Aiming High: Raising the Achievement of Minority Ethnic Pupils
Consultation summary
Overview
There was an extremely enthusiastic response to the consultation, 500 written
responses were received. In addition, a number of individuals and organisations
participated in a series of events organised throughout the consultation period.
Responses by type
LEA
Primary School
Secondary School
Community/Voluntary
Group
National Organisation
Anonymous
Parent
Others
Total
Number of responses
127
95
77
81
41
22
12
46
501
On the whole, the responses were highly supportive of the suggested direction of
travel described by Aiming High. A number of respondents commented that it was a
refreshing and realistic document setting out the nature, complexity and extent of the
challenge, and the steps required to raise minority ethnic achievement.
Respondents provided wide raging views in response to the questions posed in the
consultation document, together with a wealth of ideas and suggestions on how a
national strategy to raise minority ethnic achievement could be taken forward.
Summary
Question 1: What more should Government do to support headteachers and school
management teams in delivering a whole school approach to raising the achievement
of minority ethnic pupils?
There was general agreement that additional long term funding was essential if the
DfES was to be successful in narrowing achievement gaps for minority ethnic pupils.
The additional funding would enable Local authorities and schools to maintain
staffing levels and attract suitably qualified teachers thus enhancing their capacity to
meet the needs of individual pupils. The majority of respondents believed that EMAG
needed to remain a separate, ring-fenced grant and that any National Strategy,
developed as a consequence of Aiming High, should be funded separately.
Respondents were generally in favour of a National Strategy to raise minority ethnic
achievement, with over half listing training for all members of the school workforce as
an essential element of any strategy. Suggestions for specific training included antiracism training, focused training for EMA teachers on teaching English as an
additional language (EAL), training for school governors and training for Ofsted
Inspectors on the needs of Traveller pupils. There was also the suggestion that the
National Professional Qualification for Headship should include a mandatory module
on leading and managing EAL.
Respondents suggested that existing examples of good practice should be collected
and disseminated locally and nationally and, in particular, these examples ought to
include case studies relating to isolated learners.
Some respondents suggested that schools should be required to appoint a coordinator for Minority Ethnic Achievement and that money should be made available
to fund such a post.
Question 2: What more should be done to ensure that the school workforce as a
whole is equipped with the support, knowledge and skills to close achievement gaps?
Again, the majority of respondents considered training on strategies to support EAL
and minority ethnic pupils to be the key to equipping the workforce to narrow
achievement gaps. It was felt that such training needed to engage teaching and nonteaching staff. There were various suggestions as to the range of training to be
offered, and the method of its delivery. These included specific training for targeted
schools with particular needs, a national accredited training programme with
sufficient money to fund it and school-based INSET on behaviour, culture, language
acquisition and anti-racism, and race equality issues linked to the Race Relations
Amendment Act. School governor training was also seen as crucial in the drive to
raise standards for minority ethnic pupils.
The collection and sharing of good practice was seen as an important and effective
way of supporting and developing the workforce. There were a wide range of
suggestions as to how this might be taken forward, including more schools open for
visits by teachers to see evidence of good practice, the use of inner-city Beacon
Schools, a national newsletter and the introduction of multidisciplinary/interagency
workshops.
Some respondents suggested that Initial Teacher Training programmes ought to
include compulsory ethnic minority achievement and EAL elements and that the
induction programmes for Newly Qualified Teachers should place greater emphasis
on meeting the needs of minority ethnic pupils.
Question 3: How can we enhance the role and improve the qualifications of specialist
staff?
There was general agreement that a clear professional identity for specialist staff
needed to be acknowledged and encouraged. A high number of respondents
suggested that a national qualification should be developed for specialist staff,
including teaching assistants and mentors, in order to enhance their role and status
