My Lords, before I speak to the amendments, I must apologise to the Committee because I have to leave early this afternoon—for a rather strange reason. I live in a small town in East Sussex called Lewes, where there are bonfire celebrations. There are six bonfire societies, six guys, six processions and general mayhem and chaos in the town. The town will therefore be closed down any minute now and I have to get back. I do apologise.
Now to be serious. All of us in this room and in the House generally are concerned about the welfare and education of our children. We are all concerned about having good schools, of whatever type. We are all concerned about pupils reaching their full potential. I want to talk mainly about the issue of coasting,
which I would define as not reaching potential, but coasting is the word in the Bill. Much of the Bill is about coasting: who is responsible for the schools, who consults whom, what collaboration takes place, and so on.
First, I thank the Minister for his letter of 21 October, and for calling a meeting the other day which, unfortunately, I could not go to. In the letter, the Minister talks about the Bill making important changes to deliver social justice—I shall come back to that—and to ensure that every child deserves an excellent education. He goes on to say that the Bill provides measures to tackle coasting schools and that illustrative coasting regulations, including a proposed definition of coasting, were published on 30 June. But, to my disappointment, the letter goes no further with defining what we might mean by coasting.
The definition given is fixed on achievement at GCSE. This is a very dangerous definition for schools, teachers and young people, and for school ethos and performance. I will say why, and why I hope that the definition is broadened substantially and put in the Bill, not just in regulations.
We have heard about the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee’s criticism of the substance of the Bill being in regulations. This is what happened in the Childcare Bill and it was criticised then. The Government produced regulations that were far longer than the Bill, which is not good enough.
I am surprised that the Minister seems content with a purely academic definition of coasting, because he and I have had several interesting and very valuable conversations about the importance of personal and social skills in education and the importance of school policies which support those skills. Those skills include communication, teamwork, citizenship, knowledge of health matters and school policies about issues such as bullying and behaviour. I believe that the Minister supports all this and I hope he will exercise his influence to redefine with the Department for Education what we mean by a good school where pupils reach their potential.
2.15 pm
The Commons Education Committee certainly thought that such skills were important. It stated that personal, social and health education should be statutory in schools. When will the Department for Education respond to the report calling for this recognition? The report was published in February and we still have not had a response to it. Pupils, parents and business leaders have supported PSHE in schools. This is not a wishy-washy subject but a serious concept. Major evidence-based development programmes and research support its importance for young people. Far from calling for more academic approaches to developing young people, the CBI said that young people should be “rounded and grounded” and that they should not have just academic skills.
It has also been shown that PSHE helps to develop self-esteem and confidence in children and helps them to learn. I have visited many schools where heads say that without personal, social and health education, children would be disadvantaged. I have seen how
social skills and confidence improve social mobility, and so has the Minister. Therefore, why are we trammelling our schools with an inadequate definition of coasting? Coasting to me means a lack of a coherent strategy for personal, social and health education.
In the definition of a coasting school, why is there no mention of sport? I look forward to the speech of the noble Lord, Lord Addington, and I am pleased that the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, is here. On 15 October, in a splendid debate in the House of Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Moynihan, spoke about all-party support for children doing sport in schools: sport after school, sport linking to clubs and better facilities, including playing fields. He deplored the decline in school sport. Sport and physical activity is known to improve character, self-esteem and academic success, as pointed out by the Youth Sport Trust in 2014. For me, a coasting school would be one that did not provide not just adequate but excellent sporting and physical activity.
What about the arts—music, theatre and dance? Coincidentally, a major novelist, Philip Pullman, just wrote about the provision of the arts in schools. He described education in the arts as,
“of incalculable worth in what it means to be a human being”.
He bemoaned the fact that the proportion of primary school-aged children going to the theatre in the past 12 months has dropped from 47% in 2009 to 32% in 2015. As he said, a child tends not to find his or her way to the theatre. Some are taken by parents. Many rely, as I did, on the school to provide visits to the theatre.
A coasting school would not pay attention to our marvellous tradition in the arts and in sport. It would not encourage music, dance and drama. It would not be doing justice to pupils. Without social skills, self-esteem and health skills, upward social mobility is almost impossible. Indeed, without those skills, it may be downward mobility.
We know that Ofsted looks at all these factors when assessing a school. I really do not think that any parent, teacher or child wants an education which lacks breadth and does not have a broad and balanced curriculum. Without these skills, schools certainly will not develop the social justice that the Minister calls for in his letter. We know that children are stressed by an overemphasis on testing for academic results. We also know that teachers hate it. Will the Government, very rapidly, give reassurance that this is not the way in which we define education?
I am not sure what consultation is needed to define a coasting school. We have enough academic and practical evidence about what a good school should provide for our children and what helps them to be rounded and grounded. I fear for children and teachers if the Government seriously think that coasting applies only to academic results. It is a terrible way to look at life. Will the Government please put a better definition in the Bill?