High school results highlight Education's achievement gulf

EDUCATION is at the centre of a storm with which it has been losing the battle.

Since this column argued at the end of August for full disclosure of GCSE results, the debate has twisted and turned.

Slowly, more and more details have emerged and the clouds have darkened.

But all of it had to be dragged out of the department – it would never had budged unless the pressure had been applied by a wide range of people who believed in the right-to-know figures that are freely published elsewhere.

Back in August, the question was what had Education got to fear by giving parents and the public the full picture, including publishing the figures for pass rates at A* to C including English and maths now used as the benchmark in England.

Now we know.

There was a palpable intake of breath when Education minister Carol Steere read out the breakdown of results at Guernsey's high schools in response to a question in the States by Deputy Jane Stephens – most starkly the provisional result for this year at La Mare de Carteret, with a 12% pass rate of 'good' GCSEs.

Deputy Steere had at length explained why, by a four to one majority, the department did not want to release the data – the fear of effects on morale of pupils and staff and a potential narrowing of the curriculum – before the announcement that it had no choice but to make.

What the figures have shown was startling.

With a selective system, everyone accepts a disparity between the high schools, Grammar and the colleges.

But what was not expected was the size of that disparity with La Mare de Carteret and St Sampson's High – Les Beaucamps has consistently and easily outperformed both – and, just as worryingly, the differences between the high schools themselves.

Because of Education's continued head-in-the-sand stance it now has all the hallmarks of a cover-up, even with all the caveats the department puts on the figures.

Just as telling is the trend.

La Mare slips from 25% in 2009 to 24% in 2010 when the school leaving age was raised to 12% this year.

St Sampson's High goes from from 35.9% in 2009 to 23.8% in 2010 and to 20.2% in 2011.

We know Education would prefer to be attempting to fix these problems in private, while in public glowing about the overall performance across the island, a strategy with all the hallmarks of self-preservation.

Deputy Steere's announcement on Friday morning that she would offer her resignation for debate was a swift turnaround from her stance the previous morning.

It was perhaps the first time she began to make the running on this issue, a clever move that will act as a swift vote of confidence rather than letting things drag on.

But then the department was immediately put on the back foot again by the chief minister announcing he would ask the Policy Council to back an independent review of education – far from the type of endorsement Deputy Steere was no doubt after from her senior colleagues.

There are some key questions that remain of Education and it is not just about political accountability.

There appears to have been culpability on both sides – and this is why all the board should offer to resign.

When the members took office, how deep did they dig into the issues they were presented with, how searching were their questions?

What information did the senior management team offer, – was it the full picture, or a distorted sense of reality?

It is rumoured that the first time the board members heard the GCSE breakdown was when the minister read it out in the States, yet we are asked to have confidence in their ability to run the department.

Did they really have a handle on the long-term trends quickly enough, or has it all been exposed because of the questions asked?

It is also understood that previous boards used to have annual meetings with the head teachers, a chance to put down a marker and have a dialogue, yet this board does not. Why?

What is the measure of success? We are asked to look at the complete picture, children exceeding expectations, not just academic achievement, but yet are not given it or anything to judge it against.

Education may have found themselves in a better place when they announced the figures if they could explain clearly what action was being taken and what the benchmarks are, but unfortunately it would appear that there are no benchmarks or key performance indicators in place. Why?

If Education does not want too much emphasis placed on exam results, where does it want success or failure judged? Surely it should be more solid than directing islanders to validation reports that are not published in full anyway. Just why is La Mare's so out of date – is that an indication of a more deep-rooted problem for longer than these figures show?

Guernsey's education system seems divided. From the outside it seems that there is a successful provision of special needs education both within the mainstream schools and at Le Rondin and Le Murier, maximising pupils' ability and potential.

And clearly the three colleges and the Grammar School are achieving results at pre-16 level that would be the envy of any jurisdiction.

But then there is a middle sector where a debate needs to be held about what direction Guernsey is going in and one which should focus on why there is such a disparity in achievement between three high schools that on paper at least should be on a reasonably level playing field.

What is needed is a published plan of action to improve standards and reassure the public, and, whisper it quietly, a full debate which should include the selective system in the island.

As argued by Deputy Stephens, responsibility for independent validation of the schools should be taken away from the Education Department, which has failed to publish the full picture even when it has had it.

The department itself should also be subject to an independent review, as called for by the chief minister and backed by some Education members already, as one way of restoring trust in it.

Because essentially this is now an issue about trust – when members vote on the resignations, they will have to ask themselves whether the same political and senior management team that has overseen a hidden decline in standards can be trusted to combat the situation.