Mc'A'Levels

Not that anyone is dumbing down, of course, but if new vocational qualifications were going to be credibly introduced, you would have thought the companies selected to launch the scheme would have considerably better reputations than a junk food chain, a rail service that has not exactly enjoyed the most positive media coverage over the years, and a virtually unknown airline that sounds like freebee.

Or is it April fools' day and I've simply missed the joke? What next - Buy one qualification, get one free? ( Will that be a first class or a double, sir? - Actually, I was rather hoping for a K or P...)

Collective Worship in Schools

Commenting on government proposals that will most likely abolish the statutory obligation upon schools to hold a daily act of collective worship, Cranmer asks, "is it any coincidence that those schools which take the Christian daily act of collective worship seriously, and do it very well, are invariably those with the highest educational standards, yielding best academic results, turning out some of the most reasonable and most excellent contributors to society?"

As we noted last month, the question is why this should be so. The Church of England's chief education officer suggested it "helps embed strong discipline, a caring attitude, and a sense of purpose." Looking for political guidance, we find that when he was Education Secretary, Alan Johnson noted collective worship in schools "can provide an opportunity not only to worship God but also to consider spiritual and moral issues and to explore their own beliefs. Collective worship can also help to develop community spirit, promote a common ethos and shared values and reinforce positive attitudes."

Assuming that still to be the case, don't we need this for our children now even more than ever?

Social Immobility

"Parental background continues to exert a significant influence on the academic progress of recent generations of children."

Those from the poorest fifth of households but in the brightest group drop from the 88th percentile on cognitive tests at age three to the 65th percentile at age five. Those from the richest households who are least able at age three move up from the 15th percentile to the 45th percentile by age five. If this trend were to continue, the children from affluent backgrounds would be likely to overtake the poorer children in test scores by age seven.

Since the Sutton Trust demonstrated earlier in the year that Britain has the lowest social mobility of any country you can measure, its latest revelations should hardly come as a surprise. The trouble is, as we have noted previously, many of the proposed mechanisms that might tackle the issue focus on education — but this is the area that Labour appears most to have failed the country.

One-Stop State Service Providers

So, under the Government's latest harebrained idea, headteachers are not just to oversee "extended schools" that provide breakfast-til-bedtime supervision of children, their schools are to become centres for family welfare services, providing parents with information about housing, benefits, parenting skills, and health. As for the "parents council" proposal to allow parents to have more say in schools, perhaps Children, Schools and Families Secretary Ed Balls hasn't heard of parent governors and parents teachers associations.

If schools are forced to assume the role of social services and become seen as mere extensions of the state, not only will the education of our children suffer even more than it has already done under Labour, but the trust that currently exists between schools and their communities will quickly be forfeited. To borrow Ed's phrase, maybe schools need to display a new sign at their gates: "No Balls games here".

Primary School League Tables

Two thirds of the 250 primaries in England achieving "perfect" test results were Church of England, Roman Catholic or Jewish schools. Despite making up just a third of schools nationally, faith schools increased their hold on the top places from 44 per cent two years ago to 66 per cent in 2007. Last night, they hailed the results as a testament to good teaching and discipline.

Thus reports today's Telegraph. It goes on to note that critics claim the schools do so well by selecting talented, middle-class pupils, often at the expense of poor children living nearby. However, as David Jesson, Economics professor at York University, comments in the paper, studies have proven that this is not the case: "In a recent study of London secondary schools, it was shown that mainstream faith schools had socio-economic and ability profiles almost identical with that of the society they served - and still helped their pupils gain substantially better results at GCSE than their secular counterparts." The question, as Jesson points out, is: Why?

Jan Ainsworth, the Church of England's chief education officer suggests the schools' "Christian character helps embed strong discipline, a caring attitude, and a sense of purpose." Not so many years ago, that might have seemed like stating the obvious, but with the PC brigade being what it is, I suppose such things cannot be taken for granted any longer.

Time To Emigrate?

Last week we learnt the extent to which this Government has failed our primary school pupils, the reading performance of our ten-year-olds having fallen from third to fifteenth place in the world in just five years. Today we are further informed that an equally disasterous slump in performance is evident in our secondary schools, with the UK dropping out of the top-performing group of countries for reading and maths standards. Seven years ago, the UK ranked eighth in maths and seventh in reading in the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) league tables; today, we sit at an appallingly average 24th place for maths and 17th for literacy. For school science, using a system which places countries within a range of rankings, we have slipped from fourth place to between 12th and 18th place.

