I argued in part 1 of my comments on the Blunkett review that some of its proposals could be beneficial. Now I want to discuss its problems and to argue that some of its key proposals should be rejected. (As previously R = recommendation.)

Much of the impact of the review’s key proposals would be to sideline democracy. This impact is most easily seen in his key middle-tier proposal: the creation of Directors of School Standards (R1).

The DSSs would replace the Coalitions proposed 8 regional School Commissioners and would cover a smaller area, usually of several local authorities. The review says that LAs would appoint the DSS from a list approved by “the Office of Schools Commissioner”. The briefing notes for the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) say that the list would be “approved by the Secretary of State for Education”. Whichever it is one thing is clear: only candidates with prior government blessing can be on the list. Continue reading →

The Coalition has centralised control of schools as never before. That has served the purpose of forcing the transformation of the English school system: the majority of secondary schools have been removed from the local authority framework and are now directly answerable to the Secretary of State for Education.

Labour has focused its criticisms this centralisation  but it was always clear that running thousands of school from Whitehall could not be a long-term solution. As acknowledged in the recently published Review of education structures, functions and the raising of standards for all by David Blunkett: “This architecture which leads schools to be contractually bound to the Secretary of State .. [is] unsustainable. … The Coalition have recognised this by … seeking to appoint Regional School Commissioners.”. Continue reading →