For Childrens

Ofsted finds 800 schools stuck on ‘satisfactory’ rating

by Jeevan Vasagar

Schools serving poorest children four times more likely to be inadequate, inspectors' annual report reveals

Nearly 800 schools visited by school inspectors this year are "stuck" and failing to improve, according to Ofsted.

It says 14% of schools visited by inspectors have been judged as satisfactory twice in a row. Their capacity to improve was found to be no better than satisfactory.

Ofsted's annual report also finds evidence of a gulf between rich and poor neighbourhoods.

The fifth of schools serving the poorest children were four times more likely to be inadequate at inspection this year than the fifth serving the most affluent children.

However, Ofsted also found evidence of great schools in challenging areas. This year, 85 schools serving pupils from the most deprived families were judged outstanding.

The chief inspector of schools, Miriam Rosen, said: "It is a constant concern that those very children and young people who most need the best services are often those being let down. Worryingly, the quality of teaching in our schools is still too variable.

"Good teaching is absolutely essential to the provision of a good education and quite simply too much of what our inspectors saw this year was not good quality."

This year, schools that were previously judged outstanding were not inspected unless an Ofsted risk assessment highlighted concerns. Overall, the government watchdog says that 20% of schools in England are "outstanding", 50% are good, 28% are satisfactory and 2% are inadequate.

Most of the academies inspected this year were opened to replace struggling schools. Of the 75 academies inspected, 40 were judged to be providing a good or outstanding education for their pupils and five were inadequate.

SchoolsOfstedPovertySocial exclusionJeevan Vasagarguardian.co.uk


Leave history alone but teach it for longer, says US historian

by John Crace

David Cannadine tells Michael Gove to keep syllabus intact and make subject compulsory to age of 16

Towards the end of a typically barnstorming performance at the Hay Festival in May last year, during which Niall Ferguson had rubbished the way history was taught in this country, the spotlight was turned towards the audience to reveal that the new education secretary, Michael Gove, had snuck into the event and was sitting somewhere near the back. And after a few not entirely convincing exchanges of surprise along the lines of "Fancy seeing you here!", "You're marvellous", "No, you're marvellous", Gove offered Ferguson a job on the spot to help reform the history curriculum.

The message from both men was clear. The country had gone to the dogs, and the teaching of history was partly to blame. Under 13 years of a Labour government, the nation's schoolchildren had learned little more than a few episodic soundbites about the Nazis, and consequently had no real understanding of, or pride in, the country's past achievements. Put the Great back into Britain, celebrate the past, forget the post-colonial apologias, and the little blighters will stop stabbing one another and get off their butts and start looking for a job. Here was a post-election narrative for the new coalition government looking to reassure the Tory heartlands that a back-to-basics, common-sense approach to education was firmly in hand.

Wisely, perhaps, Gove chose to consult not just Ferguson. Instead, using the contacts book that mysteriously opens up for new ministers, he also invited several other well-known historians, including Simon Schama and Richard Evans, to contribute their suggestions for the wholesale reform of history teaching. Somewhere not far into the process, he also asked David Cannadine, Dodge Professor of History at Princeton – and, with Ferguson and Schama, yet another of the UK's top academic exports to the US – for his thoughts. Eighteen months down the line, Gove might rather be wishing he hadn't.

Like Gove and Ferguson, Cannadine has also taken a profound interest in how history is taught in state schools; unlike them, he didn't think that relying on hearsay and ideology was the best way to decide public policy. "There had been a great many theories about how history had been taught over time," Cannadine says, "but no one had done any detailed research to provide the evidence to back them up." So about two and a half years ago Cannadine, along with two research fellows, Jenny Keating and Nicola Sheldon, funded by the Linbury Trust and the Institute of Historical Research, set out to find the empirical data, and this week their findings are published in The Right Kind of History.

