The Centre for School Design » Media

The James Review – digested

Ty Goddard — Fri, 08 Apr 2011 14:42:04 +0000

Well – its been a busy final day before the Easter holidays. Nothing like a 105 page government report to test your stamina!. We were asked this afternoon to comment on a BBC report that headlines the ‘failure of the school building system’ but as I said: there is much to be welcomed in the report’s conclusions. So… the myriad of elements of the Capital Review have been deliberated, cogitated and digested and here is my view of the main conclusions of the report.

Overview
We’ve been saying for a long time that the Building Schools for the Future programme was rightly ambitious but unnecessarily unwieldy, expensive and complicated. This review mirrors that position. The key now is to come up with an approach that meets the needs of our children and teachers.

30% savings to school building costs
An ambitious target – whilst this might be true of the pilot school with all industry eyes on it, we must be realistic about that being replicated across all refurbished or newly built schools.

Fit for purpose schools
It’s very good news to see this expression repeated throughout the report. We hope this leads to the development of a decent school standard, which would ensure that all schools are built to a level that positively supports teaching, learning, sport and play.

Standardisation
There is a role for the standardisation of design – the danger is whether the standard is high or low; that will dictate whether schools have the potential to be fit for purpose. We must ensure there is room for innovation in the future.

Evidence of the impact of school buildings on attainment and behaviour
We’ve always called for a robust programme of research on the impact of new school buildings. There IS clear evidence that school environments matter – detailed research in the form of post occupancy evaluation will also help support good practice around design and construction in the future.

A new central body for school buildings
There’s a role for a new central body to support the school building programme, but we welcome the suggestion that funding could sit within the Department for Education. This should help support a change in culture in the procurement, design and construction process, which the report says is key to making change happen. We’re sorry the review did not recommend the establishment of a national advisory council which could act as a feedback mechanism direct to the Department – one of our key recommendations in our submission.

Local investment plans
The idea of putting local authorities at the centre of the process is welcome in principle. The need to manage tensions will be key.

Condition of the school estate
A very welcome recommendation – an ongoing piece of work which tracks the condition of the school estate, which will help central and local government plan and help keep our school estate fit for purpose.

Timetable for recommendations
An ambitious timetable is welcome, particularly after the delays to the review itself.

James Review is (finally) here

Ian Fordham — Fri, 08 Apr 2011 11:51:47 +0000

After a long wait, we finally have the Independent Review of Education Capital – the James Review – which sets out the 16 recommendations for the reform of the way schools are procured, designed and built. Probably the biggest headline grabbing elements are:

the much aired challenges, problems and waste associated with the Building Schools for the Future programme
the suggestion that free schools capital budgets should be retained centrally
that Partnerships for Schools should have an even larger remit and reach as a central body including negotiating contracts with the construction industry

There are also the issues we raised in our previous blog posts around: greater standardisation, the reduction in red tape around planning and building regulations, the use of faster procurement routes and a move away from the goals of school capital programmes being focused on ‘educational transformation’ to look instead at building condition and pupil places. He also recommends that new buildings should be based on a set of standardised design templates (referencing the kind of model used by Dixons and TESCOs) – yet will incorporate “the latest thinking on educational requirements.

The author of the report, Sebastian James, Operations Director for Dixons, says that the current system was “complex, time-consuming, expensive and opaque and that savings of up to 30% could be made by streamlining it” and that a “lack of expertise” among those procuring the buildings – often head teachers – meant there was little opportunity to lower costs or improve building methods”.

Already the review has sparked some interesting comment including Neil O’Brien, Director of Policy Exchange who in his Telegraph blog (as well as their report Building Blocks) is highly critical not only of BSF but also of the role of Partnerships for Schools.

We are currently preparing our analysis and response – but in the meantime the review document and letter from Sebastian James can be found at the Department of Education website.

Headlines from a plan for growth budget

Ty Goddard — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 14:01:55 +0000

As I predicted yesterday on this site, there was some positive news on education in today’s budget, particularly in the expansion of University Technical Colleges and praise for links between universities and these new 14-19 institutions.

