The original reason for a network of school buses in their recognisable yellow in the States was that distances often being so vast, it is unrealistic to expect children to walk or cycle into school. In the UK this is generally less of a problem and we have a wide public transport system – so why bother to copy the US?

The answer is that there is a plethora of further advantages. It provides a guarantee that your child actually reaches school every morning; their journey will be safe; the driver is guaranteed to be CRB-checked and a regular face for those on board; the buses provided are far cheaper to use than regular public transport (and are often free); the child arrives at school in a relaxed state of mind, helping them to be ready to sit down and start the school day, and the environmental benefit of having fewer school run cars clogging up the roads is self-evident.

On Monday 28 April, about thirty invitees with jobs relating to the transport industry, education and local/district councils gathered in London’s Offices of the Confederation of Passenger Transport for a seminar chaired by David Blunkett and three members of his Yellow School Bus (YSB) Commission team. The idea was to pool everyone’s distinct expertise to discuss the pros and cons of developing a nationwide YSB system in the UK, among both maintained and independent schools. There are already several pilot YSBs in operation, one of which has been successfully running for several years at ISC’s own Robert Gordon’s College in Aberdeen.

Of those UK schools that provide buses, some make considerable financial sacrifices to buy their own, charging very little or nothing to pupils, or they charter buses from private companies. As well as frequently being costly, these buses often cannot be designed with the school in mind (for example, featuring the school emblem), since later in the day they might be used to ferry grannies to Brighton.

A greater injustice is that in some maintained sector schools, pupils can receive free transport if they live within a certain distance of the school, but then ironically do not qualify for free transport if they live outside of that zone – that is, further away and in more need of such a facility. The government’s public services website states that “local authorities must provide transport where they consider it necessary to ensure that a child goes to school. If transport is necessary, then it must be provided free of charge”. The YSB scheme would seem to offer a solution to this if the idea is to assign a YSB to every school and enable all children to use them. Put like this, the worry naturally arises: might it be rather over-optimistic to hope that every child in every school could have access to a YSB?

Two niggling questions remain to be answered, despite vigorous discussion on Monday.

Firstly, would there be a charge to use these buses and is 50p a reasonable one-way fare? Secondly, if pupils didn’t have to pay, where would the money come from to fund the assembly, maintenance and running of the YSB fleets?

One suggestion from a coach operator present was to raise taxes paid by car-owners; another was to continue with what has been a success already with (among others) Runnymede District Council: corporate sponsorship. The theme park giant Thorpe Park ‘sponsors’ a fleet of yellow school buses: they pay for the upkeep and the buses display their logo, thereby advertising Thorpe Park and giving it social brownie points. Interestingly this is rather similar to the set up of Academies. However, presumably this will not work everywhere. A remote countryside prep school may have no appropriately sized or interested companies nearby that would find it in their interests to sponsor a fleet of buses to supply the school.

One final interesting point to consider is that because independent and maintained schools often have different start and finish times to their school day, school buses that serve the local independent schools have to do a trip encompassing an unnecessarily large area – sometimes picking up the furthest pupil hours before they eventually get dropped off at their school.

Were pupils from the two sectors to share buses, the staggered start times would mean a more tight-knit collection zone for the driver, shorter on-board waiting times for each child who is picked up, and a lower overall carbon emission time on the road. There are certainly still some creases to iron out, but overall the YSB could be a recipe for success both on and off the road, and in the drive to a greener school run.

I am touched to have received thankyou letters and flowers from a grateful parent, head and SENCo of an ISC girls school in South London.

The school had given a full bursary, a few years ago, to a brilliant, potentially high achieving, young woman with Asperger’s syndrome. As she grew into adolescence, however, she also developed a severe eating disorder. The combination of obsessive perfectionism and depression led to a pattern of self-harming behaviours, even at school.

The school was able to provide a small, nurturing, single-sex environment with a low staff:pupil ratio that would not have been available in local state schools. They were convinced that they were the best place for this very vulnerable child. But, while 100% committed to meeting her devastating combination of special educational needs, they were struggling to fund the additional support the pupil needed to stay safe and to access the curriculum.

An application was made for a Statement of SEN with a view to the local authority providing “top-up” funding for a one-to-one supporter. The authority was extremely reluctant to recognise any duty towards the young person, despite her high level of need, as she was in an independent school.