across all educational settings. A clear career path should be established based on a
national model for continuous professional development on EAL/ethnic minority
achievement issues, indicating the professional competencies required and enabling
staff to access a range of relevant qualifications.
The lack of financial stability, which leads to many specialist staff being offered
temporary contracts, was seen as an obstacle to enhancing the professional role.
Many respondents felt that additional consistent funding would be needed to ensure
that specialist staff could commit themselves to long term study plans and to
encourage mainstream staff to move into a specialist role.
Question 4 – What more can be done to recruit, retain, support and promote more
minority ethnic teachers and other skilled adults in schools?
Half the respondents cited access to high quality training as key to the recruitment
and retention of minority ethnic staff in schools. The training of staff involved in the
recruitment of staff was also highlighted, as was the need for a review at national and
local level of the recruitment process, to ensure that the strategies in place were
effective in targeting the appropriate audience.
Developing greater links with the community was considered by some respondents to
be an effective way of targeting and recruiting minority ethnic teachers, adults and
young people. Suggestions ranged from advertising vacancies in the community
press and in community languages, approaching the local community to recruit
people with skills in specific languages, and working with supplementary schools to
recruit local people to work as mentors in schools.
They also suggested that there needed to be a high profile national recruitment drive
to attract more minority ethnic adults into the area of ethnic minority
achievement/EAL teaching.
Several respondents highlighted the need for adequate funding to recruit and retain
minority ethnic staff and suggested that resources should be targeted to areas with
low minority ethnic achievement. Some also suggested that pay and conditions for
staff working with minority ethnic pupils in the inner cities should reflect the
challenges and skills required and address the issue of rising house prices,
particularly in London.
A small number of respondents raised the issue of overseas teaching qualifications
saying that Government needed to develop more flexible routes into teaching
particularly for staff who have already gained a qualification outside the UK.
In the consultation events, a number of minority ethnic teachers raised the need to
tackle discrimination and marginalisation experienced by them as a serious issue.
Question 5a: What specific action should the Department take to promote a wholeschool approach to EAL teaching?
There was general support for a whole-school approach to EAL. It was suggested
that the strategic and operational management of EAL in schools should be clearly
defined. A majority of respondents considered that EAL training should be available
for all staff, not just for specialists. Some respondents favoured the introduction of a
national EAL strategy with clear guidance on teaching and learning and pupil
entitlement to support.
Respondents suggested that the many existing examples of good practice ought to
be incorporated into national guidance and training materials. Schools should be
enabled to develop their own approaches and share good practice. The provision of
regular training was seen by some respondents as a key role for the local education
authority. The importance of flexibility was also stressed to allow for a localised
approach where populations differed.
Question 5b: What specific action should the Department take to develop and
implement a national approach to formative assessment for bilingual learners?
A majority of respondents suggested that the Department refer to the QCA document
‘A Language in Common’ as a starting point in developing a national approach to
assessment for bilingual learners. This was considered to provide a crucial
framework for development. A number of respondents referred to existing good
practice in developing formative assessment which could form the basis for a
national approach and there was general agreement that this should be developed in
consultation with experienced teachers.
There were other wide-ranging suggestions on how the Department could develop a
national approach including a national profile of EAL development, national
standardisation of the QCA steps and development of more detailed data collection
at national level on EAL and pupils’ first languages.
Question 6a: What more could the Department do to raise achievement of African
Caribbean pupils?
There was general support for specific action to raise African Caribbean
achievement. Respondents highlighted a wide range of possible actions that the
Department could take, the key themes from which are identified below:

The need for more Black teachers in schools, as both mainstream teachers
and teaching assistants;

A more culturally relevant curriculum for Black pupils with particular reference
to Caribbean heritage pupils;

Schools should be encouraged to work more closely with African Caribbean
communities in order to raise awareness of the cultural and religious needs of
Black pupils;

Ring-fenced funding to address issues of teacher recruitment and training,
involvement of parents and communities, and targeting of money to areas of
high Black population;

Professional development for mainstream teachers; and

Pro-active strategies for involving Black parents in their children’s education.
Question 6b: what more could the Department do to reduce exclusions of African
Caribbean pupils?
Again there was support for focused activity to address this issue and a series of
suggestions were put forward for DfES action, key themes are outlined below:

Encouraging schools to engage with local communities to help schools
understand and resolve this issue;

Commissioning research to understand the root cause of this problem;

Training teachers in conflict and behaviour management. Also training of
school staff in Race Equality and requirements of RRAA; and

Funding for: training and advocacy, counselling staff for at risk pupils,
mentors and youth workers.
Question 7a: What specific action should the Department take to minimise high levels
of mobility?
There were 202 responses to this question. The majority highlighted the need for
more joined up thinking between Government Departments in an effort to minimise
mobility of pupils. Slightly more than half of respondents were of the view that
housing issues, including the availability of Gypsy/Traveller sites, were the main
factor for many families. A significant proportion of respondents were concerned with
the wording of the question because, in their view, it failed to recognise the
professional and cultural importance of travelling. Respondents also highlighted
concerns over PLASC data. It was suggested that more reliable information could be
gathered from specialist LEA services. A number of respondents requested the need
for further funding to address the issue of minimising pupil mobility.
Question 7b: what specific action should the Department take to manage high levels
of mobility?
There were 160 responses to this question. The majority advocated that the
Department should allocate further funding in the drive to manage high levels of pupil
mobility. A significant proportion identified tracking systems such as the Red Book
records system as an effective method of managing high mobility. Standardised
transfer of pupil records giving progress reports was seen as an essential move to
keep track of pupil achievement and ensure consistency between schools.
Question 8: What should central Government’s role be in facilitating a national
programme of change?
There was strong support for nationally-developed training to support schools in
raising the achievement of minority ethnic pupils. Many respondents were keen to
have such training embedded within the Primary and/or Key Stage 3 strategies.
However, any nationally-developed training would need to be flexible enough to
reflect local needs and different starting points, particularly in areas with relatively few
minority ethnic pupils.
Many respondents asked for the Government to provide clearer guidance on the use
of the Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant. They argued that this should be matched
with a stronger accountability framework which required local authorities to monitor
and report on the achievement of minority ethnic pupils.
Question 9: What should local authorities’ roles be in supporting schools to narrow
the achievement gaps?
Most respondents highlighted two key roles for local authorities: sharing good
practice to enable schools to raise standards and providing advice and support to
schools. The provision of training for both mainstream and specialist staff was seen
as an important way of sharing good practice.
A smaller number of respondents highlighted the need for local authorities to play a
monitoring role to ensure that schools were making effective progress in raising the
achievement of minority ethnic pupils. Some respondents saw benefit in linking this
to the monitoring of progress against the Education Development plan while others
suggested that Pupil Level Annual School Census data should be used as part of the
monitoring framework.
Question 10: How might the resource currently allocated through EMAG be used
more effectively to underpin a national strategy to raise the achievement of minority
ethnic pupils?
Aiming High outlined DfES’ commitment to continue providing additional funding
focused on raising minority ethnic achievement. It also highlighted that there was a
need to address the targeting of EMAG resources to ensure that they reached those
most in need. Aiming High set out four options for the future structure of EMAG. Each
of the options attracted support, which was generally dictated by nature of the
organisation responding.
Respondents also made a number of more specific points, these included:
EMAG should be increased, to compensate for its year on year erosion, remain ring
fenced and put on a longer term cycle.
As outlined elsewhere in this summary, considerable support was expressed for a
national strategy. However, respondents to this question, with notable exceptions,
were of the view that such a strategy should not be funded through EMAG.
There was strong support for a local authority role in both local allocation and a
challenge and support function to schools. The LEA role was seen as particularly
important in areas of low ethnic minority population, and it was felt that funding
should reflect this. A number of respondents requested DfES guidance on the local
authority role.
Question 11: How should the [EMAG] resource be allocated?
There was support from across the range of respondents for EMAG to move away
from its historical mode of allocation on to a transparent formula basis.
The majority of respondents favoured a formula that took account of numbers of
minority ethnic pupils or numbers of underachieving pupils, pupils with English as an
additional language and factored to take account of deprivation. Of the formula
options offered in Aiming High, the most popular were option a and option b. A
number of respondents suggested a combination of these two options to arrive at a
formula based on underachieving pupils plus numbers of English as an additional
language pupils and factored by the level of free schools meal entitlement.
A number of respondents warned that any such change ought to take account of the
need to provide an LEA with sufficient resources to enable it to play an effective role
in supporting schools – particularly LEAs with relatively small numbers of minority
ethnic and English as an additional pupils spread over a wide area.
Question 12: Do you have any comments on the proposed strategy?
Respondents used this section to either praise the document or to re-emphasise
points made elsewhere in their response. A number of more specific points were also
made, these included:
Ensure that the strategy addresses early years issues;
The need to specifically address underachievement of other groups as well African
Caribbean pupils e.g. Kashmiri, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Turkish and Somali,
amongst others;
Work with parents given a higher priority within the strategy;
The strategy needed to address the specific issues faces by schools with refugee
and asylum seeker children; and
The strategy needs to take account of wider issues that impact on pupil achievement
and connect with strategies/initiatives designed to address them for example
Neighbourhood Renewal Fund.