Education took centre stage in today’s budget alongside tax changes, fuel duty changes, scrapping of business regulations, planning reform and investment for exports in what the Chancellor entitled his ‘plan for growth’.

‘Let Britain be the home of enterprise,’ said Osbourne, as he highlighted education as key pillar in his aim for Britain to be ‘globally competitive’. An ‘attack on Britain’s low skills ‘ was essential he claimed.

The budget also included a new deal on Green energy and a green investment bank. Measures to close tax avoidance loopholes also introduced.

Commenting that other countries had improved their ‘education systems’ with far-reaching reforms, the chancellor announced:

Support for Technology & Innovation at nine Universities
Small Companies research tax credit – expanded
21 New Enterprise Zones created across the country
Expansion of University Technical College’s – to fund twenty four
Apprenticeships – expanded
As a small charity good to see Gift aid limits increased from £500 to £2000

‘Made in Britain, Designed in Britain’ This was a ‘march of the makers’ budget according to the Chancellor.

Still waiting for Sebastian James…

Ty Goddard — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 13:16:08 +0000

The long heralded James Review on the future of schools capital seems to have had more pencilled-in launch dates than a NASA Shuttle. But we are pretty confident it will be launched shortly… For an industry that thrives on certainty, local authorities that need to plan and schools that need investment, this delay has implications. Rumours often fill information voids; some are plainly ridiculous, some really do represent debate within the Review team and Government. What we do know for sure are the three key watchwords for the James Review: building condition, standardisation and more for less.

That still leaves some big questions – what’s to be said about Labour’s Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme. Were there any redeeming features about BSF? How can we ensure proper design for teaching and quality with an off-site modular approach? Is it sustainable and enduring to issue summary cost cuts to present and future projects? How do you incubate real innovation in an era of more for less? Shouldn’t Academy sponsors just be trusted with the capital spend – without intermediaries? How can Free Schools be created, work and really look and feel different to the parents involved?

Yesterday, I defended some aspects of BSF at a round table event chaired by Sir Mike Tomlinson. What I couldn’t defend was the silence of too many professionals and organisations, at the time, about what was really wrong with the BSF delivery process. The multiple professions involved should have done their own house-keeping. We wasted too many opportunities to get BSF right. We should have put our own house in order – not incrementally but properly.

School buildings are also becoming an even more deeply political subject and if you have any doubt, Michael Gove speaking at the Spectator conference last week said:

“People blame us. But if you are upset, the guilty men are Gordon Brown and Ed Balls; and the Treasury were responsible. The last Labour Government deliberately chose the most expensive route to build schools. I’m as angry as anyone else about the state of some of our school buildings”

There was also an equally lively exchange this week in the House of Commons:

Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab): The Secretary of State’s comments about the state of the school estate in comparison to what it was like after the Conservative Government in 1997 are nothing short of a disgrace. The reality is that this year the average secondary school has had its budget for maintenance and repairs cut from more than £105,000 to less than £20,000 this year. The Secretary of State has spectacularly failed to stand up for our schools and our schoolchildren. Does that not fatally expose how vacuous his claims are to have found more resources for schools this year?

Michael Gove: That question was beautifully written, almost as though it had been carved in marble by a master mason. The truth is that no one on that side of the House can afford to clamber on to their high horse when it comes to school buildings. It was that side of the House that inherited a golden economic legacy and squandered it. It was that side of the House that betrayed a generation of young people by giving us a record deficit and a record debt. It was that side of the House that presided over a schools building programme that was reckless, profligate and inefficient. It was that side of the House that put political convenience and partisanship ahead of our young people. Frankly, even though the hon. Gentleman was not in the last Parliament, every time he comes to that Dispatch Box to talk about the state of our education system or school buildings, there is only one word we need to hear from him, and that word is sorry (Source: Hansard)

The state of school buildings clearly matters to the coalition and the opposition as well as to our schools and communities. Indeed it is this passion for the fabric of schools that started our own organisation. But not everything lasts forever – BSF had its day. We at the BCSE have also had to rethink how we shape and respond to the new landscape ahead. We are an independent charity and not party political. We have tried to be a cool voice in a heated debate.