Having met the SENCo and head over coffee at the ISC SEN Conference in November, I was able to be on hand to guide them through the ensuing dispute which has now been settled without recourse to the courts. The authority continues to insist that “we don’t have to do this,” but nonetheless has agreed to fund a full-time one-to-one assistant for the pupil through a Statement of SEN.

Speaking to the SENCo this week, she said that they have managed to recruit a marvellous assistant and the whole situation has “lifted”.

The Head wrote: “ I am quite sure that we would not have achieved this result without you. It is good to know that we have such professionalism supporting us.”

Sarah McKimm
Education Counsel

So what are independent schools doing? At the end of January, the Girls Schools Association (GSA), in association with The Cheltenham Ladies’ College, proved that the independent sector is ready to tackle the issues of the environment with the first ever ‘Global Caring Conference’. The conference focused on the environmental challenges the world faces today and called for the girls to use their leadership skills to become involved.

Get angry about climate change. That was the gist of Jonathon Porritt’s keynote address. Porritt is co-founder of Forum for the Future, and an eminent writer, broadcaster and commentator on sustainable development. Indeed, the level of UK public awareness of environmental issues and the government’s engagement in environmental issues today is in large part down to Jonathon’s uncompromising stance over the last decade.

Professor K Vala Ragnarsdottir, Professor of Environmental Sustainability at Bristol University explained how she had come to work on issues affecting climate change. She urged girls to take action fast, as soon it will be too late.

Former international swimmer Simone Mann and co-founding director of Cheltenham-based Commercial Group - one of the first companies of its kind to become carbon neutral - was the final speaker of the day. Simone spoke inspiringly of the practical steps she took to make her company carbon neutral and the ways the business has benefited as a result – no doubt inspiring schools to follow suit.Lunch continued the sustainability theme, with all ingredients sourced from within a 25-mile radius of Cheltenham.Over 200 pupils and staff from 52 GSA schools attended the conference, with everyone taking part in a dynamic post-lunch workshop to share ideas and create action plans on how they could make a positive impact on the environment within their own schools. Ideas included conducting a carbon dioxide audit, introducing ‘Fairtrade’ status for schools and using the search engine Blackle.com. The girls left the conference highly motivated, determined to make a difference and focused on one of the key messages from Jonathon Porritt – there is very little time and it is their generation that needs to take action.

Schools can learn more about becoming sustainable and more environmentally aware at http://www.eco-schools.org.uk.

What is your school doing to be more environmentally friendly? Leave us a comment to let us know…

Is there an alternative? What would education look like if courses were designed on a different approach? An approach which embodies a picture of knowledge not as a system of bite-sized learning outcomes, but as a world to be explored, on which journey many routes are possible?

At Rugby we have found our curriculum being transformed by the development of this approach. It began in 2004 with the introduction of the AS ‘Perspectives on Science’ course, a national development which we have supported since it began in 1999. This qualification has no prescribed content. Teaching takes place, but the focus is on the development by students of the research, analysis and presentation skills needed to engage in historical, ethical and/or philosophical discussion of issues raised by science. The crucial point about the course is that the ‘content’ element is determined by the skills basis. Students are equipped with the intellectual tools needed to begin learning for themselves.

This approach has shaped and informed the new Edexcel ‘Extended Project’ qualification, being piloted here at Rugby and nationally. The EP offers the chance for a real breath of fresh air alongside an examinations dominated curriculum. It is equivalent to an AS in UCAS points terms and is entirely assessed by means of a student project and presentation. It has been warmly welcomed by HE. At Rugby we have developed a suite of EP programmes based on the ‘Perspectives on Science’ model. On May 13 we will host a conference to explore this exciting opportunity. Speakers include world-renowned academics such as Simon Blackburn, the Professor of Philosophy at Cambridge, and tele-historian and Harvard Professor Niall Ferguson. For more details see the website for Rugby school

Deloitte’s conclusion? “Government-wide security initiatives to maintain and enhance roles, responsibilities and accountability for the security of systems such as ContactPoint that extend across multiple Departments and other organizations.” Parents should be very wary of consultant doublespeak. All databases are liable to security lapses. The question for the Government is whether a “cost-benefit” analysis of the security of information about every child in England is the right approach. The security of our children’s data is priceless. The only safe, secure way to safeguard our children’s data is to scrap the whole ContactPoint system and concentrate instead on a simpler and safer system targeted only at children who are at risk as ISC pointed out in its consultation response.

