|
NewsConference 2007 speeches: National Chairman
Date: 31.07.07
Speech by new Voice National Chairman, Geraldine Everett, to Voice Annual Conference, Monday 30 July 2007, Harrogate
Strictly embargoed until 15.15, Monday 30 July 2007
Address to 2007 Voice Annual Conference
Monday 30 July 2007
National Chairman Geraldine Everett
Check against delivery
Colleagues, guests and friends - welcome to Harrogate and our 2007 summer Conference.
Six years ago, in Cardiff, I said I was both honoured and privileged to stand before delegates as Voice’s National Chairman; I am even more so today as I take up office for the second time. As before, you have my assurance that I will do my very best to meet the many and various challenges that are ahead of us, both for the benefit of all our members and for the positive development of this independent trade union.
It is good to see that we have representatives here from all over the United Kingdom and from every sector of childcare and education, and I am particularly pleased to see that once again we have a number of ’first-timers’. Thank you all for giving up your well-earned holiday time to take part over the next couple of days - let your voice be heard, so have your say during debates, contribute and ask questions in the seminars, and just talk to each other, share good practice and take away ideas.
We are about to embark on a new triennium and this signifies change. Already you have seen the changeovers amongst the National Officers, but in September we will be welcoming some newly elected Council members. I should like to take this opportunity to say thank you to all those Council and Section members who have served us so well during the last triennium, some of whom will not be returning to their positions this coming September. I am sure though that they will remain active on your behalf in a number of other roles.
My thanks also go the countless other activists out there in the field - people like you - as well as all those who work tirelessly for us in Wales and at the Edinburgh Office, and at Headquarters in Derby, and to all those in our Regional Officer network.
I am glad I am a member of this trade union, part of a committed body of professionals, a member organisation independent of the TUC and with no political affiliation, one that both looks after the interests of all its members and works to promote the best possible practice in the education and care of children and young people.
For over three decades now we have upheld our ’no-strike’ Cardinal Rule predicated on the philosophy of Ray Bryant and the late Colin Leicester, our Founder Presidents. By relentlessly pursuing the resolution of problems through discussion and negotiation, we have not only supported members in their employment issues but we have also ploughed a straight furrow of common sense through the plethora of reforms that have rained down on us all. We have been, and will continue to be, your voice in discussion and arbitration, using the force of argument not the argument of force.
Looking back over the years since the Cardiff Conference, there certainly have been innumerable initiatives and changes, yet the issues I raised then, in 2001, are just as valid today in 2007: parenting skills; appropriate early years provision; postcode lotteries; admissions; parental choice; diversity in types of school and the demise of the genuine state-funded maintained school; social mobility; inequalities in funding, and in salaries; examination overload and declining standards ? the list is endless. I ended my address then by saying: "Remember, everyone counts and, working as the whole team, we can make a difference."
We are working now in an evolving and dynamic system of integrated provision for our children and young people, and at times it isn’t comfortable. We’ve had to change, adapt and take on board new ideas (at a rate that we would never expect our young learners to do, and usually before the earlier initiatives are fully embedded). At the same time we have maintained our professionalism and the energy and commitment levels required to motivate and inspire those in our charge. Change on the scale we’re experiencing is never easy and without doubt it is not something we can tackle alone, hence the notion of TEAM as this year’s theme: together everyone achieves more.
"No man is an island": neither are teachers, teaching assistants, heads or children, nurses, doctors or social workers, policemen or youth workers. To deliver truly holistic 21st century education and training opportunities and enable every child to reach his or her potential, we have to work together. We must get rid of the safe, comfortable silo mentality and, as Debe Lawson said last year, "integrate to educate".
She reminded us that we "cannot care for a child without providing some level of learning experience and in the same way we cannot educate children without caring about them". I make no apology for restating this. It is fundamental to our understanding of the integration of education, health and social care under Children and Young People’s Services; the joining up of services and agencies in the move towards a genuinely holistic approach to development and learning. If we are to ensure that every child really does matter and prevent children falling through the net into under-achievement or abuse, and even perhaps an early death, then we must work together efficiently, without duplication, rancour or competition, within a strategic and collaborative framework.