Lets hope the launch of the James Review heralds the rational debate this important subject needs. Also keep an eye on this Wednesday’s budget for some positive news on ways forward for investment in our schools and colleges.

Times Plus / Michael Gove education debate…

Ty Goddard — Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:21:10 +0000

“EVIDENCE IS NOT THE PLURAL OF ANECDOTE…..”

Give me the decayed glamour of a music hall in the East End; a panel discussion on education and I’m a happy man. This week I was a guest of Teach First at a Times Plus Newspaper debate:- ‘ Are our Schools Fit for purpose? ’ at Wilton’s Music Hall just off cable Street, London, E1. Here are some golden nuggets from this tuesday’s interesting and stimulating evening.Dylan William – I’d last worked with the Professor on last year’s BBC2 programme , ‘ Classroom Experiment’ where the BCSE and its members had re-furbished a classroom to enable a powerful teaching experiment to take place. Dylan is as lyrical as Peter Gabriel in presenting a fact-based analysis of what real support our teachers need – it’s the ‘Love the one you’re with’ strategy.

According to the Institute of Education’s, William :

90% of school choice is not an advantage – it matters more which classroom you are in rather than which school. It’s teacher quality within a school that is the major issue.
We need a relentless focus on teacher improvement – real time not wished for improvement in the actual ‘craft’ of teaching.
For many teachers there are real and serious mental health challenges – an openness and honesty is needed about this issue.
A new strategy of ‘love the one you’re with’ ; ie: the present teacher rather than a rhetoric of good/bad school will cost more in political will and focus than we’ve ever done before.

Modelled on Teach for America, England’s Teach First is led by the quiet American, Brett Wigdorz. For Brett the key issues are these:

Meet any six year old and it is their parent’s income that will be the key determinant of their educational future
Who goes to University? – Pupils on free school meals -16% ; Independent school pupils – 96%

Baroness Estelle Morris is so likeable, yet she must get fed up hearing how she resigned by way of introduction.

Estelle identified the progress that had been made – teachers are better; quality of teaching and leadership identified as really vital and schools are better at collaborating
Yet some young people are not engaged and we’re not evidence-based
the dividing line between education and politics is drawn wrongly

Michael Gove MP, Secretary of State – tonight an exceptional aggregator of individual and diverse opinions.

Schools must do better – education should be a direct attack on social inequality
Children should be the Captain of their own fate and the author their own life story
Some of the problems are deeply buried within the education system
Future watchwords are, school autonomy; fair accountability and teacher quality

The panels’ major area of consensus is motivating and retaining great teachers – also a key national challenge. This debate was a key dialogue and as Dylan said, ‘ evidence is not the plural of anecdote. ’

This really was an involving and inspiring natter; not top down lecturing …..sounds like a model for a new beginning? An ex Labour Secretary of State, an Emeritus Professor and a Conservative Secretary of State go into a bar….. More old music hall consensus and rational debate please.

Waiting for Superman: Free Schools vs Local Schools – the debate starts here

Ian Fordham — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 18:21:00 +0000

On Monday 22 November, we are lucky enough to be hosting the first UK screening of the Oscar shortlisted film ‘Waiting for Superman‘ that has rocked the US education system and is set to send the debate about Free Schools in the UK into orbit. We know that the film will generate a huge amount of debate between… in the Blue Corner - Free School promoters and advocates such as Michael Gove, Toby Young and Rachel Wolf vs in the Red Corner - Free School detractors and critics including Christine Blower from the NUT and Fiona Millar, Melissa Benn and co at the Local Schools Network. Well let the debate start here…Our screening on Monday is followed by a debate with a panel including myself, US Founder and CEO of TeachFirst Brett Wigdortz, James Turner Head of Policy at the Sutton Trust and Janet Cullen, Headteacher of Lea Valley School. And if you think that debate will spark some fireworks, there will no doubt be a ‘bonfire and new years eve style’ display after the event in the media, the education press and blogosphere.

So lets light the fuse for this debate now, ahead of our screening, so we have some views to start our discussion on Monday.

