“Improving our Schools”
Dharmendra Kanani (Commission for Racial Equality):
Thank you very much for giving the CRE this opportunity to come and speak to you again on the improvement in Scottish education bill. I know that you are not too keen on presentations on overhead projectors—neither am I—but I hope that by using overheads I can skim through some of the key principles. You have already received a briefing from the CRE and CERES. I hope that you have had the chance to read it. We are keen to discuss ways in which the bill can be improved in terms of equality and race equality, to ensure that some improvements can be embedded in it.
With this bill, we have an important opportunity to achieve institutional equality—that is one of the key sentiments for the Commission for Racial Equality and for the Centre for Education for Racial Equality in Scotland. If we have learned anything from the Stephen Lawrence inquiry and the recommendations that emerged from it in the Macpherson report, it is that embedding principles of equality, and race equality in particular, in legislation of this kind is absolutely essential. We are concerned that, in the draft of the bill, there is no sense of how we in Scotland will achieve equality of opportunity, let alone race equality. We should focus our minds on what is actually being proposed, on what opportunities exist and on how we might effect long-term change.
The overhead shows a set of principles that we will have to consider if a world-class education system is to emerge as a result of this bill. People should be able to enjoy participation of all kinds: educational participation, lifelong learning participation, social participation and cultural participation. When we consider the education system as a whole, other areas such as political participation and economic participation will have to be considered. Those are basic principles that we believe should underpin a revised bill.
In the review of section 1 of the Education (Scotland) Act 1980, we welcome the proposal that ministers should have a new duty. That presents the opportunity of making ministers more accountable and of sharing the responsibility for the provision of education in Scotland. If, by including ministers in that responsibility, the aim of the proposal in the bill is to achieve greater accountability, that duty on ministers should be clear, transparent and measurable. If that is the aim, we need some honest and open dialogue and negotiation with civil servants, this committee and others on how we can achieve it.
At the CRE, one of our key concerns is that the ministerial duty should include specific references to schedule 5 of the Scotland Act 1998. Why is the opportunity to include a reference to schedule 5 missed? If the intention is to achieve a modern world-class education system—an intention that is written throughout the bill—it seems regressive, to a certain extent, that the opportunity has been missed to include a reference to the equal opportunities responsibilities that the Executive and Parliament have. We hope that, in your scrutiny of the bill, you will ensure that that opportunity is not missed when the bill finally becomes legislation.
The tenor of the bill is continuous improvement, and the setting of objectives and national priorities, which will feed from the level of the Scottish Executive to local authorities and schools. We are concerned that across Scotland we do not have any reliable information on the education experiences of black and ethnic minority pupils. We have pockets of information, for example, from Edinburgh and Glasgow, but there is a complete absence of consistent information that identifies the education needs of black and ethnic minority pupils and others. If ministerial priorities and local objectives for improvement are to be set, how will they be achieved without that kind of information?
We recommend strongly the introduction of standard ethnic monitoring procedures across education management, provision and outcomes. We are conscious that there is a tendency among public service organisations in particular to feel that ethnic monitoring is problematic, difficult and resource intensive, and that people do not understand it, because the notion of self-categorisation is open to confusion.
Equality agencies such as the CRE, CERES and the Equal Opportunities Commission should have the opportunity to advise Government on how ethnic monitoring can be promoted across particular sectors of the public service domain. In that respect, I hope that ethnic monitoring becomes standardised in schools and local authorities, so that we have an overall picture of what is happening in education. That would enable us to plan effectively for the education needs, current and projected, not only of black and ethnic minority pupils, but of Scottish pupils across the board.
I have made this point already, but it is important to reiterate that one of the key concerns of CERES and the CRE is the absence of a sizeable black and ethnic minority population in the teaching profession in Scotland. There must be measures to ensure that representation is balanced, and that it is increased. If there are opportunities to use positive action measures, we should use them. We can provide you with guidance on that.
