Official Report 255KB pdf
We have two sets of witnesses this morning, the first from St Mary's Episcopal Primary School, Dunblane and the second from Steiner Waldorf Schools for Curriculum Choice in Scotland.
Cath Prescott is the head teacher at St Mary's; Paul Nelson is an elected parent on the board of management and the chairman of the school's finance committee; Gordon Scott is the vice-chairman of the board and an elected parent. I am an elected parent and the chairman of the board of St Mary's.
This question is probably for Mr McCulloch, but if any of the other witnesses would like to answer, please do. I have read through your document, and accept what you say about the quality and standards that you have achieved. However, in the section under the heading of "The effects of St Mary's losing its current management status", there is a list of very negative statements, and no positive statements. Do you feel that there would be no positive benefits for the children or for the school if you came under the control of Stirling Council?
I will answer that by referring to my initial statement that we would lose a proportion of our funding. As you will understand, St Mary's is funded by a grant from the Scottish Executive. It is divided into two pieces: one is school level expenditure, the other is central costs. That is fundamental to the impact of any change in status.
It is not for us to define what the benefits would be of going back under council control. In consultation with the Executive, our local MSP, Dr Sylvia Jackson, has defined the benefits. In a letter to the school board on 24 September, she said:
I would like to reiterate what was said. We have a school development plan well in advance, which we update every six months in conjunction with the staff. The pupils have an input. There is a school council that has an input, which reports to the staff. Using the Scottish Executive document, "How good is your school?" we analyse and evaluate the school, and then change the school development plan according to our needs.
You say that you have a high proportion of children with special needs, which requires special support. Could you give me a percentage of the children who need that kind of support?
There are 66 pupils in the school and 27 children in the nursery. We are part of Stirling Council's staged intervention scheme. Part of that requires us to fill in forms for state intervention to access resources. I filled in 22 state intervention forms, which account for a third of the pupils in the school. Some of those cases are minor—the children have speech and language problems—but concern must be registered at the first stage of the impact on classroom learning and teaching.
I have visited your school and would not dispute the standards that you have achieved. We can all understand your anxiety over the fact that what you have achieved over the past few years might be undermined.
Shortly after the general election, the Scottish Office asked us to discuss the school's position with Gordon Jeyes, the director of education of Stirling Council. He was not able to give us any guarantees whatsoever about the future of the school.
What guarantees did you ask him for?
We asked him to guarantee continuity of the school, first. He was not able to give us that guarantee. We asked him for continuity of funding. He was not able to give us that guarantee.
There have been no further discussions with the council since the publication of the draft bill?
Not formally, on that level.
Clearly, one of your concerns is not the potential closure of the school but its potential transformation from a primary school into a pre-school centre. Did you discuss that with the director of education?
No.
The visitor of schools and Margaret Doran came to the school last summer. They were not interested in the school; they wanted a nursery. They were interested to know how we thought that the building could be used as a pre-school centre: that was the basis of the discussion.
Two other board members and I had a meeting with Gordon Jeyes a while ago, at which he told us that Stirling Council does not fund according to need, as we have been trying to do. That makes me believe that our children with special needs would not receive the funding that they require.
I have a final question. The situation is hypothetical, but I am interested to hear your views. How would you react to the suggestion that you become an independent school?
By "independent school", do you mean outwith the state system?
Yes.
That has never been discussed by the board. That has never been on our agenda. We are a highly successful state school. Nobody has come to us so far and told us that we are not successful according to the various criteria that have been established by the Scottish Executive or anybody else. Nobody disputes that we are a successful school. We are a state school. We do not charge. Our admissions policy is standard. There is no examination to enter the school. We have a normal cross-section of children in the school. We have no wish to be a non-state school.
We could go further, and say that we are proud to be a state school.
Absolutely.
When I talked with Stirling Council about partnership funding for the nursery, the council wanted to put me with the private partnership group in its meetings. I refused, as I regard ours as a state school with a state nursery. Our parents, the board and the staff are drawn from all political parties. The will is not there to become a private school. We want to be a state school and stay as we are.