What emerges clearly is that there never was a golden, sentimental age of history education in which everyone came out of school knowing the names and dates of every king and queen or marvelling in a triumphalist past. "If you go through the records," says Cannadine, "it's clear that up until the second world war, history was only ever taught to a very small elite, and even thereafter, it's hardly been a mainstream subject. Along with Albania, we're one of the few countries in which history hasn't been compulsory beyond 14. And with only two or three hours a week timetabled up until that age, the chances of pupils acquiring a comprehensive grounding in the subject are slim."

Nor does Cannadine believe the fault lies with the national curriculum, which was introduced under the Thatcher government in 1988 in response to similar concerns that standards of teaching had dropped and something needed to be done. "It's become fashionable to knock the history curriculum for being too episodic and for pupils not learning enough about how the past interconnects, but the real problem is that there is not enough time to teach everything," Cannadine says. "If you examine the history curriculum carefully, it does actually cover pretty much everything you might want students to know; the problem is there isn't enough time to teach it. So inevitably there are going to be gaps in people's learning. And it was always like this, even before the national curriculum. Back in the 1930s, the Tudors were the equivalent of the modern-day Nazis, with everyone complaining that pupils spent far too much time on the Tudors at the expense of other periods."

Furthermore, history has incorporated many more areas of study in schools over the last 50 years; where once it was mainly restricted to wars, diplomacy and a bit of economics, it now incorporates race, gender and social issues. So a further dilution of a subject kept within a fixed time-frame was almost unavoidable.

If the history curriculum isn't fit for purpose, then Cannadine believes we should be looking no further than the politicians and Whitehall for the culprits, as when Kenneth Baker et al were drafting the original curriculum in the 80s it was always intended that history should become compulsory until the age of 16. At the last minute, though, Kenneth Clarke, then education secretary, decided to retain the status quo, and ever since history teachers have been forced to cram a syllabus originally intended to be learned over five years into three. As a direct consequence, those students who did choose to continue history to GCSE were frequently forced to cover much the same syllabus in key stage 4 as they had in key stage 3 – only in rather greater depth. It doesn't take a lot of working out to realise why so many students complain that history is repetitive and boring.

Cannadine thinks the answer is quite straightforward. Leave the curriculum alone and go back to teaching it the way it was always intended to be taught, by making it compulsory to 16. "I'm not naïve," he says. "I'm quite sure that in some schools history isn't always taught as well it should be. One should never be complacent about standards. But the same is almost certainly true of every other subject you care to mention and no one is proposing a wholesale reform of the curriculum in those areas."

Which raises an interesting question. Why is it that some subjects, such as maths and physics, are seen as objectively neutral – their syllabus a matter for academic discussion alone – while others, such as history, are considered so important to the national psyche that so many people feel the need to have an opinion about it? Part of the answer is that many of us know – or think we know – more history than science and therefore have some kind of entitlement, but it's also true that our culture loads history, more than any other subject, with a moral narrative. It has become one of the means through which we tell stories about ourselves and shape our national identity.

For those of the Ferguson school, this bending of history to a narrative, interpretative arc presents few problems. And if confined to a few university lecture halls, it probably serves a purpose. Ferguson has built his career on counterfactual history and championing unfashionable rightwing causes, and if he has forced other liberal academics to rethink and defend their positions more carefully, then all well and good. Yet Cannadine believes it should have no role in how history is taught in school.

"History should never be used merely as a means of relaying a desired national narrative," he says. "Putin is doing just that in Russia at the moment by insisting that some aspects of the Soviet regime should be taught in a more sympathetic light. There are also calls in some American states to rewrite their teaching of slavery. This can't be right. If a country has cause to feel awkward about its past, then so be it. We should be grown-up enough to deal with it. Which isn't to say we should wallow in guilt; rather that we should accept the good and bad equally without giving either greater emphasis."

Outsiders to the current history curriculum consultation might also be curious about why it is that three of Gove's most high-profile advisers – Ferguson, Schama and Cannadine – are spending most of their time working in the US. Cannadine insists there's nothing that odd about it. "Just one of those things. A coincidence." But of course, it isn't really, as it highlights problems Gove might also want to address rather higher up the education food chain. The reason top British academics end up overseas is not just because they get paid so much more there, but because they are left on their own to teach what they want, how they want to, without constant interference or being forced to churn out a designated number of papers every four years for the research assessment exercise or its replacement.

