Headteacher Charlie Taylor's unconventional approach pays off

Mary O'Hara meets a straight-talking head who has used massage, tea and toast to change his pupils' lives

The first time I met Charlie Taylor, the straight-talking headmaster of the Willows school, a north London primary for children with severe behavioural problems, was in the autumn of 1988 at university. Despite striking differences in our backgrounds (Taylor was every inch the self-assured public school boy who slotted right in at Cambridge, while I hailed from an inner-city comprehensive in Belfast) we became good friends. He planned to go into teaching, but I assumed he would do what others from his background eventually do (he was a contemporary of David Cameron at Eton) and gravitate towards politics, the City or some other money-laced profession.

Fast forward two decades (we lost touch about 15 years ago) and he's a lauded headteacher, a consultant who has taught in and advised some of London's toughest schools, and latterly the author of two books to help parents navigate unruly behaviour, the latest of which, Divas and Door Slammers, focuses on how to deal with teenagers.

"I got into teaching – reluctantly – and then found I was interested in children who were naughty," he explains, putting his career history in context. "I got my first job in an inner-city secondary school [dealing] with all the rogues. It was a shit hole." One job led to another and, thanks mainly to a burgeoning interest in behavioural issues, Taylor began consulting for local education authorities and doing private freelance coaching with parents and children when bad behaviour was proving intractable. By 2005, he "got bored" and was ready for something new. Taylor was already working on his first book when he came across a vacancy for a head's position at the Willows. "I had no credentials, but I thought, 'fuck it, I'll just go for it'. I hadn't been a deputy head or anything like that, but I had a reasonably good reputation in the borough so I went and was interviewed. I've been there for the last five years."

He may not have been entirely qualified to run a school, but within 18 months the Willows had achieved its first outstanding rating from Ofsted, in part due to his unconventional approach. Describing the scale of the problem on arrival (the school had 36 children aged 11 and under who had been excluded by mainstream schools) he says: "Those first few months, it was like a war zone. I bought a £29.99 machine-washable suit, I got spat on so much". Most days staff had to physically restrain children who were aggressive. "Staff were getting injured and the children were getting injured. It was a complete zoo." Desperate times called for radical measures, so Taylor set about introducing a new regime. "For example, we brought in peer massage so that all the kids massage each other every day. The whole school has tea and toast every day. They stop at 10 o'clock in a very twee way and sit round a table with a china teapot."

He describes his approach as "very basic" and he focused on tackling rudimentary but fundamental gaps in the children's development, such as teaching them to welcome affection. The aim, he says, "is to put something in the tank", a reference to the fact that the majority of children arrive at the school with a host of developmental difficulties against a backdrop of "multi-generation" poverty and chaotic home lives. "[Then] they'll have something," he explains. "A little pocket of confidence and caring and love they'll be able to draw on. We have to do the cuddling bit, the family bit and also the playing bit. Some of them have got no idea how to play."

After making some "rookie" errors, mainly as he learned how to manage, the changes he implemented began to bear fruit. Taylor's experience both at the Willows and elsewhere has left him with an uncompromising view of the root of the problems he encounters. "It's poverty. I mean poverty in every sense of the word: poverty of expectations, poverty of emotions. It's the four horses of the apocalypse in terms of social deprivation."

In what turns out to be a sweeping (and disarmingly candid) interview, Taylor seamlessly segues from his own career and on to the gamut of what he regards as England's interwoven educational and social problems. He touches on everything from the failure of New Labour to address entrenched problems such as the minuscule number of youngsters on free school meals (one barometer for evaluating educational meritocracy) who get A* grades in exams, to the benefits system (he calls it "entrapping"), to why most parents could do with a bit of help adjusting to their children's adolescence.

Taylorbelieves mainstream schools aggravate problems for the most vulnerable youngsters, accusing New Labour of being "incredibly paranoid", afraid to take real risks and introduce reforms that could have improved the performance of kids at the lower end of the social scale. He also rails against politicians in general for an "obsession" with testing and league tables. The introduction of more tests and greater scrutiny weren't of themselves bad things, he suggests. "When I first started teaching, it was so sloppy and slack. Children just weren't being taught anything. It had to change." Rather, he contends that league tables and tests have done nothing to make the system fairer. As for those children least likely to perform well? They are all too often neglected by schools, he says. "I was in one school and the deputy head said, pointing at the lower achievers: 'that's the bunch. Forget that lot down there'. It's a very common [attitude]."