You say that you are a state school. I accept that. I am sympathetic to your viewpoint. However, as a state school you must recognise that the state has an overview, and that no school is an island.
There are, as you know, three primary schools in Dunblane—two larger schools and our small denominational school, St Mary's, which has not been mentioned. About half of our children are Scottish Episcopalian. We provide the choice—which some parents want—of a Christian ethos within the community. St Mary's is also a small school, which some parents feel is better for their children and which is another element of the choice that we offer.
To a degree it does, but do you accept that Stirling Council must consider how to deal with the whole population? Do you further agree that, if your school was part of the system and the council was in control, the council would be able to think about providing places in St Mary's if there were a need for extra school places? The council would be able to take a strategic overview.
We are part of the system.
In that case, Stirling Council should have some say in what you do.
We have regular contact with Stirling Council.
It does not sound very regular.
We must have regular contact, because, as you are aware, Stirling Council has certain statutory responsibilities. We regularly consult the council on issues such as transport and special educational needs. The head teacher of St Mary's also has regular meetings with other head teachers and with officials from the education authority. Discussions go on all the time. If there was a problem with educational provision in the area and Stirling Council felt that we ought to be involved in solving that, there would be no problem in including St Mary's. We welcome discussions at any time. The difference is in how our school is managed.
The Scottish Executive is fond of pilots for this or that initiative. St Mary's is not a pilot for an initiative, but is the result of a change in education legislation. However, if it was treated as a pilot for greater devolved management, what lessons have been learned that might be applied to other schools?
As you said, St Mary's is not a pilot. However, I understand that there is a pilot learning community in Glasgow at Eastbank Academy, which is run by Glasgow City Council. There, clustered schools have, effectively, been given self-governing status. Without being political or trying to flag up any issues, I think that there are a number of lessons to be learned from that.
Yours is a small school and small schools are traditionally more expensive than larger schools. However, your per-pupil costs seem not only to be lower than those of comparable schools, but lower than those of many larger schools. What enables St Mary's to drive down its per-pupil costs?
Unfortunately, our costs per pupil are limited by the amount of money that the Government gives us. As Alistair McCulloch said, our Government grant is £65,000 less than what Aberfoyle Primary School spends on school-level expenditure for 78 pupils. We have, therefore, to cut our cloth, but our major savings are made on administration costs. We do not have the heavy back-end administration costs of a council, and we are able to devote any savings to the education of our children.
You have mentioned the fact that Dunblane is expanding. Do you have any plans for changes to the school in terms of teacher numbers in future?
Indeed we do. In May 1999, the board put a proposal to what is now the Scottish Executive to expand St Mary's teaching staff by employing a primary 1 teacher and creating a reception class of 12 or 13 pupils. That would be of benefit because more attention could be paid to earlier intervention, class sizes could be smoothed out from primary 2 to primary 6, the school roll would be increased from 66 to 88 and overall costs per pupil would be further reduced.
At one of our regular development meetings, the head teacher expressed concern about the fact that the composite infant class was growing. The situation was becoming difficult because a number of the children in that class had a variety of needs.
In one classroom, we have currently three different year groups. The fourth teacher would help to bring that down to two year groups per class all the way through the school.
I would like to ask for a little more detail on a point that you made at the beginning of your evidence, which was that if St Mary's reverted to council management, there would be less support for those who need it most. Can you explain why?
The support-for-learning teacher would go back to doing what she did before—working one morning every two weeks instead of one whole day per week. We have 10 support for learning hours for a boy in my class with Asperger's syndrome. At the moment I am talking to Stirling Council about increasing those hours, because I feel that the child needs them—he can be very disruptive. In the meantime, the board has made provision in our budget for extra hours of one-to-one teaching for the child. We would not be able to do that under Stirling Council. We might have to tell the parents that we cannot continue with the placement, because if Stirling Council does not increase the number of SLA hours that it gives us, we cannot fund them from our budget. That has a direct impact on a child with special needs.
When you say that you are meeting Stirling Council, presumably you are not paying for its time, but the rest of the community is. Every time that you go to Stirling Council for this, that or the other, somebody pays for it. When it comes to the proportion of management costs to central costs, there is not exactly a level playing field.
