reforms to primary assessment, we have worked closely with teachers and head teachers and continue to listen to the concerns of the profession as the details of the new arrangements are finalised. We are working constructively with the teaching profession and their representatives to find solutions to some of the remaining issues.
Asked by: David Anderson (Labour - Blaydon)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what plans her Department has to reduce teacher workload during this Parliament.
Answered by Nick Gibb
Removing unnecessary workload for teachers is a priority for this government.
In October 2014, we launched the ‘Workload Challenge’ asking teachers for views on how to tackle unnecessary workload. On 6 February 2015, we published our response to the Workload Challenge Survey which included a comprehensive programme of action. Additionally, we have set up three review groups to address the three biggest issues emerging from the Workload Challenge – ineffective marking, use of planning and resources, and data management. The groups will report to the Secretary of State shortly with principles for teaching practice and recommendations on how to eliminate unnecessary workload. The response to the survey can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/415874/Government_Response_to_the_Workload_Challenge.pdf
It is clear that the issues are complex and change will take time. We will continue to work with the teaching profession to make sure they have the ongoing support they need. We are currently taking forward the first biennial Teacher Workload Survey, a commitment from the Workload Challenge. This commitment will allow us to track teacher workload over the coming years so that action can be taken if needed.
Asked by: David Anderson (Labour - Blaydon)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what evidence her Department holds that increasing the national expectations in writing from 4b to 5c will improve the outcomes in writing for children at the end of Key Stage 2.
Answered by Nick Gibb
The Government has set a more a challenging expected standard for assessment at the end of Key Stage 2 (KS2) to reflect the high expectations set by the new national curriculum. The curriculum standards align with the highest performing jurisdictions internationally and have been raised because too many children who met the old expected standard at the end of primary school did not go on to achieve at least five good GCSEs.
The new expected standard is not, however, equivalent to the old level 5c for KS2 English writing or any other subject. While there will be no need to make comparison to the old national curriculum levels once the new system is established, we have been clear that the new expected standard is broadly equivalent to 4b.
The Standards and Testing Agency published exemplification materials for KS2 writing in early February to support teachers in making their teacher assessment judgements. These were developed in consultation with a number of teacher panels and are real examples of work by pupils currently in year 6. The materials show two examples of pupils assessed as working at the expected standard: one shows work that has met the expected standard and is broadly equivalent to the old 4b, while another shows work at the higher end of the expected standard. We have published these two different examples to show the breadth of competence covered by ‘meeting the expected standard’. I have asked the Standards and Testing Agency to issue further guidance to schools shortly to clarify the assessment arrangements and eliminate any misunderstandings.
Asked by: David Anderson (Labour - Blaydon)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether she has consulted teachers' unions on implementation of the new assessments at Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2.
Answered by Nick Gibb
Throughout the introduction of our important reforms to primary assessment, we have worked closely with teachers, head teachers and their union representatives.
In addition to regular discussion between teacher unions and officials, we launched two public consultations ahead of the changes: one on primary assessment and accountability from July to October 2013 and another on teacher assessment arrangements from October to December 2014. We received a large volume of diverse feedback, including from teachers unions, and this was given proper consideration in developing the new arrangements.
We continue to listen to the concerns of the profession as the details of the new arrangements are finalised. On 9 February, I met Russell Hobby, General Secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, to discuss teacher assessment arrangements. I subsequently wrote to Mr Hobby to summarise our discussion and address some of his concerns; that letter was published on 19 February and can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teacher-assessments-letter-from-nick-gibb-to-the-naht. I am also due to meet representatives from the Association of Teachers and Lecturers and the National Union of Teachers in the coming weeks.
Asked by: David Anderson (Labour - Blaydon)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, pursuant to the Answer of 4 February 2016 to Question 24570, if she will make it her policy that creative subjects must be included in the new EBacc.
Answered by Nick Gibb
I refer the Honourable Member to my response to PQ 24570, submitted to Parliament on Thursday 4 February 2016, in which I explained that EBacc subjects are part of a broad and balanced curriculum and that there is space in the wider school curriculum to teach other subjects alongside the EBacc subjects.
On 3 November 2015 the Secretary of State for Education launched a public consultation seeking views on the government’s proposals for the implementation of the English Baccalaureate. The consultation closed on 29 January 2016 and the government response will be published in the spring.
Asked by: David Anderson (Labour - Blaydon)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will ensure that creative subjects are included in the new Ebac; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Nick Gibb
This Government’s aim is to have at least 90% of pupils taking GCSEs from the English Baccalaureate subjects of English, maths, science, humanities and languages.
These subjects are part of a broad and balanced curriculum. There is space in the wider school curriculum to teach other subjects alongside these subjects.
On 3 November 2015 the Secretary of State for Education launched a public consultation seeking views on the government’s proposals for the implementation of the English Baccalaureate[1]. The consultation closed on 29 January 2016 and the government will publish its response in the spring.
[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/implementing-the-english-baccalaureate
Asked by: David Anderson (Labour - Blaydon)
Question to the Department for Education:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, for what reason statutory guidance Special Educational Needs and Disability Code of Practice: 0 to 25 years (2015) does not apply to higher education institutions.
Answered by Edward Timpson
Higher education institutions are not covered by the Special Educational Needs and Disability (SEND) Code of Practice: 0 to 25 years for good reason.
The new system of Education Health and Care (EHC) plans has a strong focus on the outcomes sought for children and young people with SEND. The Code of Practice defines the attainment of a place in higher education as a successful outcome.
Local authorities are not responsible for the education of young people in higher education. The sector has its own support system in the form of the Disabled Students’ Allowance (DSA). It would not be sensible for these systems to overlap. For example, it would not be reasonable to hold a local authority to account for securing special educational provision for a young people in an independent higher education institution.
In the academic year 2013/14, the last year for which full figures are available, DSA totalling £152.7m was provided to 68,500 undergraduate and postgraduate students. The Government also currently provides annual funding to publicly funded institutions, through the Disability element of the Student Opportunity Funding of the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) grant, to help them recruit and support disabled students. This funding rose to £20 million for 2015/16, an increase of £5 million on the previous year.
The Code of Practice provides guidance on the transition to higher education. It says that good transition planning should include:
In addition we are working with those conducting DSA assessments to ensure that they understand EHC plans and how they can assist and inform assessments.
As independent and autonomous bodies, higher education institutions are entirely responsible for addressing any issues of discrimination that might come to their attention. The Government provides a legal framework for individuals, which protects their right not to be discriminated against – primarily through the Equality Act 2010. Through the Equality Act, higher education institutions are prohibited by law from discriminating against students with protected characteristics, such as disability.