Looked at another way, though, what Ferguson, Schama and Cannadine also highlight is that Britain has managed to turn out historians of international stature despite never having had a Govian age of rose-tinted national identity in the classroom. What's more, while Britain has produced historians of many other countries, who are recognised as experts in those countries, there are very few – if any – overseas historians who are recognised as of the same rank as our own custodians of British history. And if that were to change in the future, it would be more likely due to the decline in language teaching – and the consequent inability to work from original sources – than to a fall in the standards of history teaching.

All of which, as Cannadine admits, leaves Gove with a dilemma. "I suspect he might find it politically difficult not to change the national curriculum," he says, "as it's the easiest thing to do and also what many people want him to do. But there's really no need. The biggest and most necessary change is to make history compulsory to 16, but doing that will create other pressures on the timetable. Still, he's had a copy of the book on his desk since September, and if he needs any help writing the speech explaining what really needs to be done, he only has to call me."

So the ball is in Gove's court. To learn from history, or be condemned to repeat its mistakes.

• The Right Kind of History by David Cannadine, Jenny Keating and Nicola Sheldon is available from Guardian Books. To order a copy for £11.99 with free UK p&p, call 0330 333 6846 or go to guardian.co.uk/bookshop

History and history of artSchoolsTeachingEducation policyMichael GoveJohn Craceguardian.co.uk


Do students know more about technology than their teachers?

by Janet Murray

We ask education experts for their verdicts

Rob Appelby, art teacher, Herne Bay high school, Kent

It's not necessarily that teachers know less about IT – it's just that they don't know how to teach it. The curriculum always seems to be lagging behind. My students don't want to learn how to make Excel spreadsheets or PowerPoint presentations – they want something far more eclectic that really taps into their individual interests.

Karen Davies, head of learning resources, Science Museum

Kids are very experimental and really push boundaries, but adults tend to be more cautious. That's why students often seem to know more than their teachers – it's a confidence thing. Yes, there are lots of things we can learn from young people, but children need frameworks and structures to help them learn – and that's what teachers provide.

Sam Dutton, developer advocate for Chrome at Google

Kids are very knowledgable as consumers, but they don't necessarily know how the technologies work. There is this sense of computers being like a mysterious black box. It's quite a passive way of looking at technology, so this is where


How to teach … Road Safety Week

by Education: Schools | guardian.co.uk

The Guardian Teacher Network this week has lots of resources for use with pupils to ensure they are aware of road safety, and what to do if they see an accident

Road accidents are the single biggest cause of death and injury among young people, making road safety a topic that is worth revisiting.

Road Safety Week (21-27 November) is organised by the accident-prevention charity, Brake, and the theme of this year's event is Too Young to Die. The aim is to raise awareness of how to improve road safety and the charity has materials to get you started. These include an introductory guide to teaching road safety, online games for early years and primary, and videos suitable for use with older pupils.

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) has a range of assemblies about road safety that can be used throughout the school year. Suitable for use from KS1 to KS4, topics covered include the need for young children to hold an adult's hand when near a road, the importance of cycle helmets, and issues to be aware of when learning to drive.

Rural road safety is the theme of a RoSPA teaching pack for KS1 and KS2. The resource is intended to help children in rural areas improve their road safety skills by delivering messages across a range of curriculum areas including maths, English, geography and ICT.

RoSPA has also produced a set of road safety workbooks for use with young learners of English. In the workbooks, a number of road safety key words, phrases and messages are written in Bengali, Punjabi, Urdu and Polish as well as in English. A teacher's guide accompanies the resource, created in response to statistics that show that children with no or poorly-developed English language skills are over-represented in road accidents.

The British Red Cross has produced an assembly pack about what to do if you witness a road accident. Suitable for use at KS2 and KS3, the kit contains a drama performance demonstrating five first-aid principles that young people and adults can use. It also includes ideas for follow-up activities that look at road safety issues from both a UK and international perspective. A separate document contains a set of images to support the assembly.