I will deal with the first point; Paul Nelson may want to deal with the second.
I want to comment on finance. Of the total amount that we should be allocated, 3.2 per cent is retained by Stirling Council to cover the retained items—partly the items to which Ian Jenkins referred, and partly the items to which Alistair McCulloch referred.
May I comment?
I will bring you in again in a moment. We are already running over time, but three members still have questions and I am keen that they should ask them. Please keep questions and answers fairly succinct, so that we can fit everybody in. I am aware that our other witnesses are waiting to speak to us, so members should bear that in mind, although I will try to bring people in.
I have three questions. They are quite short, and they arise from my visit to your school some months ago. I thank you for your hospitality.
We are a denominational school and we have the support of the Scottish Episcopal Church's education committee. We also have the support of the local vestry and of the bishop. In his letter, the Bishop of St Andrews says:
What discussions have you had with elected members?
Dr Sylvia Jackson MSP has visited the school and we have regular contact with her. We know that she is listening, but she has not indicated any support for our cause.
I am sorry; I was talking about discussions with councillors.
I beg your pardon. We have not contacted any councillors; however, the children's committee met recently and said that it would favour our return to local authority control.
I want to explore two issues. In many ways, St Mary's school could be the ultimate example of devolved management of resources, which is a policy that the bill will encourage and extend. However, do you have any fears about special needs provision if the school is taken back into the fold? Special needs funding is based on the number of pupils in a school who have such needs. Under the current devolved management of resources, a head teacher can use those resources to increase his or her allocation of special needs support time. I am rather disappointed by your negative view of what will become of the school under Stirling Council.
I asked a friend of mine who is a head teacher in the Stirling Council region whether she had any say in her support for learning areas or school helper time allocations and she said that she did not, even though she is involved in the devolved management of resources scheme. However, she has a say in visiting teachers and in her own head teacher relief. Learning support teachers are allocated by a co-ordinator who is part of the support for learning areas network team. Learning support teacher and SLA support allocations are based on an annual audit into special needs provision in the area.
I am not familiar with Stirling Council itself. Ms Prescott, what is your experience of being a head teacher with devolved management of resources within the state sector?
Although this is the first time that I have been a head teacher, I have worked in placements in four different local authorities, the most recent of which was in Scotland, and I worked in England at a time when a scheme that I think was called devolved school management was being implemented, which was far in advance of what has happened in Scotland. As a result, I have seen the matter from many different angles.
As Cathy Peattie said, you seem to have a very negative view of the school's future. I hope that the future will not prove to be so negative; perhaps, after four years out of the system, you are not au fait with the amount of control you will have.
I want to relate that comment to a chat that I had with our director of education at an educational conference in Edinburgh. He said to someone else that the school had done a good job but was going to be closed. Afterwards, when I pointed out to him that the school was not going to be closed, he said that he would have done it. He will deny that comment, because he made it only to me. He has closed other small schools.
Could I comment—
I am aware that I cut off Mr Scott. Did you want to add something, Mr Scott?
Stirling Council sometimes takes as long as seven months to address issues that we raise. The board of the school can address issues much faster. The delay causes us concern, as we are used to getting on with things.
A number of members of the committee have suggested that we are negative about Stirling Council. I understand that many members of the committee feel that education is best run by local authorities but I suggest that that attitude is too rigid. Nobody has told us that our school's standards are not high—we are achieving high standards. Can the committee guarantee that our standards would not only remain as they are but improve if we were to return to local authority control? If we remain as we are, I am sure that they will improve.
No member of the committee has questioned the function that you perform or the standards that you achieve. You should not assume that the committee is coming at this issue from any particular standpoint. The point of inviting witnesses such as you to the committee is to have discussions about the issue. Please do not assume that members have already made up their minds.
You say that you think that you will lose a teacher because of additional bureaucratic costs. How will rejoining Stirling Council affect the ethos of the school, which relates to the activity of the school board and the head teacher and to the participation of parents and pupils? Why do you think that the ethos would be damaged?
