All four Labour leadership candidates on their visions for education – interviews
|
Version 0 of 1. Education was remarkably low key throughout the general election campaign. Even the shadow education secretary, Tristram Hunt, suggested last month on these pages that the Labour party had failed to project a strong radical message to the voters. And apart from a few skirmishes and soundbites over free schools, and early branding of each of the four candidates on the spectrum of “new” to “old” Labour on education policy, the subject seems so far to be getting an equally low profile in the campaigns of the candidates standing to be the new Labour leader. So we decided to ask the candidates some questions. Why did Labour fail to put education at the heart of the election campaign? Has it provided an effective opposition to Michael Gove’s and Nicky Morgan’s policies? What would change if they were to become Labour party leader? The conversations ranged from academies and free schools to the role of local authorities; from the legacy of 25 years of diversity and choice to teacher morale and the candidates’ key passions. What are the beliefs that drive their opinions? Are they as divided when it comes to the “politics of education” as some commentators suggest, or could a consensus about the Labour party’s education policy be about to emerge? Andy Burnham “Evidence is pouring in now that the reforms started by Michael Gove have been wasteful [pdf], damaging and an unjustifiable experiment with kids’ education. Labour in the past few years didn’t capture the sense of anger in the profession. The Tory philosophy is to have winners and losers. I don’t see education like that: why can’t everyone rise up together by collaborating? I have got no problem at all with saying that a market approach in education is wrong. The idea of wasting scarce resources building excess capacity to make the market work is so flawed I can’t believe it is still being pursued. Labour’s education policy in the past was timid and too geared towards a fabled middle-England “pushy parent” agenda, which may not even exist. Of course you want academic rigour and high standards – I come from a comprehensive background and got to Cambridge, so it is absurd to say I have low aspirations for any child – but we have got to create a schools policy that works for everybody. My driving ambition is to give all kids a truly comprehensive education – all backgrounds at school together, a breadth in the curriculum and ambition so everyone can get on. We have got to give every child a sense of purpose and hope that there is something for them at the end of their schooling, so those who are on the academic route are not distracted by any who become disillusioned. At the moment we don’t have a modern curriculum or a comprehensive curriculum. We need parity for technical and academic routes. I would be very open-minded about the idea of a national baccalaureate qualification. I would also like to see a Ucas-style application system for apprenticeships with similar support as that we give to those who want to go to university. Labour’s education policy was timid and too geared towards a fabled middle-England ‘pushy parent’ agenda I would certainly support those headteachers who want to stand up to the government over the compulsory Ebacc [making every child take GCSEs in five government-selected subjects]. It should not be imposed. It was right to clear out the poor qualifications being offered in some schools, but who has decided that these five are the best subjects for everyone? Maths and English, certainly, and there is a powerful case for science to 16. But why should pupils in my constituency be forced to do a modern language? It is perfectly rational for them to choose something else if that is better in terms of their employability. And sidelining the creative subjects – terrible! This is not about dumbing down but it seems the fear of being seen to be dumbing down stops people doing the right thing on education. I don’t believe in selection at all and I don’t like the ever more ingenious ways of skewing admissions criteria to achieve forms of selection. This is what happens when you move to a broken-up school system. But the question is whether to impose an end to selection or to allow true local decisions with ballots that give all parents a proper say. I think it is better to do it at a local level. I don’t think in this day and age, when we are talking about devolution, you can just come in and ride roughshod over people. I don’t see the Gove academies as anything like the Labour academies, which were justifiable because these were schools where everything else had failed. Mass academisation – and the centralising side of the Gove reforms – is a very different policy. Power in education has traditionally been distributed in this country for good reasons, so no single ideology can come along and take over. Gove has come in and smashed all that up. Schools on a long line from London [through their funding agreements with the secretary of state] driving through politically driven changes to the curriculum. As a parent it feels like they are tinkering all the time. But this sort of change should be non-politicised, careful, incremental and a common endeavour. Labour now has to work out the balance between the national role and the local role. For me the national role is the “what?” What do we want for all kids? What is their entitlement? It shouldn’t be random and patchy and dependent on where you live. Westminster also has an obligation over funding to meet that entitlement, and over standards in the profession. The local role is the “how?” How do we deliver that entitlement in our community? We could be much more permissive about that. Local authorities need an oversight role in terms of school place planning, admissions, standards and exclusions. I want to begin to create a system again rather than see some schools doing well, some doing not so well. My message to heads, teachers and parents is “Don’t lose heart”. Comprehensive education is still worth fighting for. There are people in politics who still believe in it. Let’s rebuild it for the 21st century and make it as aspirational as it can be for every child.” Yvette Cooper “Education has got to be centre stage for us at the next election. From Sure Start right through to lifelong learning: this isn’t just about children and young people. It was