In this union we have long promoted the whole team approach as is shown by our membership base. Just as development opportunities, care, education and training should not be seen in isolation but as integral parts of the whole, neither can the workforce employed to deliver this holistic approach remain disconnected. We must work as a team, for together everyone achieves more.
This teamwork should not be confined to the delivery aspects in childcare, school and college settings, but from the start be embodied in constructive dialogue with government and its departments. Decisions must not be made solely from within the sanctuary of government buildings by civil servants and ministers who are usually divorced from the reality and experience of working directly with children, families and young people in today’s world.
It is essential that there is positive and constructive input, via representation, from the professionals who will be delivering the initiatives and managing change. Therefore I am glad we remain in the Social Partnership. I may not necessarily agree with all of its outcomes, but I recognise it is far better to influence from within, to negotiate and reach a workable and accepted compromise and consensus, than to have unrealistic and potentially damaging impositions with no reference to the expertise and experience of the professional workforce.
There has been change, there is change and there will be further change. To be part of that mechanism for change ensures a professional and pragmatic feed-in; it gives us the opportunity to voice our concerns and be proactive in taking forward the remodelling agenda. Talking is an essential component of good teamwork. Decision-making is then a shared operation with a commitment to finding agreed protocols and ways forward.
I am fortunate to work in a local authority where all six education unions, other support unions, plus governors and LA officers, join together in a local WAMG (Workforce Agreement Monitoring Group). We don?t always agree but by operating in this fashion we can reach a consensus and iron out some of the problems before they hit the settings, and we can support schools and help promote good practice to implement and sustain the workforce remodelling changes since 2003.
We all know that change for the sake of change is harmful and dissipative, but the workforce reforms - like the 24 tasks, PPA, cover limits, TLRs, revised Performance Management - have been implemented to allow teaching and learning to take precedence and promote the best outcomes for our children and young people. It has also contributed to a turnaround in morale according to government-funded research done by Cambridge and Leicester Universities in the spring. Also, where settings have established sound restructuring and contractual changes, they should be well prepared, having addressed capacity building, to deliver subsequent reforms. Yes, this is a major culture change, but one which for now best fits the developing needs of those in whose hands the future of this country will be when we are in our dotage.
Within classrooms, teachers cannot but recognise the invaluable addition to the team of the teaching assistant (TA). When I was managing inclusion in inner city schools, my TAs were priceless, absolutely essential in assisting children with special educational needs or disabilities and those who were slipping backwards, in running or contributing to behaviour improvement programmes, in supporting families and in turning around disaffected pupils. In my early years settings, the TAs who were trained as nursery nurses were superb - personally, I am saddened that their title has been subsumed within the TA nomenclature, for their role in supporting child development is unique, but, in order to move on, I recognise that I have to let some things go - a name is just a name but I know their core values and purpose; their raison d’être, remains.
Teachers and TAs complement each other and, collaboratively providing quality learning experiences within a caring environment, they add considerably to a child?s potential achievement. Each should be fully recognised in his or her own right for the contribution they make.
Similarly, administrative and premises staff also have a key role to play in the learning and childcare settings and are equally part of the whole team; without their input much of the joined-up organisation within settings could unravel.
As your union we continue to work closely with the STRB in respect of teachers’ pay and are equally committed to influencing the Ministerial Working Group established under National WAMG which is addressing issues around a national framework for pay and grading of support staff. I also want to see a rationalisation and standardisation of entry requirements for TAs: good personal and academic role models are essential. I would look for a rigorous training programme for all levels that enjoys at least national recognition, and a clearly defined career path with pay and conditions commensurate with the job they are expected to do.
The changing name of the Department has given rise to gentle amusement in some quarters. When I began teaching it was the DES - Department of Education and Science - and over the years it has become something of a chameleon, through DfE, DfES and now DCSF - Department for Children, Schools and Families. Since this is proving rather more difficult to slip off the tongue, you can guess that various mnemonics have been offered to assist, some emanating from within its own hallowed walls. What would help you to remember - District Council of Silly Fools, the Dogs’ and Cats’ Sterilisation Fund, or Don’t Children Smell Foul?!