Ethos is a wonderful word, but difficult to define, as we all know. St Mary's has always had a strong ethos, even when it was under local authority control. We believe that the ethos has been reinforced by the fact that we are a small denominational school that runs its own affairs. With that comes great responsibility. Meetings of the school board were always sparsely attended but meetings of the board of management are always well attended by parents and others and there is a high level of accountability. We do not take our responsibilities lightly and are always aware that we are dealing with the future of our children. Such considerations create the school's ethos and would be lost if we returned to local authority control.
We are not paid managers of the school; we are committed to the school. The board is not committed to roads, parks, lights, the police or to anything else; it is committed to the school.
Why would you not be committed to the school, if Stirling Council ran it?
We would not have the authority.
You would still be parents of the children at the school, though.
Our parents are committed to the school—our parents association is also extremely committed and will continue to be so. However, we would not have the authority and the responsibility.
I want to wind up this part of the meeting but I will allow brief points from Cathy Peattie and Nicola Sturgeon.
There is no question of the witnesses' commitment, which has been demonstrated by what has happened so far. It might have been helpful to have had someone present this morning from Stirling Council—it is difficult in the council's absence to discuss what might happen to the school. If we consider this matter further, we must involve the council.
I detected from Mr Nelson a fear that I am sure all the witnesses share—that Stirling Council's intention is eventually to close the school. The school's current roll is 66, but what is the school's capacity? Under current legislation, if a school is more than 80 per cent full, any decision on closure has to be referred to the Minister for Children and Education.
I believe that the capacity is 60. Is that correct, Alistair?
I cannot answer that, because it depends on where in the school we can squeeze in the desks and whether they are small or large desks. I am not being flippant—we are pretty well at capacity and cannot take many more pupils.
In that case, it is almost certain that any decision to close the school would not be taken by Stirling Council—the matter would be referred to the Minister for Children and Education.
I will respond to the second point. It cannot be denied that the minute we are returned to local authority control, we will lose nearly 14 per cent of our grant. No organisation can lose 14 per cent of its money without that having a huge impact. It does not matter whether one is part of a quality assurance programme or whatever—if one loses 14 per cent of one's money, the only way in which to make the budget balance would be to get rid of people. That fact is quantifiable, and no one will tell us: "Don't worry about it. You can just keep that money for devolved school management."
I made a factual point about the capacity of the school in relation to the current roll, which would have a bearing on any future closure decision.
The school is denominational, so any decision about closure would have to go to the Minister for Children and Education in any event. Our fear is not one of closure—we fear change of use. We know fine well that there is spare capacity within the other two primary schools, one of which is a new school. Because we are such a small school, those schools could take our primary pupils. However, there is an increasing shortage of pre-school capacity, because of the demand for places for three and four-year-olds. There is no logical reason why we could not be used as a pre-school centre, although Dunblane is growing and, in time, all capacity will be required.
I will answer the question on devolved school management.
Thank you for answering our questions today—we found your evidence helpful. When the bill is returned to the committee, we will discuss this issue further. As Cathy Peattie said, it might have been useful to have had someone from Stirling Council here to comment on the situation. We may wish to pursue that further and, if so, we will keep you informed.
Meeting suspended.
On resuming—
We will reconvene now. I apologise to the witnesses for the delay—we had told them that we would be ready for them at about 10 o'clock. As they were here, they will be aware that they have been delayed because we wanted to investigate as many matters as possible with the previous witnesses.
Good morning. Andy Farquharson is acting chairman of the Edinburgh Rudolf Steiner School, and an upper school teacher of geography. Elizabeth Henderson is a teacher in the lower school at Aberdeen Waldorf School, and a parent of a child there. Mike Palmer is a civil servant, but is here as the parent of a child at the Edinburgh Rudolf Steiner School. Catriona Watt, too, is a parent of a child at the Edinburgh Rudolf Steiner School, where she is also chair of the trustees. I am the parent of three children at the Edinburgh Rudolf Steiner School.
Thank you very much. Do committee members have any questions?
I want to get straight down to the nitty-gritty—funding. If you want to be part of a pluralist education system in Scotland and to get funding from the state, there will always be basic standards—laid down by the state—that you will have to meet. Do you think that you will have to conform to such an extent that you might lose much of what Steiner education offers?