My next point may be contentious, but it is important. We are in the context of setting national priorities. We said that there is an absence of evidence on some of the issues, yet locally we are aware of what is going on. Our recent casework suggests that there is still a great distance to be covered between commitments, policy manuals and practice. There are still situations in which local authorities and schools are not managing racial harassment effectively, and are not meeting the specific needs of black and ethnic minority pupils, particularly with regard to language needs.
We are not aware of what is happening in terms of educational achievement, so one of the key issues is that if we are to achieve a modern schooling system in Scotland, and abide by some of the principles of what this new Government and democracy is about, we must ensure that an equality, or race equality, priority is set at ministerial level. How we achieve that will be a matter for the coming eight months or so.
We are concerned about consultation. You will be aware that the bill suggests that there is no need to regulate how consultation takes place at a local level. Our experience suggests that the practice of consultation is patchy. Some authorities are quite robust and engage with black and ethnic minority communities and other stakeholders effectively but, across the board, the quality of consultation depends on the size of the community or the political commitment of local authorities or head teachers, for example. We have the opportunity to establish coherent consultation guidelines and a framework for engaging with black and ethnic minority communities.
I am minded of the fact that down south, Government has sought to institute regulations on how local government should consult. In our briefing, we cited the example of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the fact that local crime and disorder strategies have to be subject to rigorous consultation. We recommend that we take a similar approach in Scotland. If we cannot do that, we will want to know why.
The theme that runs throughout this presentation is that if we are to achieve some of the aims of the Scottish Executive, we must be explicit about race equality issues and school planning. One of our main concerns over devolved school management is the opportunity that schools and local authorities have to absent good practice or negate their responsibilities with regard to the bilingual education needs of pupils, and investment in equal opportunities, anti-racism and multicultural work in schools.
While we support the proposals in the bill, safeguards must be built in to ensure that schools do not opt out of their race equality and equal opportunities responsibilities, because that could happen in Scotland, where such responsibilities are not a priority and are not in the foreground of many people's thinking, particularly at a local level. We are concerned that the best-value principle of continuous improvement be embedded in performance indicators of pupil expenditure and so on.
Our casework experience suggests that schools increasingly are cutting their provision for the language needs of bilingual pupils who have English as a second language. We need to achieve a position in which we can effectively assess the situation. Our example comes from Glasgow, but I am sure that the practice extends elsewhere. If we do not safeguard against some of those issues, bad practice will emerge and persist.
Scottish police forces have agreed that next year there will be a thematic inspection of race and community policing. We recommend that there should be the opportunity to have thematic inspection of race equality. We are concerned that we have a draft code of practice on inspections, yet there is a tendency for departments not to speak to each other. Her Majesty's inspectorate of constabulary is working closely with us on framing protocols for thematic inspections for the future, which weave in some of the issues centrally; yet in the draft code of practice for school inspections there is a complete absence of any reference to equality measures.
If we are to achieve a robust system of inspection, why are those issues not mentioned in the draft code of practice? Why is there no target setting in terms of how Her Majesty's inspectors of schools will quality assure some of the race equality issues? We feel strongly that the code of practice should be amended to include specific reference to race equality.
School boards should be asked how they intend to engage with, and seek the views of, black and ethnic minority parents. There is a lot of evidence from CERES—patchy though it is—from central region and Wester Hailes that, increasingly, parents do not feel part of the process, are not being engaged with and do not understand the process. We are all aware that parental involvement is key to achievements in lifelong learning. That is borne out in evidence from down south.
A key concern has emerged from the casework regarding placing requests that was done for local race equality councils over the past five or six years. On occasion, black and ethnic minority parents have sought to place their children in schools that our outwith their catchment area, and where places are limited. In such circumstances, the fear of racial harassment has not been given equal weighting with other considerations. We recommend that it should be, given the specific issues that face black and ethnic minority parents.
I shall end there, and we can have a discussion.
You spoke about early intervention, for which new money has been made available to local authorities. Are there examples of good practice, where proper monitoring has been done or the needs of black and ethnic minority children have been taken into consideration, for example, with classroom assistants?
Not so much in Scotland. It is unfortunate that my colleague from CERES is not here to speak about some of her experiences. I know from my experience down south that there have been opportunities, for example, in Camden with the sure start initiative, where black and ethnic minority parents have been involved from an early stage, in particular when looking at pre-school provision.