simpler in 1997. Labour was able to campaign on straightforward messages like class sizes, standards and primary education. Now a lot of people feel that the education system has changed in a confusing way. That didn’t translate easily into something we could talk about unless it directly related to people’s own personal experience, such as a school losing its drama provision because of the Gove reforms. I thought our ideas about vocational education were important. We should get rid of the apartheid and snobbery about vocational education. But the real challenges for me are about cracking inequality and a curriculum to educate young people for the future. As a country we aren’t meeting either of those challenges at the moment. I would also want to broaden our vision of a good education to include wellbeing and the whole child, their happiness and confidence. If you think about your own kids, what do you most want for them? You most want them to be happy. We now have such a narrow view of what education is, at a time when we have more teenagers suffering from mental health problems, and issues about the sexualisation of young women and relationships between teenagers. Something is going wrong in terms of the wellbeing of young people. I don’t think this is a wishy-washy alternative to academic achievement. You can be really strong on standards, on academic achievement and vocational achievement and also say that kids will learn best and do better in life if they are confident and happy. Parents should have a choice of schools, but the truth is that most of them just want a good local school If you have had a good experience of school and education you are more likely to feel confident later in life that you can retrain and learn something new. For me this is a real social mobility issue. If your home life doesn’t give you confidence about yourself, then we need to make sure that school does. I would say that all those creative subjects that Michael Gove and now Nicky Morgan are driving out of the curriculum are exactly what young people need to help them gain those skills. It would be wrong of me to come up with a specific proposals now about how the school performance measures might cover this broader vision but I think this is how most schools want to be judged, so we need to find the right way to do that. We were right to say there is a problem with local accountability. If you are worried about your local school and you are not getting any response from the headteacher, where else do you go now? Ring up Nicky Morgan’s office? Well that is not really going to work is it? I think the directors of school standards [proposed by David Blunkett’s review of local accountability before the 2015 election] was good but it is too early to say what the situation might be by the time 2020 comes. We’ll need to see what local government and school structures are like by then. We are moving in a different direction now with combined authorities in areas such as Greater Manchester. Why should Greater Manchester be in charge of a whole series of other local issues and services, but not education? It is ideological with the Tories. Yes, there were problems with some local authorities, but others did really good things. You have to have good local accountability and if you are going to have combined authorities playing that strong and strategic role in other areas, it is also right that they should do so on education and skills. Parents should have a choice of schools and be able to apply where they want to, but the truth is that most parents just want to have a good local school for their children. You want your kids to be able to walk to school with their friends who live on the same street. That feeling of everyone going to school together is really important. So the best thing you can offer people is the guarantee that all the schools nearest to them are going to be of really good quality. I think a comprehensive intake is a good thing, but I am not going to say that we should be closing good schools – for example, grammar schools – because I don’t think that is the right approach. For me it is about raising standards, focusing on the quality of teaching and inspiring teachers without being so prescriptive that it inhibits good teachers from being able to use their experience and their ideas. Teachers are just not being listened to at the moment. There are too many changes taking place without any proper involvement by the professionals. Let’s put much more emphasis on professional development. Teachers should be able to do sabbaticals and master’s degrees and to progress personally and professionally without having to go into a management job if that’s not what they want. Put teacher quality and morale back into the heart of the system.” Jeremy Corbyn “I think Labour got a bit too comfortable and timid on education in the election campaign and felt we didn’t really need to say anything too different from the Tories. But education is the one chance all kids get and we have to do it properly. I am not a supporter of the principle of free schools and academies, and I would want to bring them all back into the local authority orbit. We have gone from a situation in England where the education secretary would only answer strategic questions on education and the local authority was king, to a situation where the majority of schools could be trusts, academies and independent by the next election and MPs have to lobby ministers rather than their LEA about everything. Ministers love to be in charge. But however brilliant the secretary of state is, he or she can’t possibly keep their eye on the ball of every school in the country. It would be a bit like saying that the Indian minister for railways has got to know what is happening on the 8:57 into Calcutta. We have to bring it back to a local level, rebuild the family of education, require local authorities to oversee and provide supplementary resources to schools and allow them to build new schools to meet the need for more places. Education should be linked to housing. Lack of local or national planning plays into a narrative of blaming new migrants in an area. Families reliant on the private rented sector also face unacceptable disruption if they have to move, or have long journeys to school. We must look at the wider social issues around schools. That also means looking again at the funding of very early pre-school education, where