A distrusted state education system will cost us more than a ‘schools tsar’

The resignation of Sir Kevin Collins, the man the Government put in charge of helping children to catch up on schooling after the pandemic, is a blow to the Prime Minister and the Chancellor. That may not matter to them: however respected Sir Kevan may be in the education world, the public hadn’t heard of his recovery task force, let alone of him. The abdication of this “schools tsar” is unlikely to loom large in history textbooks. But the rejection of his £15 billion plan to make up for the year lost to Covid highlights a deep-seated distrust of the state education system at the heart of Government.

Sir Kevan’s plan was based on the “three Ts”: teaching, time and tutoring. He estimates that 200,000 children will start secondary school lacking adequate literacy and other basic skills, with the ultimate impact on productivity costing the economy at least £100 billion. The Treasury balked at the cost and has offered only £1.4 billion of new money, a tiny fraction of the sums that other countries such as the US are committing to education in the wake of Covid.

Some of Sir Kevan’s ideas are excellent. Extending the school day would allow not only for more classes, but also more arts, sports, clubs and other activities that privately educated pupils take for granted. Personal tuition for those who need extra help is also obviously beneficial and indeed already ubiquitous among wealthier parents. Quality of teaching is clearly crucial: even the Treasury has earmarked £400 million of the “down payment” for teacher training.

Yet the rejection of nine-tenths of the bill for Sir Kevan’s recovery plan suggests that the Etonian Boris Johnson and the Wykehamist Rishi Sunak don’t believe that state schools can be trusted to spend large amounts of cash wisely. They presumably fear that too much will be siphoned off into teachers’ pay and pensions, or otherwise frittered away. Despite the fact that two thirds of schools now belong to academy chains or are free schools directly funded by the Department for Education, Conservative politicians have a residual suspicion of the education establishment, which the late Sir Chris Woodhead — and, following him, Michael Gove — dubbed “the Blob”.

That suspicion is not entirely unjustified. The influence of the teaching unions is still powerful. The reluctance of unions to allow their members to return to work helps to explain why British children lost more days of schooling than their counterparts abroad. But other weaknesses have more to do with weak leadership. The failure of many schools to offer online teaching to a high standard, for example, cannot be blamed on the unions; nor is it just a matter of money. Disparities between outcomes between schools are usually due to a more fundamental problem: the tyranny of low expectations.

Yet there is no denying the fact that more money is needed. The Education Department promised to provide laptops and other equipment for pupils who needed it. Did they get them? The Government claims that it has already allocated £1.5 billion in emergency assistance for schools: where is the audit on how that money was spent and with what results? If the system has so far failed to deliver, the buck stops with the ministers in charge, including the incumbents at both 10 and 11 Downing Street.

In the first instance, however, the person who bears greatest responsibility is Gavin Williamson, the Education Secretary. The fact that he failed to convince the Treasury of the merits of the Collins plan is a rebuff to him as much as to Sir Kevan. Williamson likes to make much of his roots in Scarborough, as a phlegmatic stage Yorkshireman with the thickest of skins: “See all and say nowt.” But the act is wearing thin, as the hapless minister stumbles from one fiasco to another. He has defied countless calls to resign; he and the PM seem bound together by some kind of loyalty oath. Yet Williamson’s usefulness as lightning rod may have finally run out.

England’s schools deserve better, from top to bottom. Sir Kevan’s motto is that we have a good education system, just not good for everybody. What was missing from his three Ts formula was D for discipline. No quantity of money for teachers or tutors will provide good value unless pupils are paying attention. No amount of time spent in the classroom will help them unless students are studying and participating, rather than idling or texting. No child can learn when order is replaced by chaos. The disruption that millions have experienced during the pandemic is as nothing compared to the disruption which the least fortunate face every day, at home and at school. Williamson should have made sure that Sir Kevan placed greater emphasis on tackling disorder in the classroom and supporting children who come from chaotic households.

Acknowledging the root causes of educational failure should have been the Education Secretary’s key to gaining the trust of his more fortunate colleagues. As it is, he has failed to persuade them that he grasps the scale of the problem, or that he is capable of solving it. That task will have to await his successor. Downing Street has hinted at an autumn Cabinet reshuffle and it has long been assumed that Williamson would be moved or sacked. There are also hints from the Treasury that more money will be earmarked for education in the autumn statement. Major decisions on the future of our children and grandchildren have, in effect, been postponed.

Meanwhile, schools will have to manage with the human and financial resources they have. But head teachers need not wait for the politicians to take action. It is not against the law for them to appeal to parents to help fund extensions to the school day. Some state schools already do so. Sir Kevan’s proposal was only for an extra half an hour a day. Many parents might be willing to offer voluntary tuition in literacy or other fields. Is it beyond the wit of heads and governing bodies to enlist the support of parents to implement their own recovery plans?