*** DEBUG START ***
*** DEBUG END ***

EDUCATION: That was the boom. Here comes the bust

by
09 February 2010

Schools are not going to be able to escape the effects of the recession, warns John Howson

WHOEVER wins the 2010 General Election, that event will mark a turning point in many ways. The present phoney economic war will come to an end, and the full effects of fighting the banking collapse and the resultant recession will be felt by everyone.

Although there are promises that the school system will be cushioned from the worst outcomes of public-sector cutbacks, it is likely that other parts of the education scene will not be as well protected.

First, though, it is worth noting a small piece of good news from 2009. Faith schools, and especially C of E and RC schools in the state sector, re-advertised fewer leadership positions than in recent years. These schools still found it more of a challenge to appoint a new head teacher than community schools, but, unless an increased use of acting heads disguised the true position, fewer schools had to spend money on several recruitment rounds during 2009.

This is encouraging, as most schools can find other uses for money saved on advertising, especially those afflicted by the new plague of falling rolls.

Cash, or the lack of it, is likely to be a significant theme for schools as this year unfolds. With a third stage of the teachers’ pay deal protected, those schools with youthful staffrooms where many teachers will receive both an increment and a pay rise will be looking nervously at their budgets. Many governing bodies will have to decide whether they can afford to replace all those who leave this summer.

Cash, or the lack of it, is likely to be a significant theme for schools as this year unfolds. With a third stage of the teachers’ pay deal protected, those schools with youthful staffrooms where many teachers will receive both an increment and a pay rise will be looking nervously at their budgets. Many governing bodies will have to decide whether they can afford to replace all those who leave this summer.

This may be bad news for teacher-training establishments, including those church-based universities that still rely upon training public-sector workers for a key portion of their incomes. Further cuts in training numbers cannot be ruled out in the secondary sector, and, with the capping of overall student numbers in the higher-education sector, smaller universities may well find that their budgets are under pressure. In the longer term, they may also be affected by the debate about the “graduate income prem­­ium”.

One argument trotted out in the debate over student fees is the claim that possession of a degree greatly raises earning potential. Experience suggests, however, that not all degrees lead to higher salaries, particularly in a recession. It will be interesting to see which way the debate turns after the General Election. Any serious problems are likely to be a few years away, however, when the downturn in the number of 18-year-olds starts to accelerate in about 2014.

Those church universities that draw income from continuing professional development and courses for teaching assistants, will no doubt be studying the funding for such markets with a more than casual interest.

An important question will be the fate of  the MTeach after a General Election — is it a necessary qualification to produce a “world-class school system”, as Tony Blair claimed, or is it an expendable luxury that cannot be afforded? My view is that, despite being in the former category, this is one initiative that might be deferred until better times.

The start of 2010 also saw new proposals by the Conservatives to make teaching an “élite” profession. The thesis that we need good teachers is irrefutable, and is easy to argue in the middle of a recession when there are many applicants for teaching. How any future Conservative government would handle competition for the best graduates in a booming employment market is not clear. But such circumstances are the real test of any scheme to make teaching a more attractive career. The old-fashioned notion of public service does not fit easily with plans for schools run at a profit. In the end, the alternative may be better-paid teachers, but fewer of them, with the inevitable result of larger classes.

The start of 2010 also saw new proposals by the Conservatives to make teaching an “élite” profession. The thesis that we need good teachers is irrefutable, and is easy to argue in the middle of a recession when there are many applicants for teaching. How any future Conservative government would handle competition for the best graduates in a booming employment market is not clear. But such circumstances are the real test of any scheme to make teaching a more attractive career. The old-fashioned notion of public service does not fit easily with plans for schools run at a profit. In the end, the alternative may be better-paid teachers, but fewer of them, with the inevitable result of larger classes.

Whether the academy programme that has helped the Church of England increase its number of secondary schools in recent years will be another casualty of the economic gloom is more open to debate. Both main political parties seem to be in favour of almost anyone running schools. The main issue, however, is not who runs schools, but how many there should be at this time, and how big they should be.

As the confusion over the number of places available in the primary sector during the past 12 months has revealed, straightforward planning that does not grab headlines but is vital to a smooth-running education system, is not seen as a priority by those managing education. Can the budget support the continued education of three-year-olds in schools, or does their increase in numbers mean that funds are only going to be available if class sizes increase, and more pupils are taught by less qualified staff?

The rules by which funds are distributed to schools may also change after the General Election, with at least two parties pledging a “pupil premium”. This is a form of equity based more on the funding “needed” to achieve a certain standard of education than on equal shares for all. Unless there is more money overall, a pupil premium will see winners and losers in the funding stakes. The pupil premium would be a reversal of policies such as Labour’s Key Stage 1 maximum-class-size initiative of 1997, in which every school was given funds to keep down class sizes, irrespective of their outcomes. A pupil premium is much closer to a philosophy of “to each according to their need” as espoused in the Government’s “catch up” scheme.

FINALLY, there is adult and further education, which is all too often overlooked. This sector should benefit from the raising of the learning leaving age to 18 — unless it is another casualty of the shortfall in public-sector funding, as on a previous occasion in 1967. But this is an easy sector to cut, as the recent débâcle over capital funding demonstrated.

Apart from a few sixth-form colleges, the churches have little direct involvement in this specific sector. Indeed, for 16- to 19-year-olds, prison or the armed forces are the most likely places that they will meet a chaplain, unless they attend a church school.

Apart from a few sixth-form colleges, the churches have little direct involvement in this specific sector. Indeed, for 16- to 19-year-olds, prison or the armed forces are the most likely places that they will meet a chaplain, unless they attend a church school.

Despite promises of protection, the next few years will be challenging for all in education, but, for others, the outlook may well be far worse. We may be thankful for small mercies.

Professor John Howson is head of Education Data Surveys, a part of the TSL Group. He writes here in a personal capacity, based upon nearly 40 years of service in various fields of education.

PHOTOS: PA

PHOTOS: PA

Browse Church and Charity jobs on the Church Times jobsite

Welcome to the Church Times

 

To explore the Church Times website fully, please sign in or subscribe.

Non-subscribers can read four articles for free each month. (You will need to register.)