THE government last week outlined proposals which promise £650 million in additional funding for the upcoming academic year in order to help pupils catch up on education missed as a result of the coronavirus pandemic.

Despite this being marketed to school leaders as additional funding, this cash injection does not offset the real-terms cuts suffered by schools year on year — let alone provide the “extra” funding needed to recover from a global pandemic. 

Though any additional funding is welcome at this time, we must not forget that public education remains chronically underfunded and that over four million children are living in poverty as a result of neoliberal austerity measures.

The government says that head teachers will have the freedom to decide how funds will be spent, but has also announced that a further £350m will be invested in a pilot tutoring project — leading to confusion as to how schools are expected to spend this additional funding if academic catch-up is being offered elsewhere.

The tutoring programme is billed to run over the next academic year, giving schools access to subsidised tutoring sessions for disadvantaged pupils. 

The scheme will use private tutoring organisations and charities, using volunteer and paid tutors — including the Education Endowment Foundation, Sutton Trust, Nesta and Impetus.

A smokescreen for public-private partnerships

Education unions will be deeply suspicious of the government’s allocation of public funding to establish a “national tutoring programme.” 

Though this sounds like progressive social policy, unions will be wary of the potential for this to divert funding away from local authorities and instead allow private enterprises to compete for government tutoring contracts.

The involvement of private organisations and charities suggests that this is in fact a public-private partnership (PPP), rather than a burgeoning publicly funded national education service. 

PPPs are contracts between the government and the private sector to deliver a project. 

Essentially, public money is given to private actors for the provision of a public service.

The government is enamoured with privatising education and consistently pushes its academy agenda. 

Schools are increasingly encouraged to become part of multi-academy trusts (MATs), despite objections from education unions. 

The introduction of the Academies Act 2010 in 2013 proved to be a significant step towards privatisation. 

Indeed, leaked DfE documents revealed then education secretary Michael Gove’s enthusiasm for the full privatisation of all state schools, including recently converted academies and free schools, rendering them profit-making enterprises.

In 2016, then education secretary Nicky Morgan was forced to U-turn on forced academisation following strike action by the largest teaching union, the NUT (now the NEU). 

Following Morgan’s defeat, subsequent education secretaries have not lost the appetite for privatisation.

It would not be surprising if the government uses the uncertainty in schools post-Covid-19 as a back door to the wider privatisation of education. 

The year-long tutoring programme may indeed become a permanent fixture and expand beyond tutoring, seeing more and more aspects of education outsourced as PPP contracts.

What’s the alternative?

This funding announcement is short-term sticking plaster which will fail to cover the gaping wound left by decades of cuts. 

Instead of planning to introduce a controversial new test for four-year-olds which would worsen exam culture, the government must be bold enough to make positive change. 

Now is the time to invest in long-term education strategies which address union concerns: underfunding, workload, performance-related pay, teacher retention, class sizes, etc.

Smaller class sizes; more teachers

Education Secretary Gavin Williamson last week claimed that the class size limit of 15 could be expanded under government plans to allow every child to return to school as soon as possible. 

Worryingly, this appears to be another case of the government misrepresenting evidence to fit its guidance, rather than offering responsible guidance informed by science. 

It is becoming increasingly clear that the government’s Covid-19 guidance is based on economic recovery plans — not medical and scientific evidence.

Those of us following the guidance of scientific experts expect that social distancing measures will be in place for many months to come and that, in September, children need to be taught in much smaller class sizes to allow adequate space between pupils. 

Many schools are now preparing for children to return on part-time tables which accommodate smaller class sizes — meaning that children will still not be in school full time.

Educators know the importance of getting children back in school — both for their education and for their well-being. 

The government is also keen to get children back in school so that working parents can begin rebuilding the economy.

So, with the shared goal of getting all children back into full-time education as soon as possible from September, why not take this opportunity to introduce measures which facilitate a full return to school and simultaneously address the long-standing concerns of teachers and their unions?

The government must invest now to enable a full-time return of all pupils with a maximum class size of 15. 

This will require the recruitment of enough staff (either new teachers or those who have left the profession) and the procurement of premises (either through new builds or repurposing unused buildings). 

Every child could be back to school full time in socially distanced classes of 15 or fewer.

Of course, there would be a significant initial outlay — both in terms of staffing and securing suitable premises — but surely this would be offset by parents returning to work, increasing productivity, and no longer requiring the job retention scheme?

The long-term benefits to education would be tremendous: improved teaching and learning, higher academic attainment, reduced teacher workload, improved teacher retention rate.

These are difficult times and they call for bold measures. This might just be part of the solution.

Summer holiday provision

It is vital that the government invest in plans which address the social, emotional and mental health needs of children over the summer break. 

Without this, pupils cannot be expected to return to school in a position where they are able to learn and make academic progress.

The government must plan and fund summer schemes for children, to be rolled out by local authorities.

The NEU has set out guidance calling on the government to provide these services for, at very least, pupils on free school meals, those identified as vulnerable, and those with SEND whose carers may require respite.

The union believes this summer provision should deliver activities which focus on children’s well-being and self-belief; offer sport sessions to counteract the lack of opportunity for physical activity during lockdown; give opportunity for creativity through dance, art, music etc; form connections with local libraries, art galleries, museums and other enriching local cultural experiences; and prepare children for a return to school with some personal study support.

Union consultation

Despite the government’s best efforts to hinder union activity through anti-trade union legislation, the coronavirus pandemic has demonstrated that workers — those with active experience of their industry or sector — are best-placed to advise on policy. 

Throughout the crisis, trade unions have consistently demonstrated that their demands are not unreasonable or tyrannical (as certain mainstream media outlets claim) but in the best interests of their workers and the general public.

It is vital that the government heed the concerns of trade unions when developing recovery plans for post-Covid Britain. 

Lives have been lost, families have been torn apart and communities have been thrown into disarray. 

The pride and egotism of politicians must, for once, be set aside to allow for those with valuable knowledge and insight to shape Britain’s future for the better.