Finding the X factor
While the young children at his school tend to be the most difficult cases, "they've always got an X factor", Taylor says. In an echo of the Conservatives' Centre for Social Justice analyses, he regards their plight as an intrinsic consequence of social breakdown and a malfunctioning welfare system that discourages people from finding work. "It is easy for me to say. Of course it is. But I'm not insensitive. I see the damage. The [number of] long-term jobless hasn't even wavered on the dial." Blair putting "a lot of money in to Sure Start and stuff like that" helped some, but, he adds: "there was a glass bottom that they couldn't get through and there was a benefit-dependent underclass that it didn't trickle down to."

So what would he do to change things? Taylor asserts that "the ideology bit" gets in the way of debate on education, but says he likes the idea of implementing a quota system requiring schools to allocate a proportion of places to children on free school meals as a way of mitigating against middle-class parents colonising the best state schools.

Like the prime minister, David Cameron, Taylor has a confounding capacity for melding ideas from the left and right of the political spectrum – he advocates "pouring resources" into pregnant teenagers to improve their life chances rather than vilifying them, while adding that state schools could learn a lot from public schools. "That's another incredibly political thing [to say]. Public schools are unbelievably successful. Why wouldn't you want to emulate them?"

So what's his verdict on the new government so far and proposed changes, including allowing more schools to opt out of local authority control and become academies? Taylor says he "doesn't know enough about" what academies will mean in practice for a school like the Willows, but has begun to make enquiries. When asked about Cameron's view, widely seen as a gaffe, that the prospect of finding a good state secondary in inner-city London was terrifying, Taylor, who knows the prime minister personally, volunteers: "I would say the same thing. A lot of parents would say that. You don't have to be middle class".

Taylor knows that speaking his mind on what's wrong with state education will bring accusations of hubris. So would he be tempted to cash in some of his public-school privileges and move into something more lucrative or into politics? I am what I am now. I've made my bed. Who knows where I'll end up?"

Mary O'Hara
The Guardian Interviews Mon 23 Aug
http://bit.ly/8ZIvjO
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

Coalition education: first 100 days

Of all the new secretaries of state, few could be described as needing a summer break as much as Michael Gove.

A major plank of new legislation, numerous quangos axed and serious case reviews published, not to mention a botched announcement on school buildings leading to a demonstration and a string of apologies.

And his reforms to England's education system have been introduced at break-neck speed.

First to go was the name. Within hours of moving into the Great Smith Street headquarters, the Department for Children, Schools and Families reverted back to the Department for Education.

Legislative changes were not far behind. The day after the Queen's Speech laid bare the new government's intentions, the Academies Bill was launched.

In the face of accusations that it was being rushed through Parliament, the Bill received Royal assent just in time for the summer recess.

But former Conservative education secretary Lord Baker said Mr Gove was right to hit the ground running.

"If he had not achieved this, then the changes he wants to make in education would have been halting and slow and hesitant and would have made not much of an impact even by 2014," he added.

All schools are now free to apply for academy status. Although early departmental pronouncements hinted that more than 1,000 wished to do so, fewer than 200 have applied so far.

Perhaps more important than the initial numbers, is the ideological shift the Bill represents.

The Academies Bill facilitates a move from a state-run to a free market approach to schooling under Mr Gove's so-called "free schools".

Rather than relying on the authorities to determine the best school for your child, parents, teachers, charities and "new providers" are being encouraged to go it alone and set up their own schools using state funds.

So far the department says more than 60 such schools are in the pipeline.

There are more than 20,000 schools in England, and so the number who have applied under the new legislation is comparatively small.

I think this particular government has, just as Labour did in 1997, tried to do too much too quickly "

Estelle Morris, an education secretary under Tony Blair, argues the "jury's out" on the significance of Mr Gove's Academies Bill.

'Miserable pipsqueak'

"If it goes as he wants, and many schools go on to be academies or free schools, I think these are big changes...because it leaves the centre of a local school system with too little power and too few resources to do anything.

But, she says, if few schools go for the plans, then it is little more than a "big waste of time".

In common with every other government department, education is having to make savings.

Axing the school building programme may have seemed necessary, but it has provided Mr Gove with his biggest political headache to date.

Cancelling more than 700 school rebuilds was never going to be easy, but the inclusion of several mistakes in the initial list of named projects whipped up the tension and attacks on the new secretary of state.

He was labelled a "miserable pipsqueak of a man" by one angry MP and on a hot, July day hundreds of teachers, parents and pupils marched on Westminster.