We recognise that we need to be accountable for our expenditure of public money if we are funded by the state. We therefore fully accept that we need to measure up to performance indicators to satisfy local authorities. We recognise that the Government makes certain demands of local authorities and that that is as it should be.
We feel that the performance indicators are important but only a small facet of education, which is much broader. The indicators fit a mechanistic view of childhood and picture of education. If teaching is seen as being about imparting knowledge and skills, and children are viewed as empty buckets who need to be filled with that knowledge and skill, performance indicators can be used to tell whether children are retaining what is being put into them.
You answered in relation to Aberdeen; does the same apply to the other three schools?
Because having a state teaching qualification is not essential for being a Steiner Waldorf teacher, the proportions will fluctuate between schools; they will not necessarily be the same.
I cannot give you an exact figure for graduates in Edinburgh, but it is probably also about 80 per cent. We do not have the same percentage of state trained teachers, but those who do not have state training have the Steiner Waldorf educational qualification.
We are beginning to make representations with the GTC. It is a case of the will to be slightly different. It is helpful to look at models abroad to see how they address the problem. In New Zealand, for example, where there is 100 per cent funding for Steiner Waldorf schools, if the teacher is not state trained but is already working in a Steiner Waldorf school, the state will assess them after two years of teaching and register them retrospectively, based on their obvious quality.
We appreciate the concerns about accountability; if money is being given to schools to be in the state system, there have to be rules and regulations about how we perform. Some of those rules and regulations will be mechanistic—exams and so on—and, following on from what Mike said, we would want to discuss further exactly how we would be measured. There would be no point in joining the system to be the same as other schools. Our argument is that we want to come in to be an alternative. There is a point at which we would have to say that we are different.
That is what I was trying to get at. How much of your ethos would you be prepared to shift on? We talked about performance indicators. We learned only last night that we may have dates on which children will be tested from a young age. That goes against your ethos. You will have to persuade us, or perhaps not all of us but the Executive, that there are other ways of measuring performance.
We have thought about that issue and discussed it in meetings with civil servants and directors of education, for example. We have experienced an HM inspectors of schools inspection and we do not see that there is any reason why we cannot negotiate with HMI and other appropriate bodies to have specific criteria against which the Steiner schools are measured. It should perhaps be done at a different age or in a different way.
It is also important for the committee and the Executive to understand the stress that having to comply with these performance indicators puts on children. My question would be, what are we trying to do to children? The Mental Health Foundation has just published a booklet called "The Big Picture". It states that
As a former teacher, I want to know a little more about what makes your curriculum distinctive. What different types of teaching approaches do you have?
I am not sure that we have enough time to cover that as there are so many differences. One that springs to mind is that formal education is delayed until the age of six. The kindergarten, or nursery stage, is from three until six, which is in line with mainstream practice on the continent. Languages are introduced at the age of six. Two modern languages are taught.
What about the teacher and the teaching approaches? Are you confident that you can guarantee a high degree of skill? How do you monitor teaching quality?
Are you talking about teacher quality?
How do you ensure that the teacher is skilled enough to deliver the curriculum?
In our school we have a mentoring system—more experienced teachers share their knowledge with new teachers on an individual basis. A new teacher meets their mentor once a week to discuss what is happening in the classroom. The mentor keeps tabs on how the children and the teacher are doing. We also have a college of teachers—we run the school as a group. If anyone is having problems, we try to help. We have our own in-service training and sometimes we take part in local authority service training.
One of the problems in mainstream schools is dealing with children with special needs and those with behavioural disorders. How do you deal with such children in your schools?
I have accepted in my class five children from state schools who, for different reasons, were not thriving. One child was being bullied, another was very bright and had seen one worksheet too many, another was not socially settled and the other two had learning difficulties. Over the past four years, they have all settled into my class very well.
Although Betty is mainly talking from the Aberdeen perspective, the situation is similar in all the schools.