some families who are very poor can get a place, those who are well off can pay and everyone in between has to make their own arrangements. I was not in favour of school league tables. There is always going to be someone at the top and the bottom And let’s bring back the EMA [education maintenance allowance] and support further education colleges. A civilised society provides opportunities for people who want to keep studying. But FE colleges that offer adult education are going through hell and high water defending every course from cuts. I was not in favour of the publication of the original school league tables. Choice and diversity have led to much higher stress levels for parents because there is always going to be someone at the top and the bottom of the tables. I see a disturbing number of teenagers who seem to get moved between schools once they are seen as a “problem”. There is always a temptation for politicians to interfere with what schools do, but I think unlocking imagination and potential is the key to human development – so greater freedom to study, fewer tests, discouraging league tables and encouraging the media to look at the overall performance of a school is a better approach. We talk grandly about choice; in reality I am not sure how much choice there is. Is it such a bad thing if all youngsters in a particular community go to the same school? We live in a world where people have very strong and different faiths. Bringing them together, understanding each other’s faith and integrating children with disabilities and special needs is much more likely to bring about a cohesive, coherent society in the future. I would want all grammars to become comprehensives and to end the 11-plus where it still exists. Labour has always been too nervous of upsetting vested interests and that old school network. We need to be bolder about all children having an equal chance, proud of the idea of first-rate community comprehensive education and encourage a diverse mix of pupils in all our schools. Let’s thank and value teachers, and try to reduce the stress levels. I talk to a lot of teachers and so many say “I would love to recommend teaching as a career but I don’t want anyone to do what I have had to do. The pressure is too great.” That should not be so.” Liz Kendall “We didn’t talk about education enough in the election. We know it is the key to tackling inequality and making a fairer society and that is why I am in politics. If the Labour party isn’t talking about education and social mobility front and centre, we have forgotten what we are for. I am very proud of what we did in government. Labour transformed schools in my patch. We put huge amounts of extra investment in and I supported our academies because they were focused on the most disadvantaged areas. My first priority now would be investing in early years rather than cuts in tuition fees. Children who fall behind before school are going to play catch-up for the rest of their lives. We have got to do much more to involve midwives, health visitors and parents at those very early stages. Secondly we have got to do far more to get the best heads and teachers in our most struggling schools. Headteachers feel battered under this government, but they should be the champions and community leaders and we should make that case first, last and always. I want a broad curriculum that prepares kids for the 21st century, not the 19th century. The Ebacc is far too narrow. Kids need academic and vocational qualifications, and teachers need to find any way they can to get kids involved in learning. The subjects that Gove has pushed to one side, such as music and the arts, are important in themselves but they can also act as a hook into more traditional academic qualifications. Finally we should be brave enough to look again at the idea of individual learning accounts if they are properly accredited and courses developed between employers and employees. You never stop learning. I don’t agree with free schools being forced on communities. What I have said is that in 2020 under my leadership, if there is a free school that is delivering a good education we wouldn’t shut it. But there needs to be a level playing field in terms of funding per pupil and a comprehensive intake – we need to make sure schools take their fair share of kids with special educational needs – and a broad curriculum. I don’t want any more grammar schools, but I am going to stick with our existing policy: we aren’t going to close any We have free schools that are delivering a great education and those that aren’t, but there is absolutely no layer of accountability between the secretary of state and a free school or an academy, and that is wrong. There have been appalling examples of schools that are letting parents and kids down. I think we need to look again at how we get proper accountability in the system. I think it is quite tough for regional-level directors or commissioners to be right on top of issues across a large area. We want a system where you can identify a problem early on and nip it in the bud, so I would want to look again at how we manage local oversight of schools. The local authority has a really important role coordinating school places. It is ridiculous that councils like mine, where we are really struggling with a need for new places, can’t set up a new school. That is wrong and it has got to change. Councils can also bring the family of schools together to really improve the quality of education. The London Challenge brought schools together so everyone could learn from the successes and strengths of one another. I don’t want to see a market-driven approach to schools. We know what works – great heads, great teachers, a brilliant inspiring curriculum and parents much more involved. But engaging parents is the toughest thing to do, which is why the early years are so important. I don’t want any more grammar schools but I am going to stick with our policy of many years: we aren’t going to close any. Selection is wrong but the dirty little secret is that there is also selection by house price. I want the big change to be on the stuff that is going to make the biggest difference to kids’ lives: early years, the curriculum and great teachers. Let’s keep our eye on the prize there. Too many people are being put off going into teaching now. We need to say you will get our 100% backing. You are our most important people.” |