Squeezed budgets

While Building Schools for the Future may have become the most high profile cut there have been plenty of others.

Contactpoint - the database which was to have stored the details of every child in England; playground grants to local authorities; Labour's planned expansion of free school meals; the ending of the Child Trust Fund and Health in Pregnancy Grant and quango's including Becta, which promoted technology in schools, and the Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency.

With council education chiefs being told to save over £300m, and more cuts expected after the Comprehensive Spending Review in October, the bad news is likely to be far from over.

That has led many within the education sector to question the introduction of new legislation when budgets are being squeezed.

John Dunford, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, says: "I think this particular government has, just as Labour did in 1997, tried to do too much too quickly and what I want to see is a greater emphasis on supporting schools to continue to raise standards at a time when inevitably resources are going to be much scarcer".

Despite the dropping of "families" from the department's name, it does remain a key area of responsibility.


Child protection gained prominence following the death of Baby Peter, with the then Children's Secretary Ed Balls becoming personally involved in the removal of the head of Haringey children's services.

The coalition has already made good on their pledge to publish, in full, serious case reviews which outline the failures of support services.

However, concern has been expressed that this government is focussing too heavily on school reform and that other important areas of responsibility such as child protection risk being overlooked.

Although the summer recess is providing some respite from proposed school reforms, a White Paper is due to be published in the autumn.

Pupil premium

This is likely to set the change train in motion once again.

A review of the curriculum is planned, as well as reform of qualifications from tests for 11-year-olds to the A-level.

Details on the pupil premium, whereby funds are to be targeted to the poorest pupils are expected, and there will be more plans developed on children with special education needs.

But as with all government departments, the ambition to implement reform will have to be tempered by how much money is available.

And that will not be known until after the Comprehensive Spending Review in October.

BBC online 18 August 2010
http://bbc.in/bgZaXg

Teachers unite for academies fight

Teachers and campaigners will unite in a countrywide offensive against academy schools when the new term begins in September.

They are seeking to stop schools bowing to pressure to become academies as part of government plans they branded "a disgusting attempt to privatise schools lock, stock and barrel."

Head teachers and governors of "outstanding" schools have been put under considerable pressure to sign up to become an academy, according to the Anti-Academies Alliance (AAA), which is fronting the campaign.

But only 153 schools have applied to become an academy, a measly 10 per cent of the 1,907 schools that expressed interest, it said.

AAA national secretary Alasdair Smith said yesterday: "Urgent campaigning can stop all these schools becoming academies.

"Given there are about 24,000 schools in England and Wales, it does not amount to the 'schools revolution' the Tories heralded before the election."

Campaigners are gobsmacked that, despite massive opposition, the government's Academies Bill was passed last month.

They argue the new Act has nothing to do with improving education standards but is a blatant political drive to "break the monopoly of state education" and create "educational inequality and social segregation."

The AAA is working with parents to launch a series of campaigns around the country at the beginning of the new school term.

A lack of proper consultation of schools going for academy status will be at the centre of the campaigns.

The AAA believes the Academies Act was deliberately amended to require limited consultation.

Teaching union GMB has also backed the campaign. Senior organiser Warren Kenny warned against cuts to jobs, pay or pensions as a result of a school moving to academy status.

"It is absolutely clear that support staff, parents and governors seem to have been left out of the discussions," he said.

National Union of Teachers general secretary Christine Blower said academies and free schools "will privilege the few at the expense of the many."

Free schools are funded by the taxpayer but run by private organisations without democratic oversight.

Fellow union NASUWT leader Chris Keates said: "The expansion of the academy schools programme and creation of free schools has more to do with breaking the monopoly of state education by severing the links with local authorities than with raising standards of education. 

"Academies and free schools are a recipe for educational inequality and social segregation."

The academies issue is expected to create further damaging divisions within the Con-Dem coalition, with the Liberal Democrats preparing to call for a boycott of academies and free schools at their conference next month.

The AAA is producing a new edition of its newspaper, compiling leaflets and will announce details of more than 20 campaign meetings across the country.

From morning star Sunday 22 August 2010
http://bit.ly/aHsTW8

Academies may prove to be less independent than they think

The 2010 Academies Act might end up giving central government too much power over teachers and schools, argues Tom Clark

Listen to Michael Gove enthuse about academies, and you imagine the educational system as an archipelago of fiercely independent islands, each with a distinctive culture. Rather like Oxbridge colleges, free schools are envisaged as each being blessed with a distinctive ethos. The chief objection raised to this vision amounts to the claim that no school is an island – the fortunes of one are so tied to the other, that some institutions will end up prospering at the expense of others.

