Do closure threats raise standards in schools?

Nov 6 2007 by Frank Corless, Liverpool Daily Post

Frank Corless reports on radical new plans to close schools which fail to make the grade

GORDON BROWN last week unveiled radical proposals that would see a staggering 47 schools in Merseyside and Cheshire close, if most recent GCSE results were not to improve in the next five years.

In a key speech on education, the Prime Minister said 30% of pupils at every secondary school must achieve five high-grade GCSEs, including English and maths, within five years.

Under his proposals, any school failing that test by 2013 should be closed or taken over by another school, possibly from the private sector.

According to the Government, there are 670 UK schools which fail to achieve the 30% mark - including no fewer than 47 in Merseyside and North Cheshire.

However, the Government was only able to provide figures for 2006 GCSE results and all local education authorities (LEAs),except Cheshire, have yet to publish them for 2007.

That means some of the 47 schools on the list may have already risen above the 30% mark - and out of the danger zone.

Nearly one third of the schools falling short in 2006 were in Liverpool (15) followed by Sefton (8), Knowsley (7) and Wirral (6).

That would account for half of Liverpool's 30 secondary schools.

Opponents including the National Union of Teachers (NUT) and Liverpool's executive member for education, Cllr Paul Clein, immediately sprang to the attack, saying Mr Brown was resorting to "bully boy" tactics, and also questioning whether schools should be judged on exam results alone.

This week, the Daily Post asks: Should under-performing schools be closed?

YES: The Case For - We must end failure in education, the great liberator

Extract taken from the Prime Minister's speech on education, at the University of Greenwich on October 31, 2007

EVERY child is entitled to a decent school and a good education. So we must also put an end to failure.

We have cut the number of failing schools dramatically in the last decade. In 1997, over 600 secondary schools had less than 25% of children getting five or more good GCSEs.

Now, instead of over six hund- red, 26 do. But the latest figures still show there are 670 schools where less than 30% of pupils get five A star to C grades at GCSE, including English and maths, and while that is down from 1,600 in 1997 there is still much to do.

So we must go further to end failure.

In the next five years we will work to get all schools above 30% A star to C grades at GCSE, including in English and maths. And let's be clear, many of these schools below this threshold are already improving.

We have to use the right mix of intervention and support to raise standards. So we have put in place now a systematic plan of ever- tougher measures for eradicating failure.

It will start with annual improvement targets for all schools falling below the required threshold.

There will be new incentives for the best teachers to teach in the toughest schools.

Good schools will be brought in to help poorer schools under improvement networks that will be run by schools for schools. Warning notices to trigger intervention powers will include new interim executive boards to take over school management where there is failure.

Complete closure or takeover by a successful neighbouring school in a trust or federation or transfer to academy status, including the option of taking over by an independent school, will be an available power.

And this is therefore a determined and systematic agenda to end failure.

And our final goal for world- class education for young children will be 100% success for young people to make the transition from school to college, to university or to skilled work.

And every young person should know they have something to aim for in their education. So, at age18 or 19, each should graduate from school, college or an apprenticeship with good qualifications or a certificate.

As was said by one of the ancient philosophers, the mind is not a vessel to be filled, it is a fire to be kindled. And that is why we have such high ambitions.

Not just because education is a matter of national prosperity, it is certainly that, it is because education is the great liberator.

That is why I want to see a Britain where every child can go to a world-class school, supported by high aspirations and surrounded always by excellent opportunities. And that is why I want to see a Britain where every family has the right to participate in the education of their child and is encouraged with every chance to do so.

NO - The Case Against: Instead of closing schools, listen to our teachers

by Julie Lyon-Taylor, secretary of National Union of Teachers (NUT), Liverpool branch

IF THE Government wishes to raise standards, they should start by listening to teachers. Nobody is more committed to quality in education. Unless you’ve been there, you cannot imagine the pride and joy us teachers have in the success of our pupils.

There are many reasons children fail to achieve academically. They could be contending with overwhelming family circumstances, in care, carers themselves, or have undiagnosed, unsupported special needs. Children may be in homes where, with the best will in the world, parents are unsure how to help and have experienced a poor education themselves.

Gordon Brown’s idea that shutting the schools with the skills to deal with these children will solve the problem is nothing short of crazy!

Where will these children go? Will those "high-achieving" schools - many of which operate overt or covert selection practices - take these children?

I doubt it! Will the authority and the teachers be running around to find places for children? What will happen to the teachers?

As for the notion that the private sector could intervene as saviours: nonsense again!

The figures emerging on the Government’s much vaunted and expensive academy programme show they are doing no better - and in some cases doing worse.

This is despite the fact that exclusion rates in academies are higher than the schools they replaced. Indeed, by the 2006 results the Government is using, one of Liverpool’s "failing schools" is an academy.

If Mr Brown is talking about imposing "interim management boards", how will they raise standards?

Do they think the board will pile on more pressure because teachers don’t work hard enough? I can assure him this is not the case. The latest survey shows teachers’ hours are lengthening.

So what should we do? Rather than a punishment regime for teachers and children and school closures, how about this?

Ask teachers what changes they would make to curriculum and teaching.

Put more resources into diagnosing and supporting children with special needs.

Address poor economic circumstances and support parents.

Make sure there is proper support for children who are carers , in care, or have mental health issues.

Take a look at Finland which has the highest academic achievement in Europe (but believes in allowing young children to learn through play). Possibly - shock horror - look at Cuba with its truly impressive literacy rates (better than America!).

I have many more ideas, but all of them require thinking through the complexities of learning - and money. They won’t make the headlines that shutting a third of schools will, but they might make a real difference.