It is very important that the class teacher works with the whole group of children. They stay together as a class unit for eight years. The teacher tries to create a social unit, so that each child learns to respect the differences in the others. The mixed ability and approach—the academic, artistic and practical aspects, which the children study together—allow the children to appreciate the qualities of every child. That is fundamental to the ethos of the school. Even children who are potentially disaffected, or who have academic problems and might feel a sense of failure in another school, are supported and appreciated by the rest of the class.
We recognise that children have multiple intelligences—we took that approach before it became a catchphrase. We recognise that children have many things to offer that go beyond literacy and numeracy skills.
I am just showing my doodle to the rest of the committee—it is remarkably similar.
Yet without the colour.
Fiona McLeod identified one of the biggest challenges: how to retain your ethos while meeting the requirements that a local authority and the Executive would undoubtedly ask you to meet.
I was teaching when the HMI report came out: I was standing, nerve-wracked, when my class was sitting, writing away.
As chair of the trustees, I met the inspectors at a meeting to discuss the draft. It is said to be possible to have changes made at the draft stage: it is actually impossible. At the last conference for governors and trustees that I attended, Archie McGlynn told the audience what a fantastic school ours is—it was interesting how that came out.
We used their criteria on the inspectors as well, and agreed that their inspection was fair.
You have already mentioned your response to the General Teaching Council and the HMI inspection. I take it that you would be willing to find a solution that would make HMI and the GTC happy and comfortable with your becoming part of the state sector. The witnesses are nodding, which I take as a yes.
Yes.
That leads me to my question. We have heard from representatives of St Mary's, who fear entering into a new relationship with their local authority. In becoming part of the state sector, state funding would be received, and there might be many ways in which that might be handled and the school might be managed. That is a separate matter from the curricular issues, which we have covered quite well. You might be comfortable with some of those ways of management, although some might involve quite radical changes—in the appointment of staff, for instance. You may come to an agreement with the GTC that allows you leeway with which you are comfortable, but that might not fit in with the normal procedures that are followed in local authorities for contracting and so on.
We have not had talks with the GTC, but we have made preliminary inquiries, which are on-going. We have not come up with anything concrete on that issue, however, but we would have no objection to such discussions.
Are there certain aspects of the way that you manage your schools that you would not be willing to give up?
As Betty alluded to earlier, our schools are managed on a non-hierarchical basis. The teachers who have been there at least a year have equal responsibility for the running of the school. I was introduced as the chairman of the group that is known as the college; every year someone is—in effect—elected to be its chairman. Fortunately—or unfortunately—it is my turn this year.
This is not so much a question as an observation. If you were to come into the state sector, you may find that, given that there is no cost disincentive to parents, you might need to expand. That might mean not only expansion to your existing schools, but that there would be a demand for schools to be set up where they do not currently exist. It strikes me that the committee should consider that issue. You should perhaps consider discussing that not just with individual local authorities, but with the Association of Directors of Education in Scotland, because it would have an impact throughout Scotland. I presume that you have not done that yet, but it is something that you could do.
We had a meeting with the director of education at the City of Edinburgh Council. The message we got was that the council would be content to enter into negotiations with us about taking over the school and including it in mainstream provision. We did not get into detail about the trade-offs that might be necessary for that to happen; the council said that it could not begin to consider that until the Executive had indicated that it was happy to encourage more pluralistic schools provision in local authorities.
I think that you have covered it.
The second question was about how you would deal with expansion, should that arise.
We have thought about that. One of the reasons we are here is that many parents are excluded from sending their children to our schools because they do not have the financial resources to do so.
It occurs to me that there might be a difficulty if, say, growth in Edinburgh was such that a second school was needed. That could lead to the setting up of catchment areas—something that local authorities are very familiar with. At the moment catchment areas are unnecessary because your four schools are disparate and do not take people by selection. What I am describing would be a problem of success; no doubt, you would rather face that than the problems of failure. However, it is something that you might have to discuss with local authorities.
The pattern in European countries is that, once state funding is granted, there is often a fivefold increase in applications within a decade.
The teachers at Edinburgh Rudolf Steiner School have been considering the possibility, if there were an increase in demand, of setting up a school in an area such as Pilton for children who are less advantaged than those that come to the Colinton site.