A lot of work has been invested in outreach by local education authorities. Research, particularly from Birmingham, has demonstrated the impact of early intervention on the achievements of particular communities. For example, over a number of years, children from the Bangladeshi community were tested against white pupils and those who had not had pre-school education. The difference in achievement over a five-year period was shown to be immense. There is consensus that it is important to have early intervention, because it has a marked impact on educational performance and achievement, but in Scotland, we have not determined sufficiently the needs of black and ethnic minority community groups.
I guess that most people support the principles that you outlined, although I should only speak for myself. I accept what you said about training, inspection, monitoring, recording and so on. At that general level, a lot—or some—of what we are discussing may be incorporated into the bill.
We keep coming back to the details of how things will work in schools. I was interested in what you said in paragraph 3.3 of your submission. You accept that recording racist incidents is important, but you say that:
"The concentration on recording of statistics and incidents does not address a very real issue which is that young people need to be empowered to raise their complaints and know they will be effectively dealt with in the first place."
You then talk about qualitative methods being required alongside quantitative methods. That raises the important issue that assessment can be difficult. Could you help us by telling us what kinds of indicators you want to have, because that is one of the difficult areas with which we have been trying to grapple?
A more imaginative approach to assessment and standard setting is required. For example, if the sole indicator of success were to be simply recording racial incidents, we would not get the full picture. One could conduct pupil research—ad hoc, dip sampling of pupils' experiences—to identify whether pupils feel more confident. One could examine how anti-racism is raised in the curriculum. One could measure parental involvement, by asking whether black and ethnic minority parents feel confident that the school is addressing their concerns or whether they are sufficiently engaged with the school's procedures—one could examine the number of inquiries about schooling issues and the outcomes to those inquiries. One could measure involvement in parents' evenings and so on. A plethora of indicators could be established, from what happens in the classroom through to school mechanisms for parental involvement.
That was a helpful response.
On addressing anti-racism through the curriculum, do you think that the current mechanisms—guidelines and so on—are adequate? You have had much experience in England, where there is a national curriculum. While I am not advocating that approach, is it your perception that it might be more difficult for such issues to be addressed by the curriculum in Scotland, or are you satisfied that—
No, we are not satisfied. Scotland does not have a particularly robust approach to anti-racist work within the school system, although I have come across a lot of good practice in areas such as Edinburgh, the Lothians and Glasgow. The situation is not much better down south where, most recently, a regressive position has been taken in the new opportunities available in the national curriculum, in that much of the anti-racist work will be placed in citizenship education, without much sophisticated methodology. We need guidance across Scotland on how to introduce, in a variety of ways, concepts of equality, race equality and anti-racism into the classroom.
Therefore, there are two issues: the content of the curriculum and the mechanism with which to enforce it. You say that you are not happy with the content, either in England or in Scotland.
The content is patchy and inconsistent.
Are you satisfied that we have the mechanisms to ensure that, once we have developed good content, the curriculum is delivered in Scotland?
I do not think so—there is no coherence. Ultimately, it is not clear from the draft bill how the curriculum content will be measured or monitored, apart from figures for achievement. While we appreciate that the system has operated for some time in Scotland, there is scope for a clearer approach to standardising work around equality issues within the curriculum.
To follow on from Malcolm Chisholm's first point, you have made a number of valid recommendations in your submission. Has the CRE or CERES proposed amendments to the bill?
We will be doing so as the bill journeys through its passage. One of our key priorities will be to ensure that the new duty on ministers will include specific reference to equal opportunities and to schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998. We hope that progress will follow on from that, but before the bill obtains royal assent, we will do our best to ensure that all opportunities to discuss amendments are taken, including close work with the committee.
Once the committee has concluded its consultation process, we would like to know what members' priorities are—the minimum level of the equality duty that you expect the bill to deliver and the changes that you expect to propose, to increase that level.
What practical action is needed to recruit more black and ethnic teachers in Scotland?
We need to conduct a snapshot study of why there is only the current number of black and ethnic minority teachers in the teaching profession.