On a serious note though, the new name goes some way to reflect the sea change in the way in which we view and deliver education. It’s not just about schools but it is about the whole child, the home, family and carers and the inter-agency involvement. FHE though seems to have been hived off, which might prove detrimental if we genuinely are looking at the holistic approach from 0-19, or indeed the whole principle of lifelong learning. I do hope that the team-working attitude and willingness to operate in a joined up way prevails, as it surely must across all our settings, otherwise 14-19 provision, possibly compulsory up to 18 from 2013 when the full range of 14-19 diplomas should be available, could flounder before it even starts.
Extending the school leaving age is a potential minefield if not handled sensitively. Here is a government that has toyed with the idea of lowering the voting age to 16 in order to promote a greater sense of citizenship amongst our young people. Yet it proposes to extend compulsory education or training to 18, to compel the already disaffected to, in their perception, prolong the agony - some vote catcher that! In November 2006, at a Westminster launch, Alan Johnson, our erstwhile Secretary of State for Education, announced that "staying on rates must improve" because it is unacceptable to see a 16 year old just working and not receiving any training or schooling, and that we must increase participation at 17 from the current 75% to 90% by 2015. Translating this sort of rhetoric into action is not going to be easy.
It is hardly surprising that these youngsters, whom the system probably has failed already, do not want to set themselves up to be further disenchanted and alienated by compulsory 16-18 education or business-led training designed for purely economic reasons to fill a skills gap. To make them conscripts is likely to re-enforce failure, leading to even greater disaffection. Enforcement could lead to mass truancy, further disruption to other learners and staff, maybe even needless criminalisation if - enforcement measures - are imposed.
Where are the personalised approach, the team working, joined-up and collaborative thinking leading us here? Make provision compulsory by all means and provide appropriate opportunities for the NEETs (not in education, employment or training) but allow young adults some choice between work and/or education and training.
Raising expectations and ensuring that good progress is made by all should be an intrinsic part of our provision, but the form assessment takes needs careful consideration. I believe we should pay more attention to aptitude and achievement rather than attainment, recognising the impact of dynamic assessment for learning that is integral to good practice, and place much less emphasis on inflexible target setting based on previous cohorts.
Quality control on production lines is one thing but please don’t turn our schools into mere exam factories. Blair’s mantra of "education, education, education" has become a legacy of tests, tests, tests and targets, targets, targets. Sir Peter Williams from the Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education (ACME), who is leading a review of mathematics, has said that: "Continual testing and practising for tests has resulted in a narrow and impoverished mathematics curriculum and poor quality teaching". He goes on to say that: "This seems to explain the failure to raise standards and the reluctance of students to continue with mathematics". Perhaps the same principles might be applicable across other curriculum subjects.
Unfortunately the link between disadvantage and educational underachievement persists, with children segregated by race, gender, ability and social background. Our most disadvantaged children are still neglected because focus has been on the middle band in order to meet Government targets. The recent Joseph Rowntree report describes England as a divided nation with the gap between rich and poor being the widest in forty years. Apart from Travellers, it is the poor, white boys who are the worst performers. Canadian researcher Miles Corak’s report last June is unequivocal: in no other advanced country for which figures are available is social mobility as low as in the UK and in no other country is the link between a parent’s education and the cognitive skills of their children stronger.
Peter Lampl’s Millennium Cohort Study has shown that many children from disadvantaged backgrounds are already up to a year behind their more privileged peers by the age of three. Alan Milburn in his Westminster Hall speech last June indicated that if social mobility is stalled, disadvantage is entrenched ? with all of the consequences that has for social cohesion. In the recent UNICEF report on child wellbeing, the UK was bottom out of 21 countries. Benita Refson, of the charity The Place2Be, says that: "As society has changed so have the emotional needs of children. More and more children are developing diagnosable mental health problems which are going unnoticed". I await with interest and trepidation for the final report of the major inquiry into childhood led by Lord Layard and established by the Children?s Society, which is due in 2008.