In countries where the schools are fully funded, what has been the experience of tension between the Steiner Waldorf approach and a national system of examination and accreditation?
Children in Steiner Waldorf schools also sit the national exams. In those countries there is national accreditation, as there is here. Children at schools here also sit highers, standard grades and, in some cases, A-levels. The systems coexist.
We have found that for entry into further education, colleges, universities and so on, our children will also be accepted on a portfolio, because people recognise that they are very creative thinkers, are very independent, and have a love of learning.
You have just covered some of what I wanted to say. I am interested in the idea of pluralism. I particularly enjoyed the way in which you dealt with children in the kindergarten. As nursery education for three and four-year-olds is becoming statutory it seems to me there is a danger of people starting to teach kids to read in nursery schools at the age of three to four. There is a place for a different philosophy somewhere in a state system to allow us to see it in action.
We are currently sharing our practices with local education authorities. I recently gave a course on early years learning at Summerhill in Aberdeen. Our local education authorities are very happy to learn from our practices. There is a lot to learn. Childhood is valuable and must be treated in the right way, particularly for three and four-year-olds.
Dorothy Baird spoke about cross-fertilisation, but that means that there is a two-way process.
I was going to add that to what Betty said. We are not saying that we have all the answers. There is much in the state sector that we could learn from. We would like the two systems to coexist on a par with each other. That would raise the standard of Scottish education, because ideas would be out in the open and would be discussed, instead of us being seen as an elitist private or independent school.
You said that nations provide different levels of funding. What level of funding would be good for you? Would 50 per cent be good?
Given that the average wage for a full-time Steiner Waldorf teacher, no matter how many years of experience they have, is £12,000, we would be grateful for anything.
The situation reflects the commitment and vocation of Steiner Waldorf teachers. It is astounding that they show such a level of commitment for that amount of money when, for example, Elizabeth could work for double that amount in the state sector.
I should declare that I am a member of the Educational Institute of Scotland. I do not support a lot of its thinking on many things, but I am horrified that people are earning only £12,000.
But it is the only way that we have been able to exist.
The view of the board of trustees is that we can only pay our teachers out of the income that we have. As Betty said, the percentage of families in her school that are in the £15,000 and under bracket—
Most of them are teachers.
I am aware that time is catching up with us. I will take a final question from Ken Macintosh.
Like Ian, I welcome the holistic and pluralistic attitude to teaching in the education system that you say would accept Steiner teaching, particularly at kindergarten level on which there is much debate. There is a lot to be said for postponing formal education until the age of six or seven.
No. We have never drafted amendments before. We suggest that as part of the HMI team there should be a representative from the Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship in London, which is the crediting body that has prepared the levels of attainment, or the Scottish Association of Steiner Waldorf Education, which is the Scottish branch of that body.
So Steiner Waldorf representatives would be in addition to, not instead of, HMI inspectors.
Yes.
One of the difficulties with the HMI inspection in Edinburgh was that even though we spoke to the inspectors prior to the inspection about the aims, philosophy and so on of the school, the work load of HMI means that it is hard for them to take in the information
I understand that.
It is difficult at times. It would be good to have someone who knows what we are trying to say.
Absolutely. You are not locking HMI out of the schools.
No, not at all.
The aim is to help.
My second question is about costs. What would it cost the state system to adopt all four Steiner schools?
We do not have a complete figure. The cost is hard to quantify, because if the state were to start funding us, you might want to make changes to things such as salaries and pensions. The turnover of the Edinburgh Rudoph Steiner School is £800,000. We own all of our buildings. Our basic salary is £10,800.
Are all four schools roughly the same size?
No. We are the main school. We have been in Edinburgh for 60 years, so we are longer established than the other schools, and our pupils range from three to 18, which is not the case in any of the other schools.
We think that there are about 500 pupils in the four schools. We would not dream of asking for more money per pupil than state schools currently get, as that would create double standards. That is an important principle.
Thank you for answering our questions. As you have heard, we will be considering the draft bill when it is returned to us by the Executive, and we will keep you informed about our deliberations.