ParentsOutloud » Us In The Media

ParentsOutloud on BBC

Margaret — Thu, 09 Jun 2011 14:46:24 +0000

Margaret Morrissey from parentsoutloud was on Conentry & Warwickshire show on 31st May 2011.
Please click on the video below to see this show.

Education Bill Protecting Teachers

Margaret — Thu, 27 Jan 2011 15:10:00 +0000

BBc Radio 4 Today programe

http://www.bbc.co.uk/i/xphkv/

Education reforms: what the experts think

Margaret — Wed, 24 Nov 2010 18:36:20 +0000

Times
Sarah Ebner, editor of the School Gate blog,

John O’Leary (Editor of The Times Good University Guide and of Policy Review magazine)
Michael Gove is in so much of a hurry to reform the education system that his ultra-ambitious Schools White Paper inevitably ranges from the sublime to the ridiculous. He has waded in where even previous Tory ministers feared to tread – notably on teacher training and aspects of the curriculum. It remains to be seen how many measures come to pass.
Some of the ideas are confused – a baccalaureate that can’t be taken by all pupils (because of a shortage of language teachers) is a strange national benchmark and teaching hospitals are a wholly inappropriate model for training teachers.
They are as much a part of their university as the faculties of education that Mr Gove wants to replace and there are only 23 of them in the country – completely different from training teachers in overstretched, underqualified schools.
Other reforms, such as a national funding formula for schools and reversing the spread of modules, have needed doing for some time. But overall, the impression is an attempt to turn the clock back – always tempting but seldom successful.

Philip Parkin (general secretary of Voice, the union for education professionals)
The Department for Education seems to be driven by competing and conflicting ideologies – centralise with inflexible targets yet undermine national pay and conditions for school staff; raise teaching standards but propose the employment of unqualified teachers in free schools; promote a traditional national curriculum but exempt its favourite type of school (academies) from following it; allow teachers freedom to teach but tell them how to do it – not so much a mass of contradictions but a mess of contradictions.
As with previous policies, there is a risk of a headlong rush into change for the sake of change without proper consideration of all the issues and consequences.
Warwick Mansell (education specialist and author of Education by Numbers: The Tyranny of Testing)
Michael Gove’s plans to intervene in the affairs of schools with low test or exam results, confirmed in the White Paper, are extraordinary.
Although the coalition presents itself as in favour of localism, new powers to order an “underperforming” school to become an academy appear to allow the Secretary of State to take this decision without any reference to what the school’s local community – parents, governors, pupils and staff –wants.
The most significant other reforms are on testing and the curriculum, including a new reading test for six-year-olds, with results likely to be published in league tables, and the curriculum likely to be slimmed down. Much of the white paper is going to be very contentious.

Christine Blower (general secretary of the National Union of Teachers)
Michael Gove seems determined to pursue an ideologically driven education agenda that, despite the avowed intentions of the White Paper, will increase bureaucracy and government interference and will increase the divide between schools not close it.
“If the Education Secretary genuinely wishes England to do as well as countries such as Finland, to which he frequently refers in the White Paper, he should follow its example by replacing the inspection system with school self-evaluation, refrain from the publication of results by school League Tables and the setting of narrow performance targets and allow teachers to choose their own method of teaching reading.

Margaret Morrissey (of the Parents Outloud campaign group)
A Secretary of State with very little experience of the education system is making personal and radical changes for our children and has presented a disappointing White Paper today. For 25 years parents have campaigned to have a leader in the Department for Education who has taught and managed in schools, worked with parents and teachers and understands the reality of teaching children.
It is wrong to continually damn teachers. Parents do not in general agree with Ofsted and have real satisfaction with those who teach their children. There will always be the exception, but surely that can be addressed. Teaching is a vocation not a free-for-all the jobless with a degree.
Originally Ofsted was useful and parent-friendly. Then cuts were made, parents were excluded from the process and the whole value of the inspection was lost in tick-box inspection. Ofsted needs to be abolished.
League tables are a crude indicator of a school’s performance. They give a limited view and fail to give credit to the wider progress individual children have made. The majority of parents opposed them, as they did SATs, aware of the stress they inflicted on teachers and children with no gain other than for politicians’ sound bites.