Launching the report, the OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría stressed the importance of education for the development of people and society: "Effective and innovative education policies open enormous opportunities for individuals. They also underpin healthy and vibrant economies." Quite. Conversely, chanting the mantra "Education, education, education," will no more equip the next generation than invoking the incantation "Abracadabra."

Labour's Greatest Political Failure

At the start of the month we were told that standards of reading have risen little in fifty years. Today the quinquennial Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (Pirls) reveals that, in fact, in just five years the reading performance of our children has fallen from third to fifteenth in the world (and Scotland from 14th to 21st).

Gordon Brown once told us, "There is no greater educational priority than ensuring that all children are able to read." So one might expect an admission that there can be no greater political failure than this, that ten years of Labour has thus failed a whole generation and will affect our nation for decades to come. Yet Children, Schools and Families Secretary Ed Balls has reacted by suggesting parents must do more. Given that until recently they clearly used to, perhaps they would — or even, could — once again, if the State didn't keep trying to do more?

Raising the Bar, Closing the Gap

GUEST CONTRIBUTION by Jason Fletcher

Earlier this month, David Cameron launched the Conservative Co-operative Movement to help people establish co-operatives that could set up or run local public services such as schools, providing a "flexibility and dynamism that a central state agency lacks." With the publication this week of the party's Green Paper on education, The Difference invited the headteacher of a newly created independent school to comment on the proposals to provide capital funding and loosen planning rules to allow charities and concerned parents to set up schools more easily.

I am privileged to be the Headteacher of Cambridge's newest independent school — Heritage School — which opened its doors to 16 lower-primary aged students on 5 September. Our intention is to grow year on year through the secondary level.

Although I've yet to read them in detail, the Tory proposals to back parent initiated schools are heartening. Why? After several months of evenings spent in research into our educational vision and the business case, we were very thankful in the end to secure sufficient start-up funding from a number of generous donors. But we are not out of the woods yet - as far as financial viability goes. The challenge of finding families able to pay a second time for their child's education, despite our intentionally modest fees, is considerable. Just last night a parent who is dissatisfied with the state school her child is in said she was 'envious' of what we are offering - but unable, at present, to afford it.

If government funding could follow successful recruitment in an open market I am confident that we could readily fill our available places. Our educational values and methods resonate with parents concerned by large class sizes, a one-size-fits-all system, a vacuum of Christian-based values, a test-driven school culture, the failure of so many children to be not only adequately 'up-skilled' but also, simply, to have the vitality of mind to be actively engaged with our very interesting world - to name a few concerns. Unsurprisingly, I would love to see parents given real choices. It strikes me as very wise for a government to unleash the most powerful social force for good we possess: the fierce, selfless nurturing instinct of the parent. It seems reasonable to conclude that the general well-being of children in Britain would be significantly advanced by a mature, diverse educational market.

A final thought or two: we held our first parents' evening two weeks ago. Sitting across the table from real parents who could choose to take their child elsewhere is a powerful motivator to excellence in educational provision - a far healthier motivator than excessive centralised target setting. A related point is this: independence in education ought to mean just that. Clearly some regulation is essential (a 'broad and balanced curriculum', health and safety, etc.), but there is an inevitable danger that there will be too many strings attached.

Our dream is to see other Child Light schools (Heritage is run by Child Light Limited, a registered charity) founded in the coming years. Dare I hope that we might be poised to ride a great wave of educational reform?

P Is For Pupils, Politicians & Power

My daughter, who turned five today and who is desperate to catch up with her big brother, would, I'm sure, agree that all children should learn to read by the age of six. She was disappointed not to be able to do so already in time for when she joined her reception class little more than two months ago. However, do we really need another alternative externally-administered test for six to seven-year-olds and a one-size-fits-all prescription of synthetic phonics, as David Cameron is reported as suggesting? If this were a Labour proposal, I would at least understand the rationale, with their misplaced belief that "the state always knows best." Yet this is coming from the party that is supposed to stand for freedom and local empowerment.

Shadow schools secretary Michael Gove was right when he told Andrew Marr, "Unless they learn to read properly they won't be able to read to learn subsequently, and this is the key foundation stone on which the rest of learning is built." Which is precisely why teachers need to be freed to teach. The last thing we need is yet another state-administered National Literacy Strategy, a new Every Child a Reader programme, or the Conservatives aping Labour's failed approach.

