The Courier & Advertiser (Fife Edition)
Proposed changes to school funding ‘will not boost attainment’
EIS criticises Scottish Government’s two proposals set out for consultation
Scotland’s largest teaching union has said there is no clear rationale behind planned changes to the way schools are funded.
The Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS) said the Scottish Government had failed to make a convincing case for changing the current funding structures.
The union said ministers had also not demonstrated how the proposed changes would improve attainment or equity in schools.
The Government is currently consulting on the proposals, which sit alongside reforms of school governance that will see head teachers given a raft of new powers.
The consultation paper sets out two possible future approaches, the first of which would give funds directly to head teachers through a head teachers charter and the second which would increase the targeting of funding, along the lines of the approach taken to pupil equity funding.
In its submission to the consultation, the EIS said it did not believe either approach “would drive an improvement in pupil attainment or equity”.
“Furthermore, the EIS believes that proposals set out in the consultation paper could possibly lead to a detriment in the current quality of provision as they could weaken local democratic accountability, reduce local authority ability to deliver planned educational services across an authority and overload head teachers with additional responsibilities without a transparent accountability structure,” the union said.
“The EIS believes that the current system of funding is capable of delivering resources and accountability to the sector, and that the Government’s aims of improving attainment and equity could be achieved by evolution of the current system as opposed to untested change.”
EIS said there was also “no clear rationale” that linked the proposed changes to funding with the governance reforms.
General secretary Larry Flanagan said: “While the EIS is supportive of some aspects of the Scottish Government’s proposals, such as the potential for regional collaboratives to enhance the support available to schools, we do not believe that wider structural change or a new funding model are essential components in delivering the cultural change which is required.”
We do not believe that wider structural change or a new funding model are essential components in delivering the cultural change which is required. LARRY FLANAGAN, EIS GENERAL SECRETARY