By Gavin Mackintosh-
Prime minister Boris Johnson instructed officials not to make contingency plans for schools last year in the event of another lockdown, according to a new report.
The report highlights split views at the height of the government decision during the pandemic.
Analysts from the Institute for Government said of the government’s handling of education during Covid that the failure to prepare such plans over summer and autumn 2020 marked its “biggest single failure”.
The report attacks both the government and the Department Of Education for insisting schools in England would remain open and exams would go ahead this year, despite the inevitability of a second lockdown.
“What followed was easily the most disruptive period in children’s education since at least the start of the second world war … When it came to education, U-turn was to follow U-turn. Well into March 2021, and indeed beyond, pupils taking GCSEs, A-levels and BTecs remained unclear about precisely how they were to be assessed. At times it felt as though the school system was in chaos,” the report concluded.
The report claims that senior figures, from the prime minister down, opposed the creation of backup plans for assessing A-levels, GCSEs and other qualifications in the event of formal exams not being held, limiting their options and placing the burden on teachers.
Nicholas Timmins, the author of the report, said: “The biggest single failure has to be the refusal to make contingency plans over the summer and autumn of 2020, the biggest impact of which was the failure to have anything in place to handle the second cancellation of exams in 2021.”
Timmins’s report quotes civil servants and sources within No 10 and the DfE that “confirm not just the failure but the refusal to make contingency plans” for further exam cancellations. It also quotes a No 10 source as saying that “the clear steer” officials received from the prime minister was not to make contingency plans.
The Department Of Education has insisted that contingency plans were indeed made, but has fallen short of denying the existence of the damaging claims from other insiders in its department.
Civil servants are said to have said that No 10’s view was that “if you prepare for these things not happening, then the outcome is that they are far more likely not to happen … people will look for the easy way out and take it”. The source claimed Boris Johnson’s “default is to bluff. To talk up things to such an extent that they will happen through the force of his own personality.”
Another civil servant told Timmins that “having a contingency plan if things go wrong is seen by some ministers as a negative thought. If you plan for the worst, you are probably going to get it. And we were working for a set of politicians who wanted to be clear that they were in charge,
The IfG cited the Number 10 source as saying that “the clear steer” that officials received from prime minister Boris Johnson was not to make contingency plans”, according to the IfG.
The report claims that contingency plans were considered negative by ministers who saw it as preparation for failure, rather than as a standby plan to safeguard the overall interests of the arrangements. Representatives of The Department Of Education insists contingency plans were clearly set out last year.
”The view was that “if you prepare for these things not happening then the outcome is that they are far more likely not to happen… people will look for the easy way out and take it”, according to the report.
One Department for Education official apparently claimed that there was “an anxiety that if you do contingency planning, it leaks”.”
The official added: “And contingency planning takes resource. So if you are doing that, you are not doing other things that ministers might want to happen. It would mean that other treasured projects could have to be sacrificed.”
Another civil servant said that ministers “were very keen to demonstrate that they were in charge, they had got a clear plan, this is what it is”.
“That is a theme that we can all see whether we were civil servants or not. And that does go to the notion that having a contingency plan if things go wrong is seen by some ministers as a negative thought. If you plan for the worst, you are probably going to get it.
“And we were working for a set of politicians who wanted to be clear that they were in charge, and that they knew what they were doing.”
The IfG said that the the DfE published its schools contingency framework only at the “very end of November” . But there was to be “no local discretion”.
The bombshell report also reveals how the prevention or restricting of grade inflation last summer was “totemic” for the government. But before results days ministers were “fully aware there would be a row” over how results had been decided, the report says.
The DfE insider was quoted as saying : “It did not need clever civil servants to point out to the secretary of state that when faced, on the results day, with young people disappointed that they had not got what they thought they would get – what their teachers thought on the one hand and what the algorithm had produced – he was not going to win that argument on the news.
“He had worked it out for himself. He did not think, none of us thought, that it was impossible to sustain the position, despite the onslaught of attack there would be.
“We thought we were in extraordinary times. But with hindsight that was a poor decision. Up to the top of government, politicians understood the hit they would be taking. Though not, obviously, as bad as it was.”
They added: “There would be a row, but it was rideable. That’s what No.10 was being told.”
The DfE said all decisions on assessments in 2020 were based on delivering the fairest outcome for students.
A Department for Education spokesperson said:
“The pandemic had a huge impact across society and especially in education. We want to thank teachers, parents and pupils for their resilience and flexibility over the last 18 months. Contrary to the claims in this report, contingency plans for restrictions on schools opening in the 21/22 academic year were first published in August 2020, and contingency plans for qualifications in 2021 were first discussed with Ofqual in October 2020.
“We have acted swiftly at every turn to minimize the impact on children’s education and wellbeing and help keep pupils in face-to-face education as much as possible. We provided 1.3 million laptops and tablets to disadvantaged students, funded Oak National Academy to provide video lessons and made sure students could receive exam grades that helped them progress to the next stage of education or work.
“Through the tutoring revolution that will see pupils receive up to 100 million hours of free tuition, summer schools and our investment in the teaching profession we are working with schools to deliver ambitious catch-up plans so the children and young people who have been most disadvantaged during the pandemic have the support they need to catch up on their lost learning.”
The Department Of Education indicated to this publication that the essence of the report is flawed, the details of which are still being examined.
The Ifg have so far appears to have shied away from addressing some of the rebuttals presented by the Department Of Education, citing a busy schedule, but the case is to be revisited tomorrow to get to the bottom of the facts.