In the summer, Mr Cameron criticised the Government for treating every child "not as unique, but as identical," and making schools "local outposts of the central state." He also explained how the Conservatives would improve the provision of education for excluded children by trusting schools and their local partners with more resources, more responsibility, longer contracts, and more freedom. Surely the same would benefit all children? What happened to the party's belief in the principle of subsidiarity, its call for an end to bureaucratic overload, and its promises of a massive liberalisation of the supply-side of education? Let us hope that when Cameron publishes his education policy on Tuesday, we find today's reports have given a distorted impression of the opposition's ideas...

Disruptive Children Same As Peers

"Two new studies suggest that many young children who are identified as troubled or given diagnoses of mental disorders settle down in time and do as well in school as their peers."

Now we have yet more evidence to undermine the state's unnecessary practice of over-medicating our more troublesome (and troubled) children:

In one study, an international team of researchers analyzed measures of social and intellectual development from 20,000 children and found that disruptive or antisocial behaviors in kindergarten were not at all correlated with academic success at the end of elementary school. Kindergartners who interrupted the teacher, defied instructions, even picked fights, were performing just as well in reading and math as well-behaved children of the same abilities by fifth grade, the study found.

In the other study, government researchers using imaging techniques found that the brains of children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder developed normally but more slowly, in some areas, than in children without the disorder.

For further details, see the International Herald Tribune

School Leaving Age

Can anybody tell me how compelling disillusioned and disaffected 16-year-olds to stay on at school until they are 18 is going to achieve anything besides delaying the day when they join the 1.2 million other 16-24-year-olds who are not productively involved in society?

Nontaial Liecraty Sartgety Fliarue

A report for an independent inquiry into England's primary schools says standards of reading have risen little in fifty years. The claims, made by the Curriculum, Evaluation and Management Centre at the University of Durham (whose work we have encountered previously), will come as little surprise to anyone who works in a primary school and whose daily experience seems a world away from the Government's persistent claims of improvement in literacy standards as a result of the five hundred million pounds it has poured into its National Literacy Strategy.

The funny thing is, those young minds are actually incredibly versatile ... Aoccdrnig to a rscheeearchr at Cmadribge Uinervtisy, it dseno't mtaetr in waht oerdr the ltteres in a wrod are, the olny iproamtnt tihng is taht the frsit and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it whotuit a pboerlm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

However, apparently only 55% of people can understand that and even they would still have needed to have been taught the rudiments of reading. I suggest the CEM report provides further support to calls for the state to be taken out of pedagogy. Whether you've got a classroom anecdote to share, want to share how you discovered the joy of a good book, or just want to complain about this latest evidence of Government waste, do leave a comment!

Let Parents Decide

Here's something you don't hear me say very often: Gordon Brown is right. Today he told us:

"We can no longer tolerate failure, no longer will it be acceptable for any child to fall behind, no longer acceptable for any school to fail its pupils, no longer acceptable for young people to drop out of education without good qualifications without us acting. No more toleration of second best in Britain. No more toleration of second best for Britain."

However, he is mistaken in thinking that the state should take over or close down schools that fail our children. Instead, it is time to let the market decide.

Rather than controlling schools from the centre, the state should pay schools on a per-pupil basis via a voucher or tax credit scheme, allowing parents and guardians to choose the school they would like to send their children to, promoting higher standards, innovation and competition. Failing schools will be taken over by successful education providers or be forced to close down by parental choice.

Of course, it will come at a cost: no more expensive central bureaucracy.

Taking The Educational Temperature

The big news of the day is the report from The Primary Review, which notes that primary school children and their parents are suffering from "deep anxiety" about modern life, with primary schools engulfed by a wave of anti-social behaviour, materialism and the cult of celebrity.

In view of our plea last made only yesterday for an end to government interference in our public services and the devolution of power to local professionals, perhaps most striking is the following observation: "The report also records that gloom could turn to hope when witnesses felt able to act rather than merely comply, whether as children working on projects for sustainable development, teachers taking control of the curriculum, or schools using their entrepreneurial talent to enhance staffing and facilities. This finding is a timely corrective to the belief that for every educational challenge there should be a high-profile government initiative or national strategy."