If only we could get it right from the beginning of a child’s life through good parenting alongside universal adequate funding in the early years with appropriate high quality learning and care opportunities and joined-up services. I am sure then we could avoid so many children failing or being at risk of failing later.
Funding levels in our system increase from the early years upwards to the highest level in FHE. If we reversed this, I believe we could get better results overall and avoid playing catch-up through the ensuing key stages. Then, with the right curriculum or training programme on offer, taught in the right way, in the right surroundings, voluntary uptake beyond 16 is likely to increase.
More money has been put into the system I agree, but I am not entirely convinced it has been directed always to the right areas. It is hardly surprising that secondary school heads cannot turn their backs on BSF (Building Schools for the Future) or PFI (Private Finance Initiative) schemes when there is no money forthcoming from the usual routes to invest in repairs to our dilapidated and "not fit for purpose" education settings. Blair’s flagship City Academies are certainly attractive under those conditions. If they are included in BSF bids they will be built with no charge to the LA - just a £35 million cost to you and to me, the taxpayers - and they will trigger the desperately needed funding for other schools within the LA through BSF. Our LAs should not be put in that invidious situation, having to sell their educational souls for a pile of bricks and mortar.
By September 2007 there will be 80+ Academies across 50 LAs, representing quite a significant break-up of our national state education system that is locally administered and locally accountable. These new build independent state schools - state of the art as opposed to state of the ark for some LA schools - are also attractive to parents and are beginning to draw brighter pupils from a higher socio-economic band. Are these Academies worth the enormous investment?
In Darwen near Blackburn the projected overspend will take the cost to £49 million ? £14.8 million of that has been spent already on acquiring and demolishing houses on the site before any building is started. In Kent the Business Academy which opened in 2003 had £46 million in total. Students at the Thomas Deacon Academy in Peterborough due to open in September this year have no playground despite the £46 million investment.
In July, PricewaterhouseCoopers published an evaluation of the first 24 Academies. It indicated significant differences in performance between them. Some showed a fairly rapid improvement in results, but this was largely because of the introduction of vocational courses and GNVQs. Admission arrangements had an impact too. With others there were concerns about behaviour and attendance, with a small number having continuing high levels of permanent exclusion. Again, are these Academies worth the investment? Could the money be better spent within LAs?
The flood tide of Academies is unlikely to be halted, as there is the ?400? target to be met. Now though we have waivers for the £2 million sponsorship investment to encourage universities to get involved and suggestions from the Opposition that independent schools could be lured into running Academies. The Government took up the cause, saying that private schools could prove their commitment to the public good (and thus stand a better chance of retaining their charitable status) by sponsoring City Academies and forming trusts to share resources with local comprehensives.
The team concept may be expanding here, and this could prove to be the right route to take. However, over forty years ago, Sir John Newsom was advocating sharing resources between public and state schools, putting underfinanced, underperforming and underprivileged children to the front (remember Half Our Future?) and here we are again - but better late than never. As Norman Douglas said, "Education is a manufactory of echoes".
It seems a long way from the seemingly simplistic tripartite system to the multifarious types of schools we have today. Such diversity is claimed to give choice. Perhaps though there is a danger that divisiveness might prevail when what we really want is unity and equality of opportunity. Unless we work together in the best interests of our children and young people, calling on input and co-operation across the board, we are selling them short.
The 2020 vision sees education services designed around the needs of each child, with all learners achieving high standards irrespective of socio-economic background, gender or ethnicity, and parents/carers as co-educators in a society whose aspirations for children are based on the Every Child Matters framework. To realise this and meet the challenges of the 21st century there must be increased collaboration between all parties concerned, a genuine signing up to teamwork, because together everyone achieves more.
Thank you
For further information contact:
Voice Head Office: Tel: 01332 372 337 pressoffice@pat.org.uk (before/after Conference)
Voice Conference Press Office, Harrogate Press Officer: 0794 871 0413 Voice Press Office, Majestic Hotel phone: 01423 503674* Voice Press Office, Majestic Hotel phone/fax: 01423 503674* *Available from Monday 30 July ? 1 August only
|
