The DCSF has managed the introduction of managed moves into the national strategy with aplomb. Its sensitive and ‘hands-off’ approach (such as the request that authorities develop a protocol for managed moves without prescribing its content) has enabled schools and local authorities to respond creatively following their local imperatives. Infrastructure based on admissions forums, school clustering arrangements and flexibility in curriculum and course development has helped.
The development of a collaborative approach has thrown up some new issues such as the size of schools ’ cash reserves and whether it can ever be said that ‘everything possible has been done to enable the pupil to succeed at the school before permanently excluding’ whilst those reserves could have been used to buy in more support at less cost to the whole community. At the same time the competitive ethic is still not quite dead, and whilst performance league tables continue to be published, will not expire.
Development imperatives
The DCSF should develop its conflict resolutions team so that paradoxes within government strategy are ironed out (e.g. in funding schemes and the Collaborative/ competitive agenda).
It is time for the DCSF to get more involved in Managed Moves development, with more extensive research, the creation of new and better guidance for schools and the promotion of best practice training. Activities should promote local autonomy not paperwork.
New economic models for education communities are need to replace outmoded schemes. When school clusters are able to manage together the out of school budgets for their children, they will find opportunities to reduce that expenditure by avoiding high cost
provision for children who really only need ‘direct support now’, with savings which would benefit all the children in the community.
background