That argument is important, and it has been well rehearsed, not least in the pages of Education Guardian. But after a generation of curriculums and tests being handed down from on high, it is not hard to see why the idea of independence holds terrific appeal.

Far less thought, though, has gone into assessing whether the claimed independence is meaningful, or even what "independence" actually means. The legislation hardly helps: Labour's laws defined independent state schools purely negatively, as institutions not funded by local authorities.

Sir Peter Newsam, the respected educationalist, notes that this is rather like "defining a camel as not being a horse", and suggests it is more instructive to consider how far academies are beholden to powers outside their own walls.

Consider how academies fare in respect of the two worries that most reliably render institutions dependent – worries about where the money will come from, and worries about the right to stay open for business. Unlike universities, private schools or even church schools, academies have virtually no independent resources. The revenue comes from a deal with the secretary of state, and in the final resort even the premises can be returned to him or her, to redeploy or sell off as the secretary sees fit.

Under Labour, the law provided at least a measure of security by specifying that there would be formal contracts that would run for at least seven years, but the new Academies Act – which was rushed through in July – opens the possibility of new schools being established from scratch, using the secretary of state's sweeping powers "to give financial assistance for purposes related to education". These were originally intended to allow Whitehall to subsidise particular initiatives, such as scholarships or literacy schemes, but in theory they could now be used to set up and maintain entire institutions on the basis of insecure grants.

The traditional local authority school was, if anything, rather too free of the fear that anyone would shut it down. Rab Butler's 1944 Education Act was in part a response to the totalitarian habit of bullying schools into line. While local authorities could propose shutting a school, they could not actually do so unless the secretary of state agreed. The secretary, meanwhile, could not close any school's gates without receiving such a proposal. With the local tier swept away, however, academies lack these checks and balances. The educational islands have no defence if they incur the wrath of the imperial power in London.

Now, whatever else Gove may be, I do not think he is a power-mad centraliser. He defines himself against the French Third Republic, where the minister could sit in his office and dictate that children all over the nation were reading the same book at the same time. But, like all politicians, he has his own views – think of the great stress he lays on children learning British kings and queens.

The great dependence of academies on the educational centre might make them more receptive to such whims. The real dangers, however, could emerge when we get a new education secretary who has a more prescriptive agenda – be it religious, secular, liberal or traditional. We might then discover that – in the name of increasing school independence – the 2010 Academies Act has given the centre all the power it needs to tell teachers how to teach.
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

Does the new A* at A-level make the grade?

Did the new A* grade do what it was intended to do? Opinion is divided.

For the tens of thousands of students celebrating climbing to this new height, much praise is due. With only one-in-12 A-level papers (8%) getting the grade, they are set apart.

The grade was brought in to challenge the brightest students, give them a chance to demonstrate the depth of their knowledge - and to help universities choose the best students. Critics had complained A-levels were not hard enough. But has the A* done its job? Opinions are divided - even on what the job was.

Martin Stephen, the high master of St Paul's School in west London, is very critical of the A*, even though many of his pupils boast a string of them.

"I think it is an outrage and a disgrace," he said."The idea of an A* is fine. Universities need an exam to identify the top 15% of the cohort - unfortunately the A* is not the way to do it."

Dr Stephen dismisses the grade as a "statistical, mathematical device" and says the "fatal flaw" is that no new material was involved.

Pupils have to score at least 90% on their harder A2 papers - taken in the second year of study - and get an A overall to be awarded an A*. All candidates get the same questions.

"It will destroy creativity, imagination and independent thought because people will be terrified of dropping a mark," he added.

John Dunford, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, disagrees.

" He said there was "no question" the exams were harder this year - and that teachers and pupils rose to the challenge.

It will destroy creativity, imagination and independent thought because people will be terrified of dropping a mark"

"The questions were harder, the way in which the questions were framed. Over the last 10 years, people who have done A-levels, the A2 questions would take them through A, B, C, D, E," he said.

"It would sort of take you through the answer, whereas now the question just comes at you, and you've got to do the analysis. It's required a different way of teaching." Martin Stephen High Master St Paul's School

Gillian Low, president of the Girls' School Association, said: "There was stretch there and some demanding questions. "We did welcome the A*. It is important to give that stretch and challenge to the brightest."