At the end of the report, it lists 44 questions for the next stage of the review. Here's a "top three" for you to consider and let us know what you think:

• If, as witnesses tell us, there has been a loss in recent years of social cohesion, community and concern for others, and a growth in selfishness and materialism, how might primary schools both help children to cope with the adverse consequences of these changes and play their part in redressing the balance?
• Is it the case that the profile of identified special educational needs is changing, with a rise in the incidence of behavioural difficulties? Why is this? Are current SEN and inclusion policies able to meet these changes? Is SEN provision equitable, both geographically and in relation to the range of needs which are identified?
• Is the day-to-day work of primary schools excessively controlled and constrained by central government, as witnesses claim? Will the ‘flexibility’ and ‘freedom’ offered by the Primary Strategy be sufficient to discount such claims or should the balance of national, local and school be radically reconfigured? Does the notion of a national strategy or agency defining the precise nature of school-level freedoms embody a certain contradiction?

Convenient Untruths

Just last week, the envirocrats again attempted to flood the news airwaves with their apocalyptic message that the fabled opening of the Northwest Passage means the Arctic is melting at a disasterous rate and constitutes the latest catastrophic evidence of global warming — when, in truth, scientists told us earlier this year that the ice sheets are not losing their mass through melting but because the ice is flowing into the ocean faster than the snow is replacing it and that, without knowing why this is happening, it is impossible to predict the extent of future sea level rises, especially as climate modelling predicts that snowfall on the ice caps will increase over the coming century.

It was therefore a good day for science and education today when, despite Al Gore being tipped as the favourite to win the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts on behalf of the climate change lobby [Can anyone seriously tell me he is in the same league as Burma's Aung San Suu Kyi?!], a High Court judge ruled in favour of Kent father Stewart Dimmock, who accused the Department of Children, Schools and Families of trying to "brainwash" children by sending thousands of copies of Gore's "shockumentary" An Inconvenient Truth to schools across the country. The judge concluded that the Oscar-winning film should only be distributed if it is accompanied by new guidlines explaining the numerous scientific errors contained in the former US vice-president's "one-sided" views — errors that he attributed to "alarmism and exaggeration."

As has previously been commented on this blog, if the Government were to send the failed presidential candidate's propaganda to every secondary school, then a copy of Martin Durkin's The Great Global Warming Swindle should also be sent, to encourage proper debate and help develop the next generation's critical thinking skills.

The Times lists the nine errors identified by the judge:

Error one

Al Gore: A sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting
of either West Antarctica or Greenland “in the near future”.

The judge’s finding: “This is distinctly alarmist and part of Mr
Gore’s ”wake-up call“. It was common ground that if Greenland melted it would
release this amount of water - “but only after, and over, millennia.”

Error two

Gore: Low-lying inhabited Pacific atolls are already “being inundated
because of anthropogenic global warming.”

Judge: There was no evidence of any evacuation having yet happened.

Error three

Gore: The documentary described global warming potentially “shutting
down the Ocean Conveyor” - the process by which the Gulf Stream is carried over
the North Atlantic to western Europe.

Judge: According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), it was “very unlikely” it would be shut down, though it might slow down.

Error four

Gore: He asserted - by ridiculing the opposite view - that two graphs,
one plotting a rise in C02 and the other the rise in temperature over a period
of 650,000 years, showed “an exact fit”.

Judge: Although there was general scientific agreement that there was
a connection, “the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts”.

Error five

Gore: The disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro was expressly
attributable to global warming.

Judge: This “specifically impressed” David Miliband, the Environment
Secretary, but the scientific consensus was that it cannot be established that
the recession of snows on Mt Kilimanjaro is mainly attributable to human-induced
climate change.

Error six

Gore: The drying up of Lake Chad was used in the film as a prime
example of a catastrophic result of global warming, said the judge.

Judge: “It is generally accepted that the evidence remains
insufficient to establish such an attribution. It is apparently considered to be
far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and
over-grazing, and regional climate variability.”

Error seven

Gore: Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans
to global warming.

Judge: There is “insufficient evidence to show that”.

Error eight

Gore: Referred to a new scientific study showing that, for the first
time, polar bears were being found that had actually drowned “swimming long
distances - up to 60 miles - to find the ice”.

Judge: “The only scientific study that either side before me can find
is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned
because of a storm." That was not to say there might not in future be
drowning-related deaths of bears if the trend of regression of pack ice
continued - “but it plainly does not support Mr Gore’s description”.

Error nine

Gore: Coral reefs all over the world were bleaching because of global
warming and other factors.

Judge: The IPCC had reported that, if temperatures were to rise by 1-3
degrees centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and mortality,
unless the coral could adapt. But separating the impacts of stresses due to
climate change from other stresses, such as over-fishing, and pollution was
difficult.