Record numbers of parents getting criminal records for allowing their children to skip school

Margaret — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 11:16:51 +0000

By Laura Clark Mail 19th November 2010
Record numbers of parents are ending up with criminal records for letting their children skip school, figures revealed yesterday.
More than 8,000 were convicted last year over their child’s truancy – a five-fold rise in eight years.
Since tougher sanctions were introduced in 2001, nearly 41,000 parents – mostly mothers – have been convicted over truancy and given a criminal record. Although the traditional image of the truant is of children ‘bunking off’ school and wandering the streets, increasingly truanting takes place with parental knowledge and in some cases consent
Figures released by the Ministry of Justice under the Freedom of Information Act show that in 2009, 10,697 parents in England were taken to court for failing to ensure their children go to school.
Of these, 8,330 were convicted. Most – 5,326 – were fined, while 399 were given community sentences and 54 suspended prison sentences. Fourteen were imprisoned for an average sentence of a month. Thirteen were mothers. The remaining defendants were given an absolute discharge.
The figures show that, on average, 56 parents faced criminal proceedings over truancy every day of the school year.
In 2001, only 1,961 were prosecuted and 1,595 found guilty.

Margaret Morrissey, of pressure group Parents Outloud, said there was no evidence that jailing parents had cut truancy. She added: ‘If you’ve got a 15 or 16-year-old who doesn’t want to go to school, there’s not an awful lot as a parent that you can do about it.’
Mrs Morrissey said there was ‘no evidence’ that jailing parents had improved the truancy rate in schools.

Figures released earlier this year by the Department for Education suggest that unauthorised absences soared under Labour.
In 2009/10, the truancy rate – the percentage of school registration sessions missed without permission from parents – stood at 1.01 per cent.While this was down on 1.03 per cent the year before, it marked a rise on 1996/97 levels of 0.73 per cent.
The Coalition claims Labour failed to get a grip on the literacy problems that can underpin truancy and the poor behaviour which can lead to bullying. It is expected to unveil a package of reforms next week intended to strengthen classroom discipline.
The DfE said the use of prosecution was a matter for local authorities.
Read more: In the Daily Mail article

Council illegally spied on family during row over catchment area

Margaret — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 13:03:32 +0000

Richard Garner, Education Editor
Jenny Paton from Poole, in Dorset, with her partner Tim Joyce, after the landmark ruling A family has won a landmark legal ruling that council officials acted illegally in spying on them to check they were living in the right school catchment area.Jenny Paton, her partner Tim Joyce, and their three daughters, were placed under surveillance by Poole Borough Council for three weeks in 2008. Now the Investigatory Powers Tribunal – which deals with complaints against surveillance – has ruled the authority acted illegally.The ruling could have massive implications for local authorities throughout the country following evidence that they have resorted to covert surveillance techniques on more than 8,500 occasions during the past two years. It was the first time tribunal surveillance powers granted to local authorities had been tested in an open hearing.Ms Paton said yesterday: “Obviously, after two-and-a-half years of campaigning on this particular issue, I’m delighted and relieved that the tribunal has ruled that Poole acted unlawfully. I’m very pleased.”It is not the end of the story, though, for us. It won’t be until the coalition Government removes these powers from the local authorities.”We don’t believe council employees should have the same powers as international spies – and need to track members of the public filming them and photographing them.”A survey by the pressure group, Big Brother Watch, revealed the powers had also been used by councils to spy on their own employees.In Ms Paton’s case, the surveillance included spying on the family home, trailing Ms Paton’s young daughters and recording the family’s movements. In the event, they found there was nothing untoward in Ms Paton’s application for a school place for one of her daughters.She only found out by accident during a meeting with council officials to discuss the application. The council was criticised for using the surveillance without intending to gather evidence for a court prosecution. Even if it had found something untoward as a result, it would only have been used to send a threatening letter.

Margaret Morrissey, of pressure group Parents Outloud, said what happened to Ms Paton and her family had been “a clear case of bullying and harassment and no amount of apology from Poole council is going to take away the distress this family was caused”.

A spokesman for Poole Borough Council said: “The council accepts fully the ruling of the Investigatory Powers Tribunal and would like to apologise to Ms Paton and her family for any distress caused as a result of its actions in this case.” The use of councils’ powers is under review as part of the Government’s counter-terrorism review. The coalition agreement stated the it would limit local authority use of them to “stopping serious crime” and only when approved by a magistrate.