The theme of first aid can be explored further with some British Red Cross PowerPoint presentations suitable for use with pupils aged 11 to 16. First aid basics 1 explains how to put someone in the recovery position, while First aid basics 2 looks at how to assess if a person is unconscious and how to perform CPR. Teacher's notes for First aid basics 1 and First Aid basics 2 are also available.

SchoolsChildrenguardian.co.uk


Speed read of the latest educational news

by Janet Murray

Free schools get spiritual, students get nasty and the Skills Funding Agency chief clams up

Enough to make humanists hopping mad

News that the founders of the Maharishi free school, which follows the teachings of the Beatles' spiritual guru, Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, are hoping to open two more like it hasn't gone down well with the British Humanist Association (BHA). It issued a press release earlier this month objecting to the plans on the basis that Maharishi schools teach transcendental meditation, which "adheres to a number of beliefs based on spiritual teachings that lack evidence" – and also, they claim, teaches levitation.

David Hughes, a spokesman for the Maharishi free school, confirmed that there are plans to open two schools – in


Exempting schools from Ofsted inspection is a worrying policy

by Estelle Morris

Only the Treasury benefits from the proposal to waive future inspections for schools that Ofsted judges outstanding, says Estelle Morris

A little noticed clause in the education bill that has just completed its passage through parliament could just herald a significant shift in assumptions that have underpinned our education system for the last 20 years.

From next year, schools judged by Ofsted to be outstanding will no longer be inspected. Under pressure, the government has identified a number of triggers that could lead to an inspection, but the thrust is clear – regular inspection is considered an unnecessary burden on our highest-performing schools.

The school itself can request an inspection, but it will have to pay – perhaps an indication that this measure is as much about saving money as anything. And apart from the Treasury, I can't see any winners.

Standards, in even our best schools, can decline rapidly; parents will no longer have up-to-date inspection information and inspectors won't regularly see the full range of schools, which could influence their judgments. A child could go through a school without it ever being inspected.

External inspection has earned its place in the education landscape. Ofsted has gathered a wealth of information – from both high-performing and underperforming schools – and it has contributed to higher standards.

The change is even more worrying when seen against the wider shifts in education policy. Schools have been subject to significant and relentless change over the last 30 years; government has never been as active or interested in this area of its responsibilities. These decades have seen not only a battle of ideas, but also a search to find which levers are most effective in influencing change. Governments have passed laws, issued edicts, spent money and invented new structures. Their relationship with the profession has swung from naming and shaming to praising and encouraging.

Yet whatever the policy differences between the political parties, there is now some consensus about the need to shift from centralised control. All politicians talk about trusting teachers and their professional decisions. The days of major government initiatives are gone; they wouldn't sit well in the wider political context of devolution and localism.

Yet no politician, no matter what their commitment to devolving power, can afford to completely relinquish all the levers. Government has a responsibility to its electorate and it needs some way of delivering on this.

Over recent years, government has settled on a formula that offers local flexibility but maintains a national framework – more decisions devolved to schools, but government holding schools to account through national inspection, curriculum and testing.

Which brings me back to dropping Ofsted inspections for outstanding schools. Some schools will also be freed from the obligation to teach the national curriculum or to employ qualified teachers.

So as more freedoms are granted to individual schools, government will, for some schools, give up two of its three accountability measures.

I think the education secretary is a true believer in devolution and small government, but I'd be surprised if he didn't want to retain some means of influencing schools – which might explain why he has announced so many policy changes on testing: new reading tests for six-year-olds; a revised test for 11-year-olds; the introduction of the English baccalaureate at GCSE; changes to course work at GCSE and A-level; a revamp of vocational qualifications.

For those schools freed from inspection, and which choose to opt out of as much of the national curriculum as allowed, these test results will be the main way in which they are held accountable for what they do.

This could be the way to resolve the conflict between localism and the need for national standards: as long as the results are delivered, just get on with it.

Yet I remain uneasy about this. If the only national measure of success is test results, we will value even more what we can test and risk even further undervaluing those things we can't. Subjects not in the English baccalaureate are already being pushed out in some schools. This trend might grow significantly.

