Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of
the number of young people in alternative education.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for
Education () (Con)
My Lords, in January 2021 there were 12,800 pupils whose main
registration was in a state place funded alternative provision,
or AP. A further 9,200 pupils were dual subsidiary registered in
state place funded AP, meaning their main registration was at
another school. Additionally, local authorities arranged 32,700
placements for children and young people in other independent or
non-maintained registered and unregistered settings. Around 59%
of these were in independent and non-maintained special schools,
many of which are not AP placements.
(LD)
My Lords, of the 40,000 or so young people in alternative
provision it is widely recognised that once they finish their
schooling, many leavers—particularly those with special
educational needs—still have anxieties of a large institutional
environment. The only funded progression opportunity that exists
at entry level would be a further education college. Will the
Minister look at supporting these year 11 leavers in alternative
provision and pupil referral units who require time to develop
and progress towards level 2 with post-16 alternative education
funding?
(Con)
I recognise the work the noble Lord has done in this really
important area. He is right that the percentage of young people
leaving alternative provision who go on to be NEET is far too
high. Over the last two years we have provided £15 million of
funding for the AP year 11 transition fund, which allows settings
to support year 11 students to transition into sustained post-16
destinations. That fund supported over 6,000 pupils, which is
about 55% of pupils in year 11.
(Lab)
My Lords, can the Minister tell us where we are up to on the
register? She will remember, I think, that some two years ago the
Bill on home education passed through this House with support
from all sides. I have had letters from Ministers since then
saying that it is going to proceed, but it never actually does.
It might be a good idea if they at least told me what is
happening; it would be quite nice if they told the rest of the
House as well. So, can we have an answer to that question: what
is happening to the register?
(Con)
The noble Lord will be aware that we consulted on the register,
and he will no doubt be delighted to know that we have responded
to that consultation. From the local authority perspective, the
consultation showed a clear call for a register, which we
support. There was concern expressed by parent groups who educate
their children at home. We absolutely understand that many
parents go above and beyond to do that, but the safety of
children and the fact that we know where they are is
all-important.
(CB)
Is it possible to accept the fact that a lot of people like
myself have had to put their children through alternative
education largely because things such as dyslexia are not really
accounted for? We have had to follow the Steiner school system,
which is about helping people with those problems. That is one of
the major reasons why there are so many children going through
alternative education.
(Con)
I think the noble Lord uses the term “alternative education” in a
slightly broader sense than the noble Lord, , does, but he is absolutely
right that it is critical that we support teachers, particularly
in mainstream schools, where the majority of children with
special educational needs study and learn, to identify as early
as possible dyslexia and other similar issues.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, I assume that the Government agree that the number of
children in alternative education is less important than its
quality. Can the Minister tell us not only how many Muslim
children attend our 2,000 madrassas—which are not inspected by
Ofsted—but how the Government are satisfied that radical Islam is
not being taught in them?
(Con)
I can do my best to get the numbers on the noble Lord’s first
question, but we need to be extremely careful not to mix up what
is a school, which is regulated by Ofsted, and what settings
provide additional education. We are tightening up the definition
of a school and will be looking for a legislative opportunity to
bring that forward.
My Lords, returning to home schooling, I have been very struck by
the number of people I have met in the last year or two who have
decided to take their children out of mainstream schooling to
educate them at home—often, from what I hear, with spectacular
academic results. But what assessment has been made about the
trends of whether this is increasing, and what assessment has
been made about the reasons why people are doing this? We need to
listen to what is happening at a grass-roots level to understand
this phenomenon.
(Con)
The right reverend Prelate asks about the trends. One of the
reasons we plan to introduce a register of home-educated children
is exactly that: it is very difficult to track those trends
today. There has been a lot of anecdotal evidence about the
increase in the number of children who are electively home
educated during the pandemic, but we do not have hard data on
that, and we need to. As the right reverend Prelate knows, there
are many reasons why parents choose to take their children out of
school. Some children will benefit from being home educated, but
we also know—to go back to the Question from the noble Lord, Lord
Storey—that there are parents who are concerned that their
children will end up in alternative provision and want to avoid
that, and therefore choose to educate them at home.
(Lab)
My Lords, two and half years have now passed since the Timpson
review of school exclusions presented its report, following which
the DfE confirmed that it would hold schools accountable for the
outcomes of their permanently excluded children—yet a report that
the department itself commissioned in May showed that in some
multi-academy trusts, schools were refusing to engage with
alternative provision. Can the Minister say what instructions
have been given to regional schools commissioners to ensure that
all schools in multi-academy trusts meet their responsibilities
with regard to alternative education provision, which, of course,
looks after the high needs of young people?
(Con)
With regard to the Timpson review, where the noble Lord started,
one of the vehicles through which we will deliver on all of the
recommendations that we have accepted in the Timpson review will
be the SEND review, which, as the noble Lord knows, we plan to
deliver in the spring. We have already established behaviour hubs
with funding of £10 million. We have included training in the
early career framework around behaviour and we are clear in all
our guidance that off-rolling students with challenging behaviour
is unacceptable.
(LD)
My Lords, the link between special educational needs—particularly
undiscovered special educational needs—and children being
excluded is very well established. When we get this review into
SEND, how much work has been done in identifying what is needed
in teacher training and professional development to spot at least
the most commonly occurring conditions? Will that be a key part
of the review and will this be taken into account when looking at
what will happen to the high numbers of pupils who are being
excluded?
(Con)
The noble Lord is right. About 83% of children in alternative
provision have special educational needs and 24% of them are on
an education, health and care plan, compared with 4% in the wider
population. We will be looking at all the best evidence and
research to make sure in the SEND review that we deliver for
these children who, for the most part, have had a difficult start
in life and we need to support them in the best way we can.
(Lab)
My Lords, given that the reason for young people being in
alternative provision is that they have been less than successful
in mainstream settings and given that academies and free schools
do not have to follow the national curriculum, does the Minister
think that there is a reason to look at the national curriculum
so that more schools, including all our academies, might think it
was fit for purpose?
(Con)
I do not think that there is any suggestion that the educational
quality in our academies is not fit for purpose. I hope the noble
Baroness would agree that it is crucial that when we plan
provision in an area, we first consider our most vulnerable
children—of whom this is an important group—and make sure that
they get the education that they deserve.
