Publication of new research – Parents in the Driving Seat?

5 March 2007

In the 2005 White Paper, ‘Higher Standards, Better Schools for All’, the Government promised ‘to put parents in the driving seat’ and to give parents the right to ask for a new school. 

During 2006 Anne West and Hazel Pennell from the London School of Economics, commissioned by Research and Information on State Education (RISE) and funded by the Esmée Fairbairn Foundation, investigated 15 parent campaigns, including seven campaigns to set up new schools and eight against the setting up of a new school, to find out the extent to which parents’ views were taken on board. The research aimed to identify what lessons could be learnt for school planning in the future.

Findings

The researchers found:

• parents’ involvement in the planning and setting up of new schools was limited, particularly in relation to academies;
• in some cases, parents’ wishes, either in favour of or opposed to the setting up of a new school, were taken on board;
• there was variation in the extent to which campaigners were successful in meeting their aims and objectives, although the campaigns for a new school appeared to be more successful than those against.

Policy implications

There were several policy implications:

Type of school

Nearly all of the campaigns for a new school wanted or assumed that the new school would be a community not a religious school.

 ‘…what we want is a local authority-run community comprehensive school.  Overall, we’re not interested in a denominational school; we want to be able to maintain the social and racial mix we get in our primary schools…  The primaries are really nicely mixed and you get to secondary stage and it just fragments.’

 There was a concern that faith-based schools were replacing non-faith schools. The researchers considered that this indicates the need for a debate on this issue.

 Academies

The major barrier for many campaigning against a new school was considered to be the academy process from which interviewees felt they were excluded.  In particular, they were concerned at the lack of openness, the speed of the process, the method of consultation employed and what appeared to many to be the inevitability that the academy would be built.

 ‘It was so quick. By the time we knew about it, it was at the architectural planning stage. And they kept saying that they had to deliver the scheme, that there was some cut-off point for getting academy money. The agents [appointed to manage the academy process] had the absolute urgency for pushing it forward, pushing it forward…’

 Government policies and priorities were perceived as major obstacles by many campaigners as most either wanted to obtain a new community school or to prevent a community school closing, whilst the Government prioritised academies. Local government priorities were to some extent bound up with those of the Government in the case of academies. The researchers concluded that there is a case for reviewing these procedures to bring them into line with the establishment of other types of schools.

Availability of information and lack of expertise

There were similarities in the experiences of campaigners irrespective of the type of campaign they had taken part in.  Most had experienced problems in accessing information either because it was not readily available or, particularly in the case of those campaigning against a new school, because information was not provided to them.

 ‘We started at the grassroots with parents and then moved on to politicians.  We had to do lots of homework and find things out first. We could not find things out from the Council so we did it ourselves. We found that there were x pupils in year 6 and that we were x places short and that there were too many denominational places….’

Councils varied in the extent to which they made documents (agendas, minutes, reports etc.) available. The researchers concluded that it is important that this information is provided by all local authorities. In addition, some campaigners from both types of campaign had also experienced difficulties in understanding the system of local government and its procedures.

 ‘Somebody managed to tell us that [it] was on the agenda [of Scrutiny Committee]. So I managed to ring up two days before and asked to speak…  Somebody got back and said no you can’t speak.  Then I told somebody at the school and – because he had worked in local government before – he told me what to say when I rang back. He said I had to quote standing orders at them.  I had it all down on a piece of paper and I rang back and read it out and was allowed to speak at the meeting.’

The researchers considered it would be helpful for an individual within a local authority to be designated to assist parents with accessing information and to provide guidance about council procedures.

Another major difficulty for campaigners for new schools was lack of expertise on legal, technical and other matters. Campaigners spoke about the ‘steep learning curve’ they had faced or that they ‘had to learn everything’. The researchers consider that more support could be offered by the DfES, as is currently provided in the case of competitions for new schools.

Securing sites

Securing suitable sites for new schools was identified as a major problem by campaigners, the DfES and local authorities.  One campaigner explained:

‘Land has been the sticking point for us. There is no way that you can get money to buy land. It has to be provided by the local authority.’

The researchers conclude that this is an issue that needs to be addressed by central and local government.

Improving links with parents

Parent campaigners against the closure of schools were concerned that they did not receive information about proposed closures in good time and that their views were not seriously listened to.

‘I was incensed to receive a letter giving us very little warning that in a week’s time the proposal [to close the school] was going to Cabinet. It came completely out of the blue – we hadn’t been aware that the school was under that kind of threat. We knew it was a struggling school because it had a difficult intake but we weren’t in special measures or anything of that kind.’

The researchers conclude that the purposes of consultation regarding new schools – including the role of parents in the consultation – and the processes involved, should be made clearer to parents. The consultation processes themselves need to be carried out openly at a formative stage. Parents whose children’s schools are threatened with closure should to be more constructively engaged in discussions about the future of the school at an earlier stage.

Read summary or download full report