If, however, I am wrong and ministers really are going to give up all their centralised powers, let's just see what happens the first time a previously high–performing school hits the headlines – and hasn't been inspected for a decade.

OfstedSchoolsEstelle Morrisguardian.co.uk


Immigrant children benefit from Finnish education

by Jessica Shepherd

Finland's education system is already praised worldwide. Now, as its population becomes more diverse, it is setting a great example when it comes to educating its immigrant children, too

In Finland, it is customary for children to line up their shoes outside the classroom and to learn in their stockinged feet. Outside classroom 3C at Laakavuori primary in Helsinki, there are only four pairs of shoes and they include the scuffed trainers of a 12-year-old boy and the sparkly pumps of a seven-year-old girl.

Inside, four children – Anastasia, Artur, Kevin and Arthur – are taking in the basics of the Finnish language. Their teacher points at a picture of a jacket and articulates the word slowly – "takki". The children mouth it back. A teaching assistant, sitting at the back, joins in.

Anastasia, Artur, Kevin and Arthur arrived in Finland with their families less than two months ago. Like most newcomers here, they come from Russia and Estonia. Fortunately for them, their parents have chosen a country that has much to teach other nations when it comes to educating young immigrants.

Finland is seen by many outsiders as monocultural – its foreign-born citizens make up just 5% of its population, compared to about 11.5% in the UK. But, over the last 15 years, Finland has diversified at a faster rate than any other European country. By 2020, a fifth of Helsinki's pupils are expected to have been born elsewhere – the majority in Russia, Estonia, Somalia and the former Yugoslavia.

At Laakavuori primary, in the poorer, eastern part of Helsinki, 45% of pupils have a language other than Finnish as their mother tongue. And yet they achieve as much as others in more affluent areas of the country, where there are few, if any, immigrants.

Politicians and policy-makers the world over have admired Finland's education system for the fact that, over the last decade, its 15-year-olds have consistently had the highest – or among the highest – standards in reading, maths and science when compared with most of the developed countries of the world. Every three years, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) administers a numeracy, literacy and science test to about 470,000 15-year-olds in 65 countries, known as the Programme for International Student Assessment. In the most recent Pisa study, in 2009, Finland came third out of 65 countries, while the UK was 25th. In the 2006 Pisa study, Finland came top and the UK 14th.

Much of Finland's success has been attributed to the high prestige associated with being a teacher and the fact that it is as hard for Finns to win a place on a teacher training course as it is for them to get into law or medical school.

But another aspect of Finland's success – getting children whose first language is not Finnish up to the high standards of their classmates – appears to have been overlooked by the education tourists.

Anastasia, Artur, Kevin and Arthur stay in their class of four with a teacher and teaching assistant for 25 hours a week – for every subject except sports and arts. It can be anything between six months and a year before they are judged to have mastered Finnish and are ready to be placed into their correct year group.

It's no surprise that with this kind of immersion, half of Laakavuori's pupils – including a high proportion of those who come not speaking a word of Finnish – go on to pass the aptitude test that admits them to prestigious academic high schools.

It says something, too, about Finland's attitude that since the 1980s, the state has paid for Somali teachers to help young Somalis living in Finland to expand their vocabulary in their native language, too.

Helsinki's education department estimates that just over 11,000 pupils – almost 2% – have state-funded tuition in a mother tongue that isn't Finnish, before or after their other classes.

In England, meanwhile, a grant for schools to employ and train teachers to help pupils whose first language is not English has been scrapped.

Finland, on the other hand, has had what it describes as a "positive discrimination" policy since the 1990s. It gives schools extra funds if they are situated in relatively poor areas or have a disproportionately high number of children with special needs. It tops up these funds with €1,000 (£875) a year for each child on the school's roll who has lived in Finland for less than four years.

"The government rightly recognises that it is more intensive to teach in an area like my school," says Janne-Pekka Nurmi, principal of Laakavuori.