At the end of July, just as schools had closed their doors for the summer holidays, the DCSF issued a consultation on a proposal to transfer its responsibility for the registration and regulation of Independent Schools and Non Maintained Special Schools (NMSSs) to Ofsted. We had been given no advance notice that this was on the cards, so coupled with the fact that the proposals are based on serious factual errors, we didn’t have much time to react and try to change the Government’s mind.

In essence, the proposals will mean that Ofsted, rather than the Secretary of State, becomes accountable for regulating the whole independent sector. That doesn’t mean inspecting schools directly. That area will remain with The Independent Schools Inspectorate (ISI). But it would mean that Ofsted would become the interpreter of regulation for the ISI and therefore dictate the inspection agenda. We want the ISI to report to Ed Balls just like Ofdted does in the maintained sector. Also Ofsted doesn’t have the capacity to take on new responsibilities. ISC chief executive Jonathan Shephard referred to Ofsted as a ‘python-like bureaucracy struggling to digest its existing workload’. Only recently, the Parliamentary Education and Skills Committee questioned Ofsted’s ‘fitness for purpose’ - so ISC is not alone in voicing such concerns.

We also sent a response to the DCSF regarding its proposal to abolish Approved Special School (ASS) status. Here our concerns relate directly to the welfare of those children with Special Educational Needs (SEN), and whose best interests, we believe, would immediately be jeopardised if the status of Approved Special Schools were to disappear. The current Approved system, introduced back in the 80’s, provides a system of positive approval to make sure that any independent school catering for SEN pupils is able to meet their very specific needs.The Approved ‘kitemark’ effectively indicates where such provision exists - so without it, local authorities would have to place a child with SEN without this guidance. ISC is not sure whether local education authorities (LEAs) have the will or the resources to fully investigate the expertise on offer in an individual schools - resulting, most likely, in mis-matched placements. We have heard from a number of parents over the last few weeks with children who have already really suffered through their LEA placing them at the wrong school, unable to copy with or cater for their needs. If Approved status were to be abolished, the risk is that ALL children could be misplaced, not just a few. The consequences of the wrong placement being made are devastating. Send a child, especially one with SEN, to a non-specialist school and the effect can last a lifetime.

ISC has done, and will continue to respond to Government consultations, on behalf of the sector.
We’d welcome your thoughts on these important issues as well - so do get in touch.

Let’s start with Labour. The big themes set by Ed Balls at the conference were: tailoring education to individual needs, improving results for the most socially disadvantaged and aiming for a world class education for all. Interestingly while Balls had some unkind words to say about academic selection, he always spoke of aiming for the standards enjoyed by the “privileged few”. With Gordon Brown promising much more 1-2-1 education, as part of his tailoring agenda, another boost in state sector funding per pupil would seem to be on the cards.

Off platform, Balls and schools minister Jim Knight handled almost all of the fringe events. OFSTED received a battering from the unions (”death by tick boxes” was one memorable phrase) and Balls said that he wanted it to become less burdensome.

Balls also faced some flak from members over academies. The oft repeated question was: “why can a flat earth society buy into our children’s education for 2m?” Balls said: “We are trying to bring academies into the mainstream of education . . . they are becoming part of the family of local schools.”

Partnerships were also a big theme. As well as closer working between schools, Balls is keen to see schools working with children’s services.

Over at the LibDem conference, education front bencher David Laws came up with the one of the surprises of the week: a pro-choice, independent-leaning philosophy. “We wont tell head teachers how to spend money . . . we will give teachers the freedom to innnovate . . . choice is not a dirty word.” The caveat, though, is no freedom on admissions and a minimum set curriculum.

Finally the Conservatives. Heavily based on the widely trailed public services review carried out by Dame Pauline Perry and Stephen Dorrell (Conservatives Public Sector White Paper), the press picked up on Michale Gove’s “blazers for all” policy but behind that facade were serious proposals for pioneer schools (similar to US charter schools), a benchmarking scheme called Comprehensively Excellent, more power to heads over discipline, reduced liability for accidents on school trips, an end to forced inclusion of special needs students and a return to Churchill on the curriculum.

I’m only four weeks into this job and the sector (other than as a parent and partner to a state school teacher), so I’m not sure what to make of it all other than: if it’s Labour we will all need to review our partnerships with state schools and children’s services; and if it is the Tories we may be facing some interesting new competition (or opportunities) from pioneer schools. What’s more, if the LibDems hold the balance, it is unlikely to be a disaster.

What do you think?

Andy Cook

ISC Communications Director