Let us know what you feel about Charter Schools in the US or Free Schools in the UK and (if you are in the US) what issues were raised for you in the film? There is a wealth of coverage of the film in the US – where it has sparked debate across the country. The official WfS website is here and there is notwaitingforsuperman.org which shares some of the less favourable reaction to the film in the US.

Back to the UK – I’ll also share with you a comment from Toby Young himself – who said to me last week in an email:

‘You must understand what this film is really about… the film portrays charter school pioneers as true American heroes and the US teaching unions as blinkered and self-serving. It’s an eviscerating attack on the American teaching unions and a ringing endorsement of the American charter school movement’.

So to translate this for a UK context…

Free schools pioneers are heroes and teaching unions and the views that the local schools network represents are intransigent and holding back the education system…

Is that enough to start the debate?… comments welcome… and much more to come after the screening. Watch this space…

Let’s be proud of our schools – set them free

Ian Fordham — Tue, 26 Oct 2010 08:00:32 +0000

We all have a memory of that place we call school. A moment of insight or fun; a teacher that inspired; the classroom; the sports field; an art room; a playground; a science experiment; the awful toilets. Our childhood in our schools has for many a particular and enduring place in our memories. And schools stir great passions and great divides – when in fact there is more to connect us together than divide us. And in an increasingly competitive education system globally, there is now more to gain from having a common sense view about our schools – so we don’t fall further behind Singapore, Finland or China.So what we must do is set our teachers free, set our schools free and set the system free. The trajectory of government legislation in this area is exceptionally positive – new academies provide greater freedoms in terms of staff pay, conditions and the curriculum and, as middle class parents are now saying in a recent Durham University report the results are starting to add up. Free Schools too have enormous potential to address a major problem of a lack of school places – resulting from a population timebomb of children coming into the system – and they put parents, charities and teachers into the driving seat of setting up their own school. Critically both policies are based on a growing evidence base in Charter Schools in the US, which have radically changed the education system in America.

But despite this, the education system – much like the National Health Service – is like a large tanker. It takes time to turn around, takes pioneering leaders to show the way and takes courage from the large majority of frontline teachers who, despite caricature, are small ‘c’ conservative in nature. So the question for us is – have we set the bar high enough? Are we being ambitious enough in the change we want in education? And can we free up schools even further so they and we are able to compete with other countries?

Our report launched last week, Free Schools Thinking, encourages teachers, parents and government to deliver even greater freedoms, at a faster pace of change and beyond just freeing up the model of schooling (academies and free schools) and the supply side (academy sponsors, chains of schools). More fundamentally we should be freeing up all schools in terms of:

the time when teaching and learning takes place, including longer teaching days;
the people who help to support schools including local businesses and entrepreneurs;
the spaces where learning takes place including corridors, playgrounds and after school clubs;
the places where schools can be located including redundant offices, government buildings and factories.

Free Schools Thinking also entails an understanding that school environments can be a major tool for school improvement. Every top private school, academy and comprehensive knows they must invest some of their budget in creating ‘decent school environments’ to inspire and develop future leaders of this country. And this is not about the bricks and mortar or glass atriums – which we know are just a means to an end. This is about common sense elements such as light, temperature, air quality, acoustics and decent furniture – which are important in our workplaces but sadly not in all schools. It is vital to refresh, refurbish or reuse schools to ensure they function well, last for a generation and make a difference in terms of results and achievement.

The bureaucracy surrounding such programmes such as Building Schools for the Future were an insult to our architects, construction companies and suppliers who are in fact not just building some of the best schools in the UK, but are exporting British products and expertise to a global market. The waste represented in this policy represented the ‘Worst of Britain’. Freeing up our schools to think differently about the way education is delivered, reducing bureaucracy, stripping away planning laws and rewarding excellence is the ‘Best of Britain’ and vital if we are to compete with the fastest moving economies and education systems in the world.

Let us be proud of our schools – let us set them free.

Note: this post is adapted from a ‘Platform article’ written by Ian Fordham on ConservativeHome – the most visited grassroots Conservative Party website in the UK

Free Schools Thinking – what is our new report saying?