Is it very low?
Yes—it is extremely low.
We should also engage in positive action measures to make the profession attractive, and we should identify whether there are unjustifiable stumbling blocks. Colleges and institutions should consider how they recruit and try to understand the problem better.
The issue of bullying is very worrying. You talked about the fear of racial harassment and about schools that have limited places—what practical solution is there to that problem?
Currently, schools and education departments have clear criteria for agreeing placing requests. When committees assess such requests, a parent's assertion, based on experience, that the child's fear of racial harassment is a feature of the request, should be considered equally with the other criteria. The fear of racial harassment should be written into the current criteria.
I am concerned whether the bill concentrates enough on improving other aspects of education, such as the health and fitness of our school-age youngsters and making them aware of the importance of health and fitness, particularly given that recent reports show an alarming rise in obesity.
You talked earlier of the need to measure black and ethnic minority pupils' educational attainment and the standards that are not being achieved within our schools. Do you plan to try to establish whether there is a greater problem in the black and ethnic minority community in relation to rates of health and fitness, particularly given some of the cultural barriers that might prevent pupils from taking part in physical education in current school curricula? If you have such plans, could you outline them and, if not, will you give some thought to that issue?
There are no such plans. We are looking at the whole picture. As I said earlier, it is quite alarming that, both in Scotland and elsewhere to a certain extent, there is no reliable information about what is happening to black and ethnic minority pupils in our schools. Therefore, it is difficult to get to the stage where we can discuss what is happening at pre-school level or, in schools, the levels of attainment of black and ethnic minority pupils, let alone consider fitness or health issues.
We know that there are certain patterns of ill health in black and ethnic minority communities, such as diabetes or thalassaemia in particular Asian communities. However, there is only patchy information about and awareness of the traits and patterns of ill health later in life. The connection with education is not clear and there are generational differences. Our starting point must be a more meaningful scrutiny of what is taking place in schools, so that we are able to meet specific needs and to plan for the future. The present system does not allow for that and we must achieve a position where it does.
At paragraph 2 of your written submission and in your presentation, you refer to your concerns about the potential for the bill to be in conflict with, or to override, the Race Relations Act 1976. Could you expand on that?
A significant case involving the local education authority in Cleveland dealt with the concept of parental choice. In that case, a white parent chose to remove her child from a predominantly black school because she was concerned that the child was losing its ethnic identity. On that occasion, the Education Act 1980 took precedence over the Race Relations Act 1976, although we felt that the actions and choices that were taken were discriminatory. We are concerned that primary weighting should be given to the Race Relations Act 1976, which would be consistent with the obligations placed on local authorities under the education sections of the act. The CRE's "Code of Practice (Scotland) for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in Education", which we circulated to members in our initial, thick briefing pack, contains more detail on that issue.
In paragraph 4 of your written submission, which deals with the arrangements for consultation, you note that ministers do not intend to regulate local consultation processes. In paragraph 4.3, you say that guidance should be issued by the Scottish Executive on local consultation. Do you think that guidance would be sufficient, or should there be a reference to local consultation in the bill, by way of an amendment?
The paper reflects our desire to compromise, because we understand how things happen and the minimum level of guidance that we might achieve. However, we would welcome regulation and a specific provision on consultation in the bill, which would make it clear that people have to consult and that there are ways in which consultation should take place. Guidance would follow on from that—that is our optimum position.
I apologise for being late. Please forgive me if I ask about something that has been addressed already.
I was interested in what you had to say about pre-school education and youngsters with special educational needs. Are there specific issues about consultation with black and ethnic minority parents? In both those areas, parental involvement is crucial, but you say that our education system is flawed in the way in which it works with black and ethnic minority families. What solutions should we consider, particularly in relation to special educational needs and whether young people are placed outwith mainstream education inappropriately?
You said that there was little evidence about what happens to young black people in schools. Do you have anecdotal evidence on truancy among young black people, which might arise from their school experiences or from the way in which, if the cause of a disciplinary problem is not correctly identified, the disciplinary system might deal with them inappropriately?