This sounds just like a more generous version of our pupil premium – the £488 that schools in England receive annually for each pupil they enrol who is eligible for free school meals. But there's a crucial difference. From next September, our government will be publishing what schools spend this on and, in time, will publish its suggestions of how best the pupil premium can be spent. In Finland, they simply leave it to the teachers.

Laakavuori primary has used this premium to employ social workers and psychologists a few days a week. The principal says this helps to "detect early problems and deal with them quickly".

It's not just in primary schools that young immigrants are helped. Helsinki's education department is running a pilot project that puts 15- and 16-year-old immigrants in touch with "social instructors" to ensure they fit in with Finnish society and don't drop out of school. Extraordinarily, these instructors work to find the young people friends to socialise with as well as helping them to find the services and careers advice they need.

Naldic (National Association for Language Development in the Curriculum) represents teachers in UK schools who specialise in educating pupils whose first language is not English. Amy Thompson, its chair, says that in England, the needs of non-English-speaking young immigrants are "no longer recognised as distinct from the needs of all pupils in terms of policy and funding". "The English system of 'sink or swim' needs to be brought in line, not only with Finland, but with English-speaking countries across the world that provide dedicated funding, curriculum and support for learners for whom English is an additional language," she says.

To many, a comparison between Finland and the UK is unfair. Finland's entire pupil population amounts to just 600,000, while that of England and Wales tops 7 million. Finland wants to promote skilled immigrants to compensate for an emerging labour shortage due to its ageing population, while in England, the aim is to reduce net migration to under 100,000 by 2015.

In Finland, unlike in the UK, an influx of immigrants is still new to the country.

Not everyone in Finland is quite so friendly towards newcomers. In April, The Finns – a populist nationalist party that wants to limit humanitarian immigration to refugee quotas – won 19% of the vote in the parliamentary election, becoming the largest opposition party in Finland.

A growing number of Finns are said to be removing their children from ethnically diverse primary schools, and some are reported to be demanding a cap on the number of non-Finns in a classroom.

But Finland's teachers and educationists are adamant that they will fight this on all fronts. They say that what they provide for young immigrants works.

Meanwhile, says Thompson, England should look at Finland's impressive procedures for the education of bilingual pupils. A national survey carried out by Naldic and the National Union of Teachers in February found that over 60% of respondents believed that support for pupils for whom English was an additional language and for bilingual learners had significantly deteriorated over the last six months. In England, she says, "the situation is becoming worse by the day".

Finland, the facts

• Parents can send children aged between eight months and five years to free daycare. At age six, there is a year of pre-school

• All full-time pupils get free lunches

• Basic compulsory education starts at age seven and ends at age 16

• At 16, pupils either go to vocational school or an upper secondary school. Upper secondary schools tend to be for those who want to go on to university, although it is possible to study for degrees from vocational schools

• There are no league tables or inspections and the only national exam is at the age of 18 or 19

• Finland has no university fees for home or EU students

SchoolsLanguagesFinlandImmigration and asylumEnglishJessica Shepherdguardian.co.uk


Pregnant pause

by Ros Asquith

Sex education lessons aren't getting the message across

Ros Asquith


Leeds academy unveils mural of Carol Ann Duffy’s Mrs Schofield’s GCSE

by Alison Flood

Penned after her work Education for Leisure was banned from the GCSE syllabus, a school has immortalised the poem in art

What would Pat Schofield say? Carol Ann Duffy's poem Mrs Schofield's GCSE, written in response to the complaint which led to her work Education for Leisure being removed from the GCSE syllabus, has now been immortalised in three dimensions.

Leeds West Academy has unveiled a mural of the poem in its new library, with principal Annette Hall saying, "We know the poem – like the rest of [Duffy's] work – will be an inspiration to students for years to come." The poet laureate attended the unveiling of the installation, by the artist Stephen Raw, herself last week, also reading from her new collection The Bees.

The current celebration of the poem is a long way from its origins. Duffy penned the poem after her work Education for Leisure, written in the 1980s, was pulled from the GCSE syllabus in 2008 for supposedly glorifying knife crime. "Today I am going to kill something," says its protagonist. "Anything. / I have had enough of being ignored and today / I am going to play God."

