This time last year, I tried to outline what I felt were the biggest priorities for those charged with leading in education. I plumped for Parenting, Early Years, SEND, Accountability and Attendance. Well, I could probably copy and paste the same for 2024 as these priorities most certainly remain. We could probably add behaviour which appears to be getting more challenging in all sectors.

But this year, I do feel we can allow ourselves some more optimism, knowing that we will have a new government to take us into 2025. I am determined to be hopeful. The derided Ofsted will see change too, though in its defence it is only doing the Government’s bidding. It will also wait for a change in administration before undertaking much needed reform.

My hope is that our new leaders will be able to build a new covenant between the education system and our children and families. This would be a radical movement away from the last four decades. It is perfectly expressed in the late Rabbi Sacks’ video entitled ‘The Politics of Hope’, available on YouTube here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BvLp4VdW1A

The Rabbi explains the difference between contract and covenant, and why the accepted consensus around contract, market, competition (and increasingly surveillance) has fractured society, deepened inequalities and allowed the civic realm to decline, like many of our provincial high streets. In my view, there is a direct link between this consensus, one that has existed throughout my 25 years in senior school leadership, and my own concerns about Parenting, Early Years, SEND, Attendance and Accountability expressed last year.

Let’s take just the first one in the list, parenting. As a result of the focus on contract, it is too often seen as ‘getting the best for my kid’, a competitive race typified by sharp elbows, gaming the system and finding the right contacts. As a headteacher, I have lost count of the amount of times I have sat in a meeting with a parent and heard the following.

‘With respect Sir, I’m not interested in the other kid who was involved. I’m only interested in my child and I want it sorted out.’

The inference is that ‘I want it dealt with in the interests of my child, and I really don’t care much about anyone else.’ The same argument is made in the ever-competing world of SEND funding, where parents insist on their rights to funding, provision and resources, knowing that there will be less for everyone else as a result.

Before I get attacked for sticking the boot in to all parents, I have a lot of sympathy for them. This contractual consensus is the only culture they have known, with a majority of parents now born post-1980. As a parent myself, I insisted on doing it the other way (maybe a bit naively, and even sanctimoniously I now admit).  I adopted a code of anti-competitive behaviour, priding myself on absolutely no intervention to get any extra favour for them. I was almost fundamentalist in my fidelity to it. I think it’s worked, but only to a certain extent. My boys, now adults, are happy and well-balanced, very sociable and great fun. But they are hopelessly uncompetitive and usually find themselves pushed to the back of the queue. I wonder if secondary colleagues might even say this culture has been imbibed by pupils/students who increasingly appeal their side of the contract and demand their rights more vociferously.

The governments during this period (both the New Labour version, and the post-2010 Conservatives) will point to gains in the PISA tables, fewer schools deemed ‘inadequate’, or recent gains in reading scores at primary level. Politicians might try and argue successfully that the competitive drive and centralised management, allied with an aggressive inspectorate, has raised standards. But I would argue that this is a Pyrrhic victory. Those of us on the ground find it difficult to see many upsides.

Our way out of this market-based, competitive focus on power, wealth and individual gain is to pursue a system based on covenant. As Rabbi Sacks explains, the best example of a covenant is a marriage. In sickness and in health and all that. Think about giving love, finding solidarity, freely giving attention, sharing knowledge, being part of collaborative initiatives, being in it for the long-term. All this can feature in a new covenant.  

Take SEND, potentially the biggest issue facing school leaders. Here, we have reached a seminal moment in that numbers are now unsustainable. Most primary schools are reporting a third of their pupils requiring a level of support which is more specific and requires extra resource. Parents demand the best, but it is impossible to meet the market demand here. We must respect the fact that this government, nor the next one, will not have the money to match the demand. We just don’t have the resources, and in that context, a continuation of the status quo will not work.

Instead, based on this new covenant, maybe we need to do away with labels and stigmas, and just educate all the pupils we have to the best of our abilities, pooling resources, knowledge and expertise to adapt our teaching and provision.  At the very least, schools will not be able to say (as they do now for competitive gain), ‘we can’t meet need’. We have thousands of incredible teachers and support staff who now know so much about autism, or attention-deficit disorder, or the increasing number of medical conditions, that they can support those who are less-experienced. And for the most severe pupils, well maybe all schools should have a properly-staffed resourced provision. And I mean all.

At the same time, a revised accountability system would recognise the commitment and mission of the school in attempting this, and support them on their journey, rather than writing a short, mechanical report, headlined by a one-word grade and too often based on narrow performances measures (more contractual language).  No, instead we can work together in solidarity, focused on how all pupils with SEND can go on to lead a good life rather than getting wrapped in funding knots and legal tangles.

A move from contract to covenant really isn’t difficult, and it would cost little. I’m sure there are some good Labour policy wonks who could work on it before the election. The Labour party musn’t feel it has to continue with the status quo. Its moment has arrived.

Now I’m working for a Catholic Multi-Academy Trust, the move from contract to covenant sits comfortably within Catholic Social Teaching, and there is great synergy with our own vision for the future. A long-term vision, where we share, collaborate and work alongside each other in solidarity. Arguably, this is tougher to do – it is not an easy option –  so is, ironically in my view, far more aspirational and ambitious than the current status-quo. It also positions us well for the undoubted crises around the corner. I can’t quite believe how quickly the world is changing and that schools are in the eye of that storm. We simply have to work together.

We can do this. 2024 is the time for a new covenant.