Islamic School For Kent

Tonight's local news that Muslim leaders are calling for a state-funded Islamic school to be set up in Kent saw me turning to Martin Parsons article in this month's edition of The Difference, examining how Western educational values unwittingly contributed to the rise of Islamism.

The BBC quotes a spokesman for Kent Muslim Welfare Association, Anwar Khan, who runs Islamic classes outside school hours for about 100 children at Jamia Mosque in Gillingham, as complaining, "We run our schools for 10 hours a week - two hours a day, for children across the ages and from different schools. It is an extra burden for them, coming back from school, doing some work at home and having their evening meal and then coming to the mosque."

Parsons concludes his article by considering this very issue of demands from Islamic organisations for state funding of Muslim schools. Let us know what you think:

When Labour came to power in 1997 the government began to approve the creation of Muslim schools in a similar manner to voluntary aided Anglican and Catholic schools. However, the question which needs to be answered is whether these schools are inspired by a philosophy that is compatible with western democracy and seeks to promote tolerance and freedom, or Islamism, which combines western education's critical thinking with Islamic political values?

Labour clearly needs the votes of Islamic groups but doesn’t appear to want all of their agenda. It has been willing to grant some requests – such as government subsidies for courses in Islamic theology and Arabic and considering approval for a Muslim City Academy in Bradford – but has now made a significant u-turn on faith schools. First came an announcement that all faith schools would have to allocate 25% of their places to pupils from another faith or no faith, a proposal that was finally dropped after a concerted campaign by the Catholic Church. Then the government legally required all schools to promote “community cohesion”, with Jim Knight, the Schools Minister, suggesting faith schools should twin with those of other faiths.

Many have suggested that this attempt to create “community cohesion” by targeting all faith schools instead of just Muslim ones is driven by Labour’s desire to hold onto its share of the Muslim vote, which slumped in the 2005 general election. However, there is also a marked secularising tendency in liberal-left politics, coupled with an ideological assumption that the state, not churches or parents, should educate children. The recent vote of the left-leaning teaching union, the NASUWT, to oppose new faith schools well illustrates these ideological assumptions.

Yet whoever heard of voluntary-aided Church of England or Catholic schools in mainland Britain creating problems of community cohesion? They don’t for two reasons. First, because as part of the majority community – 72% according to the last census – voluntary-aided Christian schools by definition cannot create an educational ghetto. Secondly, unlike the Islamic scriptures, the Bible does not set out a distinct political system, still less require one to be imposed on non-believers. Tragically, this is a nettle that the Labour government and other members of the liberal left seem unable or unwilling to grasp.

For more on this issue, also see The Rise Of Islam.

Brown's Lurch to the Right

Nick Robinson and Matthew d'Ancona, among others, have commented on Gordon Brown's TUC pledge to deliver "British jobs for British workers," speculating on how such a phrase would have been portrayed by the media had David Cameron delivered it.

Looking beyond such "harsh realities of political life," the truth is that our European masters would never permit such employment protection rights. Moreover, given that employers are usually going to take on the best person for the job, then presumably the immigrants accused of "stealing our jobs" are better qualified and/or better experienced than the natives whom they are supplanting — which would seem to imply that there is something wrong with British education and training, requiring a more direct and substantial remedy than any diversionary "British jobs for British workers" sticking plaster.

Time to Inspire

The Conservatives' latest idea for healing Britain's broken society is a "universal scheme" to give every 16-year-old the chance "to mix with others away from home, give them a challenging mission to fulfil and enable them to be stretched in an environment they would never, otherwise, have encountered."

In an attempt to recapture the virtues of National Service, preparing young people for adult life, delivering the values of personal growth and service to others, and bringing Britain together in one shared, classless, patriotic mission, David Cameron is proposing a new sort of National Citizen Service, designed for the 21st Century. The six week programme would include an act of substantial community service, time away on a residential course, and a real challenge such as a week of basic training with the military or preparing a presentation to the board of a new social enterprise.

The only trouble is, if the programme is voluntary, then it sounds little different from what teenagers are already able to access through established platforms such as the Scout movement and the Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme. If we are truly to "unlock the full potential of the next generation" then surely such scheme will have to be truly universal — that is, compulsory. Otherwise, the same self-motivated and parentally-supported youngsters will participate as already benefit from what is currently on offer — and the same anti-social yobs will continue being a nuisance in our communities.