Ian Fordham — Sat, 16 Oct 2010 09:49:10 +0000

We are really thrilled to be launching our new BCSE / Centre for School Design publication Free Schools Thinking on the 20 October 2010 – the day of the announcement of the UK Government’s Comprehensive Spending Review. The timing is not a coincidence. We feel strongly that despite budgets in education and across the public sector being cut, that the thinking about education should not be cut back too. Teachers, parents and those working with schools should be encouraged and enabled to ‘free up’ the way they work, the people they work with and the places and spaces where teaching and learning takes place – so they can find new ways of improving their schools and the education system as a whole. Our publication is the result of a unique collaboration between the BCSE, the Centre for School Design and 5 leading architect practices (Architecture PLB, GSS Architecture, Jestico & Whiles, Ryder Architecture and RH Partnership) who co-developed the report over a 5 month period.

The first section of the report looks at the changing policy landscape and puts forward a framework that encourages schools and those working with them to rethink the spaces and places where teaching and learning takes place and the time and people who help to support learning. It argues that many schools are already working in innovative ways and that new policies such as ‘Free Schools’ (regardless of your views on its potential impact) have started to provide an injection of fresh thinking into the way schools are managed, designed and work in practice. But to achieve a step change – we believe passionately that ‘free thinking’ must be applied to all elements of the education system – for us to compete in an increasingly global education market.

The second section of the report looks at a set of new typologies and case studies for schools – looking in depth at the issues, opportunities and challenges associated with locating schools in radically different building types. From public buildings to offices to retail and factories – the report highlights how a free thinking approach might enable a huge, undersused reservoir of public and private sector estate to be used to create exciting and dynamic spaces for teaching and learning. It moves beyond the rhetoric of ‘schools on high streets’ or ‘eduretail’ and looks in detail at the way the education system in the UK might be developed if such projects were delivered and taken up to scale.

We hope that our landmark publication, the first of its kind in the UK, will act as a stimulus for debate about the education system we want in the future. A preview of the report is shown below and the final report will be available in full on this website on the 20 October.

Update: our report has been featured over the weekend in articles on the BBC, the Independent on Sunday, Building Design (£) and Construction News (£)

New government – the first ten days

Ian Fordham — Thu, 20 May 2010 14:27:59 +0000

In the first of our podcasts Ty reflects on the first 10 days of the new government, the newly launched coalition programme for government that shares some more detail about schools policy and the rumoured cuts to the Building Schools for the Future budget. Note: please excuse the wobbly camerawork – its our first one!

New government: long signalled, swift action

Ty Goddard — Fri, 14 May 2010 14:11:12 +0000

Michael Gove speaking at launch of Conservative Education manifesto

The change from Ed Balls to Michael Gove into the rebranded Department for Education is not going to be the only speedy change in the coming months in the worlds of education, and design. It is likely to be the most radical period of change that these policy areas has seen for almost a decade. We have known for some time and shared on this blog that big changes were afoot; it maybe the pace that surprises some.

The much vaunted free schools programme and the pupil premium will be high profile items on the ‘to do’ list. Free schools will be well funded and pump primed for success. The pupil premium will take longer to sort out and also all schools will be given much greater freedom in the curriculum than the pre election rhetoric led us to believe. Greater freedoms will also follow with more ‘academy like’ benefits given to all schools – to remove practices imposed by what many perceive was a top down, command and control government. And a new education bill is likely to appear within weeks in time for the Queens Speech with a number of shake ups to the current education landscape.

We know that there are likely to big cuts in public services across the board with guesses of between 20-30% depending on the outcome of the budget and next spending review. We are given a further insight from yesterday’s article in the Independent Education Supplement from Anna Fazackerley – the head of education at the think tank Policy Exchange – who says that, “one part of the schools budget that is ripe for cutting is capital”. We have also heard a day later that all BSF programmes that haven’t reached preferred bidder stage may be frozen, pending a review in the upcoming budget.

So the pace of change is fast and the next 6 weeks are a crucial time for everyone working in the education, design and built environment sector.