Schools ‘break law’ on teaching assistants, NUT claims

Margaret — Sat, 03 Jul 2010 11:39:38 +0000

BBC TV News 3 July 2010 09:53 UK - Some teachers are comfortable leaving support staff in charge at times
Schools could be breaking the law by asking support staff to teach lessons when qualified teachers are absent, the National Union of Teachers has claimed.
Since September, teachers in England and Wales have only been expected to cover for colleagues on rare occasions.
But some schools are using classroom assistants to fill in, rather than more costly supply teachers, the union says.
Ministers say that if support staff deliver occasional lessons, they should be under a teacher’s overall direction.
Assistants are allowed to supervise classes if they have the right level of qualifications.
But the NUT says they should not actively teach and, if they do so routinely, then schools could be breaking the law.
“What the regulations say is you can only do specified work, which is teaching, if you’re under the supervision of a qualified teacher. What you can’t do is take over on your own, plan lessons, run classes etc,” said John Bangs, head of education at the NUT.
‘Cheaper option’
He said the employment of supply teachers – qualified teachers employed to cover absent staff – had “gone through the floor” because “they [were] being replaced by cheaper cover supervisors and support staff”.
Governors have got to be very clear they ensure there is money and provision for a supply teacher to come in
Headteachers faced a “real temptation to employ cheaper, unqualified staff” in the current climate, but evidence showed putting support staff in inappropriate roles led to a drop in standards, he said.
Mick Brookes, who leads the head teachers’ union NAHT, said their policy was to make sure the “appropriate person” was infront of the classroom.
“Mostly that’s a teacher, but there are circumstances where somebody else would be perfectly fit and competent to be infront of a group of people, for instance a sports teacher, someone teaching music or a languages specialist,” he said.
He said there were cases where teaching assistants could manage a class well.
Some teachers felt confident their assistants could supervise the class because they knew the children and subject work, whereas they would not know the qualities of any supply teacher they might be given, he said.
The NUT’s John Bangs: “This is not anti-support staff”
“My fear is that teaching assistants… will be first in line [for job cuts] and that will mean – as most of them provide support for children with special educational needs – a deterioration of that support.”
Christina McAnea, head of education at Unison, said she was “very concerned” some teaching assistants might be being stretched.
“Most of our members are actually being paid incredibly low rates of pay, most of them haven’t got sufficient qualifications.
“Part of the workforce agreement says that to do specified work, to actually be actively teaching, should be someone who is HLTA – higher level teaching assistant level – only about 25% of the people we surveyed actually had that qualification,” she said.

Margaret Morrissey, from the campaign group ParentsOutloud, said teaching assistants were “probably the best thing to have happened to schools in the last decade” but there was reason to be “cautious”.”The occasional emergency teaching or class supervision by a teaching assistant is going to harm no children.
“But they don’t have a teaching degree… they are not there to teach, they are there to assist.
“So governors have got to be very clear they ensure there is money and provision for a supply teacher to come in,” she said.

ParentsOutloud on BBC

Margaret — Sun, 28 Mar 2010 14:40:16 +0000

On the 21st March 2010, Margaret Morrissey from ParentsOutloud was on the The Politics Show South about Bob Howitt from Action4Kids and Cllr John Hartley from Reading Borough Council.

Please click on the video below to see this show.

September start for four-year-olds will cost half a billion pounds over the next decade

Margaret — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 16:12:01 +0000

Published in The TES on 5 March, 2010 | By: Helen Ward
Balls to push ahead with the Rose report’s most controversial proposal. The move to a September start for all four-year-olds next year will cost the education budget half a billion pounds over the next decade, a government impact assessment has concluded.The proposal was the most controversial part of the review of the primary curriculum carried out by Sir Jim Rose, and has been opposed by almost two-thirds of people in a consultation last term. The official estimate for the cost is between £43 million and £57 million a year. The analysis of the policy estimates that around 7,300 children would take up the offer of an early start. It estimates the 10-year cost to government would be £481.2 million, which will be paid to authorities to cover the extra places. Most authorities already admit children in the September after their fourth birthday, but about 40 let younger classmates begin in January. It is believed that 11 also have an April admission date for summer-born children. The move is designed to provide a level playing field, allowing parents across the country to have the option of a full-time reception place.

Margaret Morrissey, of Parents Aloud, said: “Legally it is an option but in practice it’s really not, because schools cannot afford to hold the place.”I can’t see the point in the Government having a consultation, getting an answer and then carrying on regardless. It makes a mockery of it.”