Magic bullet

Isabel Nisbet, chief executive of the exams regulator Ofqual, says the A* "did what it said on the tin - and did it fairly and accurately". "The purpose of the A* was to demonstrate exceptional achievement at the most difficult part of the A-level. I think it has achieved that," she said. "If you ask me whether it was the magic bullet to answer all questions about university selection - it was never intended to do that."

Andrew Hall, chief executive of the Assessment and Qualifications Alliance, one of three main exam boards in England, said: "I think there is a myth to slay here - the A-level is not meant to get harder. "There is a myth to slay here - the A-level is not meant to get harder"

"What was introduced was some more complex questions that enabled the really, really strong students to show how much stronger they could perform within the A grade."

The new format for the A-level, Ofqual explains, was intended to stretch the brightest while not disadvantaging the "C" candidate. Andrew Hall AQA exams

But will universities find it easier to choose the best students because of the A*? The jury might be out on that for some time. Only a dozen or so universities built the A* into their admissions systems for this year.

Those which chose not to include the new grade say it is because they rely heavily on teachers' predictions of pupils' grades when making offers - and they were not sure how reliable the A* would be in the early days.

Indeed, many students with strings of A*s are among those disappointed not to get a university place of their choice this year.

But universities are paying close attention to the grade. Oxford University - unlike Cambridge - did not make offers based on the A* and says it will not do so for the next round of applications.

But the director of undergraduate admissions, Mike Nicholson, says the university will look closely at the results of those it has admitted for this year - and those it did not - to see what lessons it can learn.

"The next stage will be to look at how the distribution of A* grades correlates with Oxford's own selection procedures," he said.

"We will also over a number of years be looking at how candidates with A* grades perform in their university exams."

Dr Wendy Piatt, director general of the Russell Group of research-intensive universities, said she expected to see an increase in the number of courses requiring at least one A*.

"The A* grade - alongside very helpful recent reforms such as access to AS-level unit grades and the extended project - is a welcome addition to the tool kit that admissions tutors can choose to use to help them select students with the greatest potential," she said.

Some fear the introduction of the A* will make it harder for pupils from disadvantaged homes to get to university.

Just 14% of A-level exam entries this year were from independent schools - but private schools took 30% of all the A*s awarded.

Entries from comprehensive schools made up 43% of the total but just 30% of the A*s.

At some independent schools, as many as 40 and 50% of A-levels were passed at A*.

Conveyor belt

Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said: "The introduction of A* at A-level has introduced a way for the Russell Group of universities of filtering candidates for selection without the rounded interview processes which have enabled many candidates from disadvantaged backgrounds to go to those universities."

And TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said: "Whatever its intentions, the introduction of the A* grade will do even more to favour the conveyor belt from private education to top universities."

Dr Piatt said more students from low-income groups were now going to Russell Group universities but members remained concerned about the under-representation of students from comprehensives among the highest-achieving A-level candidates.

"Ensuring students from low-income backgrounds fulfil their potential at school is by far and away the most effective way of increasing their chances of going to a leading university," she said. " The A* grade represents genuine top-level attainment"

Schools minister Nick Gibb spoke up for the grade: "The A* grade represents genuine top-level attainment. The most competitive universities have long wanted to differentiate between top-performing students. The previous government introduced the A* to help them do this. It is now down to universities to decide how they use it." Nick Gibb Schools Minister The coalition government has already committed itself to making the exams system "more rigorous".

Education Secretary Michael Gove has said he wants A-levels to "revive the art of deep thought". He has asked Ofqual to make sure the exams withstand international comparison, and wants universities and employers to be more involved in their design and content.

The government will set out its plans in a White Paper in the autumn

BBC 21 August 2010
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11037928
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

Multi million schools plan will go ahead

BSF for two local schools will go ahead

St.Helens is celebrating today's news that it has confirmation that two projects under the Building Schools for the Future programme will now go ahead together with the associated ICT investment.

Earlier this year the Government scrapped the majority of BSF projects but left some hanging in the balance.

A £27-million scheme to rebuild and remodel Rainford High Technology College catering for 1650 young people will now go ahead. A £20-million scheme to remodel De La Salle School with partial new build catering for 1220 young people will also proceed

A scheme proposed for part new build and part refurbishment of Sutton Academy catering for 1200 pupils plus post-16 provision is still awaiting a government decision.