I will deal first with your question about consultation with parents on pre-school education and special educational needs.
As can be seen from the Birmingham research that I quoted and from the work that has been carried out in London, there is consensus down south that while pre-school education is good for everyone, it is an absolute must for groups such as Bangladeshi pupils, given the differential patterns of achievement for such groups. In Scotland, there is a lack of information, but we can draw on the experience down south.
The CRE undertook a formal investigation of the education department of the then Strathclyde Regional Council and its provision for bilingual learners with special educational needs. We found that there was a tendency to confuse language issues with special educational needs. There are huge issues there, in terms of understanding what a child's needs are. Bilingual learners have specific needs. We found that parental involvement, from the beginning of the process to its conclusion, was minimal. Parents were not effectively consulted or involved and their language needs were not taken on board.
The investigation, which we concluded some years ago, resulted in guidance and recommendations for local authorities and schools across Scotland; that is contained in the pack that we circulated in the initial briefing. There are clear recommendations for what schools should be doing. In the development of the bill, we should all be mindful of that experience and ensure that there are safeguards so that what we witnessed in one authority is not replicated elsewhere. On special educational needs, we have to be clear that despite guidance being in place, practice can be far removed from what it suggests should take place. That formal investigation gave us the opportunity to research that more effectively; it is time to consider it again.
The commission does not have even anecdotal information on truancy. Some of our racial equality councils have raised issues, but no consistent pattern or trend has emerged. Research was undertaken in Glasgow—which led to the bid from the Glasgow Anti-Racist Alliance for social inclusion partnership funding—that identified high levels of disaffection among young black Glaswegians, with the implications for future aspirations and full participation. We do not yet have sufficient information to comment on levels and patterns in the school system itself.
The Government is targeting money at alternatives to exclusion and trying to maintain young people in mainstream education. If it is not aware that there are race equality issues that are making young black people disaffected with school, some of that money might not be targeted to their needs. Targeting will be much more general. It is an area that would be worth exploring.
I think so. In fact, one of the key themes for us is that the bill provides a significant opportunity to do a lot of good. Our concern is that, in relation to race equality issues, there will be a tendency to say, "We do not know about that, so it is not a problem," or, "Let us wait and see what the impact is." A modern approach, based on experience elsewhere, suggests that we should pre-empt the issues and ensure that we embed some key principles, not only in the framework of the bill but in the guidance, so that we achieve the minimum positions that we have articulated. It is important, for this committee in particular, to raise that consistently in the next eight to 10 months.
How would the differences in the demographics of ethnic minority communities affect the delivery of improvements in the way in which equal opportunities in education are dealt with from local authority to local authority? I would imagine that in Glasgow, where a higher proportion of the population is from ethnic minorities, the impact would be different from that in, say, one of the local authorities in my area, North Lanarkshire, where the proportion is much less. What are the disparities and what is the impact?
There are disparities which will have an impact on the quality of what is achieved locally. Whereas in areas such as Glasgow there will be sufficient pressure on the authority to do something effective, other areas will be perceived to be predominantly white, and it will be felt that they are not a priority.
One of the key issues for us is that we have to move away from the argument about numbers and how we define equality issues as they emerge. A commitment to equal opportunities and race equality should not be dependent on the size of the ethnic community in a locality. In the Highlands, for example, would it be sufficient that, because of the size of the population, not even scant attention was paid to specific needs? Is it sufficient that pupils in the Highlands do not have the conceptual tools to deal with equal opportunities and an anti-racist position, or a clear sense of gender and disability issues? Some of those philosophical and practical questions need to be asked in the framework that is being established.
There is a tendency in Scotland, in our approach to some of those issues, for development on equality issues to be proportionate to the size of the community. We need to move away from such an approach; at the end of the day it depends on the societal value system that we want to create in Scotland. On a practical level, we know that the approach will differ according to the size of the community. Individually and collectively, people in all parts of Scotland need radically to scrutinise their approach to what is being planned and what they think they are achieving in the delivery and management of education. We need standard approaches which, to a certain extent, cannot be open to negotiation. There have to be minimum levels throughout Scotland. That also relates to the advice that we are giving to police authorities and police forces. We need to standardise emerging practice across Scotland so that it does not rely on the size of the community.