After growing pressure from early years experts and parents, Ed Balls, Schools Secretary, made it clear that parents would be allowed to defer a reception place until January or April and the Government would fund the equivalent hours in a private or other nursery until the child was ready to start school. The Government launched a four-week consultation in October on the proposal consisting of just one question – do you agree with the proposal? There were 489 responses to the question – 32 per cent agreed, 62 per cent disagreed and 7 per cent were not sure. More than half the respondents were heads, and their main concern was funding if parents decide to admit children part time or defer entry. Parents were concerned that there was no real choice as they would feel pressured into sending their child early, and many felt that four was too young. The analysis mentioned that other parental surveys suggested that 61 per cent of parents with children aged four to 10 agreed that children should start school in September after they turn four – including 63 per cent of parents with summer-born children. Local authorities welcomed the proposal, saying it would prevent confusion when parents moved.

‘Too generous’ middle-class student loans should be scrapped, say universities By Sarah Harris and Laura Clark Mail

Margaret — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:37:15 +0000

Middle-class measures: The changes could add £1,000 a year to the cost of a degree course (posed by model) Top universities are calling for middle-class students to be stripped of subsidised loans in a move that could add more than £1,000 a year to the cost of a degree course. They believe the current student support system is far too generous and needs to focus on the poorest. Cambridge and University College London are the latest to join Oxford University’s demands for wealthier students to lose out on taxpayer-funded loans. They have been backed by the 1994 Group, which represents universities including Durham, St Andrews, Exeter, Leicester and Lancaster. Nottingham, a member of the elite Russell Group, has also demanded a clampdown on grants for middle-class students. The universities have submitted evidence to the Government’s review of higher education funding by former BP boss Lord Browne. Although the institutions have not specified a parental income at which support should be stopped, experts have predicted that it could be as little as £25,000 a year. Students starting university later this year will all be entitled to a subsidised state loan for the £3,290 annual tuition fee. They are also entitled to a maintenance loan to help pay for living costs. Those from families earning less than £50,000 also qualify for a maintenance grant, which is not repayable. The total bill to the taxpayer is £2.7billion a year. Middle-class families could end up paying up to £1,000 extra a year if they were forced to pay commercial rates on student loans.

Margaret Morrissey, of the pressure group ParentsOutloud.com , claimed that middle-class parents are being discriminated against. She said: ‘We have to realise that if they give up and stop earning and putting the money into the economy, there’s going to be no money for anyone and then we’re in real trouble.’

Lifestyle coaches to help four-year olds play… from the government that’s STILL selling off school sports fields

Margaret — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 15:33:34 +0000

More than 1,000 lifestyle coaches are being recruited to give ‘couch potato’ primary school children lessons in yoga and cheerleading. Pupils as young as four will have extra-curricular classes in free running, breakdancing and Brazilian martial arts. The government scheme is designed to tackle childhood obesity but was described yesterday as a ‘ridiculous’ waste of taxpayers’ money and a further nail in the coffin of competitive sport. Critics pointed out that Labour has presided over the death of competitive sport in schools and the selling-off of playing fields. Liberal Democrat education spokesman David Laws said: ‘This is yet another expensive, top-down gimmick from a Government which has run out of ideas. Local authorities and primary care trusts are ploughing in additional cash, meaning the total bill could run into millions. The unpaid coaches will include teaching assistants, volunteer parents and lunchtime supervisors trained to provide ‘fun activity sessions’. More specialist staff could be drafted in for some lessons. The coaches will work with children aged from four to 11 who have been identified by healthcare professionals and teachers as not doing enough exercise or lacking confidence in PE lessons. However, since Labour came to power in 1997, 203 school and community pitches have been lost. The Government has even allowed the sell-off of 49 school sports fields since it was chosen to host the 2012 Olympics. A spokesman for Fields in Trust, an organisation which protects playing fields, said it supported attempts to increase physical activity levels among children. She added: ‘However the most effective long-term strategy to ensure that children continue to participate in sport and play both out of school hours and into adulthood is to ensure the availability of free, local outdoor spaces in each and every community in the UK. ‘Securing the future of the country’s stock of playing fields is the best way to achieve this goal.’

Margaret Morrissey, of pressure group Parents Outloud.com , called the scheme ‘gimmicky nonsense’. She said: ‘Everyone has the chance of living healthy lifestyles and we don’t need lifestyle coaches to do that. We have very good PE lessons and children can walk to school. Most local areas also have good swimming pools. ‘The thing that really annoys me is that we are entering an election campaign and the Government is playing politics with children and education.’ Build houses with gardens nd stop putting families in flats with no outside play area

Nick Seaton, of the Campaign for Real Education, added: ‘This is a ridiculous waste of taxpayers’ money. Read more: