Standards-Not-Tiers Press Release
No mandate! It’s Official. School Reorganisation Plans are Un-Democratic.
Standards-Not-Tiers Press Release - 1st July 2008
Standards Not Tiers have welcomed a statement made by David Pugh on behalf of the Isle of Wight Conservative Association that effectively shelves the current formal consultation embarked on by the Council last month.
Chairman of Standards-Not-Tiers Chris Welsford said “whilst we are pleased that Mr Pugh accepts that we need to put this to the people, nobody should forget how much time, money and more importantly goodwill of teachers and parents has been squandered since he took office in September 2007. Having wasted all the good work done by officers and the Children’s Commission during the three years following the 2005 election, he is now being forced to climb down. Would the Conservatives have made this decision had it not been for the pressure that we and others exerted in respect of their broken election promise? We also need to keep in mind the effect on all of us, parents, teachers, ancillary staff and children, of the radical proposals that were made in January and the subsequent farce of a consultation that followed. They are only doing this now because they are under pressure to win the next election. What David Pugh and Alan Wells have demonstrated is how powerful politicians are and how easily their poorly thought out plans can make a misery of the lives of ordinary people”.
Standards-Not-Tiers made a pledge in January that it would field candidates at the next council elections in 2009. Following a meeting of potential candidates in May, it was decided that supporters of the group would stand as independent candidates. At that meeting it was established that there were sufficient potential candidates to take a majority at the next election and that whilst Education would be the central plank of their combined thinking, democracy and fairness would be the group’s main theme, as a contrast to the selfish and dictatorial stance adopted by the current Tory Group.
Debbie Hart, a member of the SNT Executive said: “This is all about Democracy. We would like to hear from others who are unhappy with this administration and who would like to see a non-party political approach to local government on the Island. We would like to encourage people who would be prepared to step forward as independent councillors and promote the virtues of conscience and principle in local government.”
Loading ...
July 2nd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
I am extremely disgusted with the present administration and wholeheartedly back any candidate who has links with Standards Not Tiers and their common sense approach to education!
July 5th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Thanks Danny.
We have just updated the website and people may be interested to see the new position that we are taking which as always will be shaped by discussion, constructive criticism and debate. Please take a look and most importantly note and act upon the offer of assistance that has been made by the NASS - National Association for Small Schools. They have a very successful track record in upsetting school closure plans and saving small schools. They are willing to come to the Island to help us here.
Members of SNT visited the House of Commons last month to attend the NASS seminar on small schools a copy of our report on the meeting is available on our website. Click the link from the SOS site.
July 5th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
There were some problems with links and one or two documents - now resolved.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
NOT SO FANTASTIC NEWS:
Given that it’s SUPPOSED TO BE Standard NOT Tiers, I am amazed at the statement on their web site :-
“We will not seek to overturn the basic move to a two tier system” followed by –
“as we want to avoid causing any further disruption or uncertainty for schools and parents.”
Whatever happens there is nothing wrong with the 3 tier system here, the uncertainty still goes on, uncertainly is not the problem. Just recently in the middle of uncertainly 2 Middle Schools have received both Outstanding and Good OFSTEDs– Standards are already improving and I for one will NOT VOTE for anyone who does not propose to keep the Middle School System and improve upon it. The whole idea of going 2 tier will almost certainly give a drop in standards for at least a few years, just like it has virtually everywhere else. Even if the proposal would be to make all Middle Schools secondary’s given the statement “Our research has shown that GCSE results are on average much better in secondary schools with smaller year groups” Just adds more and more uncertainty!
If you can’t vote for anyone to keep the existing system it doesn’t really matter who gets in on the education front – we’re going 2 tier but with probably much more unknown uncertainly of exactly when and how. What is needed is for Standards Not Tiers /independent candidates to be in favour of keeping our Middle School System and GUARANTEEING to stick to it.
July 6th, 2008 at 9:20 am
Fantastic news, I am sorry that you see it like that. Perhaps I phrased the statement rather too blandly. It should not surprise you to know that I have huge sympathy for your view and if politicians and officers had truly understood the problems at KS1 and KS2 back in 2004 and had done as we suggested immediately then we would not be faced with this situation now. But there has been a massive failure in political will. The establishment of Key Stage 2 and 3 team working never happened. Cluster management failed to produce the outcomes that we proved were needed. The need for wholesale reorganisation is something that we still reject.
To labour the point, it is a FACT that our education system has for years been suffering as a direct result of the Local Authority’s inability to lead and manage a number of crucial changes that arose directly out of changes to national education policy. Specifically the national curriculum and more importantly the introduction of key stages and key stage testing.
Standards-Not-Tiers has never been about simply maintaining the existing system for the sake of it - we have ALWAYS said that it is not the tiers that matter but how we work with the system we have got. We have always said that there should never be change for the sake change. Clearly senior officers and politicians currently don’t agree.
Our statement that we would not seek to overturn the basic move to two tiers is designed to demonstrate that it does not matter which system you adopt so long as you can be flexible in the way in which you deliver provision locally. Maybe we should have said that it doesn’t matter what structure we adopt because each local area will get the structure it needs and in many cases that will mean keeping middle schools - but let’s try to get away from 2 v 3 tiers argument. The possible range is 0 - 5 tiers - and it will be different from community to community.
One important factor about having middle schools is that it keeps provision local and small. We will seek to maintain that ethos. It also provided transfer at ages that are psychologically beneficial to many young people (mostly boys) who experience difficulties during year 6 and more so in year 7. We understand and support the reasons for having middle schools. But we have to adapt the system to work with the national curriculum and key stage testing. Now with the introduction of the 14-19 agenda it is all the more important to address the issues that make life difficult for middle and high schools.
I could not agree more with you when you highlight the outstanding and good Ofsteds of Solent and Ventnor Middle schools as examples of excellence.
Under the plans that we are exploring, together with the National Association for Small Schools and an organisation called Human Scale Education, there would be no direct reliance on either 2 or 3 tier structures. We need to think bigger than that.
Almost all local authorities are hung up on standardisation and how the structure meets THEIR administrative requirement rather than how the system best serves the local communities - Note: there is one local authority and many local communities. A single rigid structure cannot serve the needs of all communities and is not the way forward.
Finally there will be no Standards-Not-Tiers candidates. Independent means independent and not tied to the policies of a political party. We are an education campaign group not a political party. Any candidate for election will need to be more than just a schools campaigner. They will need to be a representative for their community and take forward ideas and debate subjects not related to education. SNT will produce ideas and policies that we hope independent candidates can subscribe to and deliver on. Many of these independent candidates will of course have been born out of the SNT / SOS campaign – but they will be independent. Democracy has been torn to shreds by this administration – an alliance of like minded independent councillors with no party ties would help to restore the confidence of the voting public in local democracy.