Councillor Barrie Grunewald, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Culture,Communications and Town Centre welcomed the news adding: "While being devastated that the coalition government scrapped BSF at least two of our schemes will now go ahead and residents can be assured that we will be pressing the government to come forward with plans to finance our other Schools in the Borough. This announcement will be a tremendous boost for the educational facilities concerned and good news for the construction industry."

Councillor Eric Smith, Cabinet Member for Children, Young People and Learning Services says: "This is a major investment into the two schools and into their communities, which will support the ongoing regeneration and modernisation of St Helens. This is however not just about buildings and facilities - critical to the success will be the transformation of teaching and learning in the high schools, and the aim is to lift the achievement of our young people in these schools to another level in future years."

From St Helens Council website
http://bit.ly/bVhykA

A-level results: academy to move to international baccalaureate

As pupils at Havelock get their results, all eyes are on the academy in Grismby as it prepares to introduce qualification

Havelock academy in Grimsby received its first ever set of A-level results today, having set up its sixth form in 2008. But they are also among the last for a school which views the qualification as a limited – and limiting – measure of pupils' talents.

"Two more years, and then we will be using the international baccalaureate," said the headteacher, Nick O'Sullivan, as pupils compared results beside a quacking pet duck which shares Havelock's grounds with a wildflower garden.

"I believe that will bring us a richness and flexibility which we can apply across the school at all levels."

Two Havelock pupils illustrate the various pitfalls of the current exam system, despite good results.

Lauren Ward, 18, has won the school its first A* grade, in photography. However, her place at the University of Lincoln still depends on the results of retakes of GCSEs in English and maths, due next week.

"She's brilliant at photography, no one can have the slightest doubt about that," said Janet Shawcross, the school's A-level co-ordinator.

Ward has already set up wedding and commercial business "to earn a bit of money and to get my name out there for when I've finished my studies."

But the two GCSE basics came a lot harder, and the regimentation of grades for university could still, just possibly, mean that she loses out.

Jessica Paterson has got three Bs in English, psychology and social care, enough for her to pick and choose from five university offers. Instead, she is one of a growing number of well-qualified leavers opting to go into full-time work instead.

"I'm just fed up of studying," she said. "I've been offered a job as a support worker and events organiser for Mencap, which is just want I want to do. It'll be great experience, and I can maybe think about going to university later."

O'Sullivan, who was head-hunted from the independent sector to lead the new academy, believes that the international baccalaureate (IB) will nurture and encourage such independent souls. Lauren in particular, he says, has shown "a route to success which I don't think anyone would have foreseen a couple of years ago".

The IB system will feature innovations such as Dutch and Swedish – languages familiar on lorries heading up and down the M180 to the port – and courses designed to help students such as Paterson into work at 18, if they prefer to postpone or sidestep university.

Havelock has been chosen to trial the aspects of the IB, and O'Sullivan hopes that the new exam may also ease the careful targeting of A-level students towards "achievable" universities, which can sometimes fall on the wrong side of caution.

Havelock's system of houses, all named after famous Grimsby trawlers, encourages intensive mentoring of pupils which leads teachers to a good notion of where they will succeed, and where applications to further education might be risky.

As a result, two-thirds of the first tranche of 19 A-level students have got their first choice of place. All the others have got into their "insurance" options, bar two who are still waiting for confirmation or clearing.

"The teachers advised us very carefully, and I'm glad they did," said Joe Wilkinson, 18, who knew by the end of his exams that things had not gone as well as he'd hoped. So he backed up his first choice of Nottingham Trent with Manchester Met and, in the event he failed to make the grades for either, a third choice, Grimsby Institute, where he will now study psychology.

Eyes now turn to Havelock's lower sixth, including two Oxbridge applicants and budding mathematician Aakash Limbu, son of a former Gurkha who relocated to the UK three years ago. He took maths and physics this summer, a year early, and got an A and a B, which he hopes to supplement with more A-levels in order to gain a place at York next year.

The attention comes not just from Grimsby either. Havelock was favourite of the last government, much-encouraged by the former education minister Lord Adonis. And the school's sponsor, David Ross, the scion of Grimsby's leading fishery family who made his own fortune with Carphone Warehouse, is one of the Tories' main cheerleaders for academies.

Lord Plant, the philosopher and another influential adviser to government, who was himself a Havelock alumnus, also keeps in touch and is following the IB trial with interest.

Martin Wainwright
The Guardian News Thu 19 Aug 2010
http://m.guardian.co.uk/?id=102202&story=http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/aug/19/international-baccalaureate-havelock-academy-grimsby