I apologise for being late.
Following on from what you said, in paragraph 6 of your submission, on supporting best performance in schools, you say:
"Sanctions should be considered if schools remain resistant to change."
What sort of sanctions do you have in mind?
Perhaps financial? Through discussion with the committee, Scottish Executive officials and so on, we should work out a formula for a meaningful sanction for schools that resist development in the area of equal opportunities and racial equality. People always move quickly in response to something tangible such as financial sanctions. That might be one means of imposing sanctions, but I am sure that there are others.
I was slightly puzzled by paragraph 7:
"Performance indicators relating to pupil expenditure should not affect the provision for special and specific needs."
Why?
If a school wishes to stick to a spend formula, there might be a tendency to reduce pupil expenditure. Recently in one authority, we came across the provision of English as a second language being cut, simply because of money. Because it was seen as ad hoc, and as something that might not address the needs of the whole school population, it had not featured as a priority in the mainstream budget spend. We are concerned that if performance indicators are related to pupil expenditure as a whole, it is more likely that specific provision will be cut.
May I ask the committee a couple of questions? First, much evidence has been provided to you over the past few months, and you have heard from many groups. I was quite heartened by the dialogue that emerged when civil servants made representations to you some time ago. Is any consensus emerging about what you might ask for in terms of the bill's development, and about your recommendations to the Executive?
Secondly, do you have any intention of inviting Sam Galbraith to the committee, either before the revised bill is published or during its first stages? We recommend that you do, but you might have your own thoughts on that.
We have not yet discussed any of the evidence from organisations. At the conveners group, I raised the issue of where the Equal Opportunities Committee fits into the progress of the bill. The committee will either give a draft stage 1 report to the Executive or we will add our proposals to those of the Education, Culture and Sport Committee. That committee has not yet begun to consider the bill, so we have a bit of time. I hope that we will have Sam Galbraith back, so that we can ask him further questions in the light of the briefings that we have had. We might also invite other organisations back.
Are there any other issues?
I have had representations from several people on the issue of keeping disabled children in the mainstream of education, rather than having special schools.
It is a bit early to reach any conclusions on that, because the committee has not discussed it or taken evidence from parents who do not want special needs education to be mainstreamed.
We have taken a lot of evidence, so we will probably discuss the next stage when we consider our work programme. What strikes me is that we were not involved in the consultation period, partly because it ended in October. The first piece of work that we did—of which I am sure you would approve—was on the Macpherson report, which meant that we were unable to get all the education work done in time for the consultation.
It is emerging that the Parliament provides many opportunities to feed into the process. The revised bill will probably be published before we have the chance to question Sam Galbraith, but we can still feed into stage 1 of the bill. As we saw last week, with the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Bill, there is a report at stage 1 and amendments at stage 2, so although we have missed the consultation period, we have not missed the boat.
Although we did not submit an official report on the Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Bill, I raised the issue of same-sex relationships at the Justice and Home Affairs Committee, of which I am a member. I do not know whether the minister said that same-sex couples would have equal status, but adults with incapacity would be counted as spouses and cohabitees, and so on.
We will discuss our work plan later, and how we will prioritise issues to ensure that we have the maximum opportunity to contribute to everything that is happening in the Parliament. You are welcome to stay for that discussion.
Thank you.
There are cross-cutting issues in our recommendations in response to the action plan. It would be useful to know how the Scottish Executive intends to meld what is stated in the plan with the opportunities that the bill provides. At some point, it would be useful to find out what you as a committee think about our proposals on the new duty including specific reference to schedule 5 to the Scotland Act 1998. After you have called Sam Galbraith to the committee, we would welcome the opportunity to come back to discuss some of the specifics, on the amendments and other measures.
We would be happy with that, too. Does anyone else have anything to add?
Thank you for coming and giving evidence to the committee. We will no doubt see you again—you are welcome to stay, but I can understand it if you have other things to do.
I have Jackie Baillie's forum.
That is much more important. [Laughter.] I was joking.