A Sense of Belonging

Discussing today's Public Services Improvement Policy Group report on Radio 4 this morning, Baroness Perry suggested that the tendency for school size to increase over the last ten years has been a disaster "very much at the root of some of the bad behaviour that we have seen":

"It's a sense of belonging more than anything else which children lack in very large schools. They feel that nobody knows them and if you are not known you can get away with anything. The sense of being part of a smaller community where people do know who you are, where you have a real sense that you belong in the community and it matters what you do, makes a huge difference."

She went on to praise experiments in America where big schools have been broken down into small units — what they call "several small schools under one roof" — resulting in reduced truancy rates and improvement in both performance and discipline. She was also critical of the increase in the number of repeating exclusions — almost a quarter of a million a year — which she described as "just a recognition of failure":

"I want to see much more positive attempts within the school to keep these children engaged, interested and excited in what's going on. I think we are failing them by giving them a curriculum which is only really suitable for about half the children in our schools — the other half are being failed by what we're offering them."

Among the 156 proposals in the report, some of the other ones that stand out for me are:

Health

• We propose that the Treasury should present an annual report to Parliament which sets out the public health implications and impacts of all public expenditure programmes both within and outside the Department of Health.
• We propose that the next Conservative government should remove licences from shops prosecuted for selling alcohol and tobacco to minors.
• We propose that the next Conservative government should establish better access to mental health and drug rehabilitation services for those in the criminal justice system.
• We propose that the next Conservative government should bring forward legislation to provide for the establishment of an NHS Board which is independent and accountable to local communities and through Ministers to Parliament.
• We propose that the next Conservative government should establish a new statutory framework for NICE which clarifies the scope of its work and advice.
• We propose the next Conservative government should work with professional and patient groups to develop a new primary dental service contract that ensures equitable access to dental services.

Education

• We recommend that teachers receive full anonymity until any case against them has been fully dealt with.
• We recommend that a review of guidelines and publications are sent to schools should take place, with the aim of reducing the burden that these place upon teachers, allowing them the professional freedom to teach.
• We propose that the level of prescription set out in the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile and the Primary National Framework be slimmed down to enable early years teachers to focus their judgments on what is best for each individual child.
• We recommend that there should be far fewer national targets, as the determination of the broad outcomes would give a firm steer to the service nationally. A slimmed down structure of national tests at 7, 11, 14, GCSE and 18-19 examinations and diplomas would provide the government and public with all the information needed to monitor whether the system was delivering successfully.
• Any pupil falling behind at the age of 11 should, we believe, be given a chance to have remedial education to bring them up to the right standard in the basics, either during the summer before secondary school, or even – particularly perhaps for the summer-born – repeating the final primary school year.
• We recommend that schools should set by ability unless they can demonstrate that they can achieve higher standards using mixed ability teaching.

Social Housing

• We recommend that social and economic mobility should be cornerstone of housing policy generally, and of community housing policy in particular. The aim of community housing must be to encourage greater home ownership, with a flexibility that will cater both for those in greatest need and for those struggling to find a home.
• We recommend that tenants who move between Housing Associations retain their Preserved Right to Buy.
• We propose a review of VAT and Stamp Duty regimes that discourage private sector involvement in refurbishing the social housing sector.

A Lost Virtue: Excellence

"Primary tests results improving" reads the encouraging BBC headline ... the "best set of Key Stage 2 results we have ever seen," according to Schools Minister Andrew Adonis.

Now, I always thought that a headline was supposed to summarise the most significant point of what followed. Yet the article reveals "the overall results show that four out of 10 children have failed at least one part of the tests." Put another way, just 60% of the 600,000 11-year-olds about to enter secondary school next month are able to read, write, and count properly?! The headline should read "Education Failing Next Generation"!

What kind of foundation does this lay for the future? We are talking about the unfulfilled potential of hundreds of thousands of individuals — and the devastating impact of an uncompetitive economy for decades to come. And the head of the National Union of Teachers is right: it is not the fault of the teachers, who continue to provide the best service they can; Labour is to blame, with its unhealthy obsession with tests, targets and tables. This above all is surely why we need a new government — one "that is for excellence and opportunity for all." In the meantime, perhaps the only hope is for every parent to have their children join the scouts or some other such club where they might yet have a chance of learning to aspire for excellence.

NB. Of course, in the wider context of school examinations having got significantly easier since the end of the 1980s — as proven by a study carried out by Durham University’s curriculum, evaluation and management centre and summarised by Burning Our Money — even the claim that 60% are ready for secondary school should probably be questioned.