The AQA exam board received three complaints about the work, the most recent from Schofield, Lutterworth grammar school's exams invigilator. "I think it is absolutely horrendous – what sort of message is that to give to kids who are reading it as part of their GCSE syllabus?" she said in 2008 of the poem.

Duffy responded with another poem, Mrs Schofield's GCSE, which details the violence and murder in Shakespeare: "Who said / Is this a dagger which I see? Which Tragedy? / Whose blade was drawn which led to Tybalt's death?" writes Duffy.

Schofield said at the time that she was "a bit gobsmacked" to have a poem named after her, describing the work as "a bit weird".

"Having read her other poems I found they were all a little bit weird. But that's me," she told the Guardian.

Carol Ann DuffyPoetryPoet laureateSchoolsGCSEsAlison Floodguardian.co.uk


Why won’t private schools back academies?

by Jeevan Vasagar

Very few academies are sponsored by private schools - and there's little ministers can do

Private schools are in an assertive mood. They've claimed victory in a long-running dispute with the Charity Commission over what they do to justify charitable status. And they've shrugged off pressure from the government to get more involved in its academies' programme.

The latest independent school head to rebuke ministers is Dr Helen Wright, president of the Girls' Schools Association. In a speech today, she warns:

"The government must be careful, I believe, in drawing us in the independent sector in to bolster their new academies or to prop up other failing schools. This might curry favour in some political quarters but who will really benefit if we are forced to provide the teachers, classrooms and the expertise that should have been provided by successive governments?"

Dr Wright argues that while private schools may be capable of "succeeding where the state has failed", their prime duty is to their own fee-payers.

"Why should our parents – most of whom struggle hard to pay the fees to educate their children – prop up the state system and so effectively pay twice?"

The best riposte to this was made by Andrew Adonis, who pointed out in a lecture this summer that "by far the single largest source of new teachers in private schools is experienced teachers in state schools, whereas traffic the other way is minimal." The pupil-teacher ratio in private schools is close to half that of state schools (9.4 to 1, compared with 16.6 to 1).

Adonis' powerful lecture is worth reading. In it, he argues that every successful private school should sponsor an academy.

"And by sponsoring academies I don't just mean advice and assistance, the loan of playing fields and the odd teacher, etc. I mean the private school or foundation taking complete responsibility for the governance and leadership of an academy or academies, and staking their reputation on their success as they currently do on the success of their fee-paying schools."

Opening up a few more places to poorer children might be good for the social mix of independent schools. But it will do nothing to create more good schools - or build a "truly world class education system," Adonis argues.

Some private schools are already sponsoring academies. But it is a small proportion. Out of 319 sponsored academies which opened under Labour and the coalition, just 17 have private schools or private school foundations as the lead sponsor.

The majority of these schools are sponsored by City livery companies, such as the Mercers Company, which is also trustee of the foundation behind St Paul's School - the ancient public school attended by George Osborne.

None of the 45 which opened their doors in September are backed by private schools. David Cameron is critical of the segregation between private and state schools - rightly calling it "one of the biggest wasted opportunities in our country today". But aside from honourable exceptions like Wellington College, there's little support from the private sector for the government's reforms.

It matters. As Adonis put it in his lecture: "We do indeed have a coalition government – a coalition between Eton and Westminster. It is only a slightly broader coalition which funds, manages and entertains the country too." If we are ever to be one nation, we need the two sectors to work together, he argues.

Dr Wright accepts that private schools have "an undeniable moral imperative" to educate broader society. She suggests that the government's demands will "begin to be fair" if the pupil premium meant students could opt out of the state system and bring state funding with them.

Even at the best of times, it's unlikely that any government would divert money from state education to bolster private schools. In an era of austerity, offering a carrot like that is an extremely unlikely prospect. Dr Wright's words illustrate the extent to which the stick has been taken away.

Private schoolsAcademiesSchoolsJeevan Vasagarguardian.co.uk


Michael will find cleanmymac on this page. купить шины киевiphone 4s с чехломперегородки под заказ