1-20 of 1,019 results for subject:Standards
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.328 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.021 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Standards
- We searched for
- subject_t:Standards OR subject_t:Benchmarking OR subject_t:"Performance indicators" OR subject_t:"Performance measurement" OR subject_t:"Performance standards" OR subject_t:"Performance targets" OR subject_ses:93107
Type
House
Session
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
More
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
I agree with my noble friend. Much has been said about this issue, not all of it, I suspect, either helpful or correct. It is important that we allow a relatively speedy—I hope—and independent investigation into the issues raised by this very sad case, which may well relate to the processes for the recruitment of academics, the levels of academic and research standards and the processes in place, both within individual institutions and across the sector, for ensuring that in our higher education system those are maintained at the very highest levels. I am sure it
will be helpful to wait for the results of these inquiries and any recommendations that are made in order for all of us to be able to review what further action might be necessary.
I agree with my noble friend. Much has been said about this issue, not all of it, I suspect, either helpful or correct. It is important that we allow a relatively speedy—I hope—and independent investigation into the issues raised by this very sad case, which may well relate to the processes for the recruitment of academics, the levels of academic and research standards and the processes in place, both within individual institutions and across the sector, for ensuring that in our higher education system those are maintained at the very highest levels. I am sure it
will be helpful to wait for the results of these inquiries and any recommendations that are made in order for all of us to be able to review what further action might be necessary.
My Lords, this is a serious and difficult case that clearly raises legitimate questions, but surely we should await the outcome of the various inquiries under way before passing judgment. Universities, as the Minister said, are already subject to a range of checks and balances, and indeed Cambridge has already started its review process. I suggest that the most responsible course of action at this stage is to let the investigations establish the facts, look carefully at what they tell us about the robustness of the existing checks and then consider whether any regulatory or other intervention is necessary.
As I think I have already made clear, both I and the Secretary of State have been doing more than just keeping our eye on this. It was important for us yesterday, in our meeting with the vice-chancellor, to have the assurance that she was able to give us that the detail of the reviews would be imminently announced, that the reviews would be carried out independently and that recommendations that came from them would be made available for all of us to consider whether any further action is necessary.
As I think I have already made clear, both I and the Secretary of State have been doing more than just keeping our eye on this. It was important for us yesterday, in our meeting with the vice-chancellor, to have the assurance that she was able to give us that the detail of the reviews would be imminently announced, that the reviews would be carried out independently and that recommendations that came from them would be made available for all of us to consider whether any further action is necessary.
My Lords, on Tuesday we heard some moving and powerful speeches about breaking through the defensive institutional cover-ups of wrongdoing when we discussed the Hillsborough law. Even honest mistakes can be made toxic by a lack of accountability. Can the Minister assure us that universities are also held to these high standards of candour, that their autonomy cannot be used as an excuse for marking one’s own homework, as in the instance of what Cambridge proposes, and that she takes seriously the fact that academics, whistleblowers and journalists were threatened and smeared for simply doing their job? Does she accept that academic freedom and academic standards are threatened if nothing is done, and can she assure us that she will keep her eye on this? What has happened here is very serious.
First, to reiterate what I said, it is right that institutions themselves are responsible for maintaining academic standards. It is a fundamental part of the reason for the success of our higher education system that they continue to maintain high academic standards. The noble Baroness raises an important point about regulation with respect to teacher training, where I think there is a role for Ofsted, but I will come back to her with more detail.
With regard to the university itself, as I have made clear, the Office for Students already has the ability to regulate with respect to academic standards and processes that might be undermining them. She makes an important point, which I touched on earlier, about the extent to which the system itself, rather than simply individual institutions, maintains the quality of academic standards. That is something that we and Universities UK will want to look at in more detail.
First, to reiterate what I said, it is right that institutions themselves are responsible for maintaining academic standards. It is a fundamental part of the reason for the success of our higher education system that they continue to maintain high academic standards. The noble Baroness raises an important point about regulation with respect to teacher training, where I think there is a role for Ofsted, but I will come back to her with more detail.
With regard to the university itself, as I have made clear, the Office for Students already has the ability to regulate with respect to academic standards and processes that might be undermining them. She makes an important point, which I touched on earlier, about the extent to which the system itself, rather than simply individual institutions, maintains the quality of academic standards. That is something that we and Universities UK will want to look at in more detail.
My Lords, the department at the centre of this summer’s tragic events is not any university faculty. It trains teachers with public money under DfE accreditation. Parents and schools are entitled to know that those who train our teachers meet the standards that we demand of the teachers themselves. Will the Minister confirm which regulator—the Office for Students, Ofsted or her own department—is responsible and accountable for the integrity of academic qualifications in accredited teacher training providers? Will she accept that nobody in England currently has the power to investigate across institutions? If she agrees with that, will she say which body should do it?
It is unlike the noble Baroness to make the charge that she has just made to me, and, frankly, I think it is unfair. I have been pretty clear that, in talking to Cambridge University, we have been assured and are clear that there will be an independent investigation into the particular circumstances here. I have also been clear, in response to the question from the noble Lord, Lord Mohammed of Tinsley, that when we know what the conclusions of that review are, there may well be further action that we want to take. If the noble Baroness wants me to take knee-jerk action on the basis of news headlines, I am afraid that is not something I am willing to do.
It is unlike the noble Baroness to make the charge that she has just made to me, and, frankly, I think it is unfair. I have been pretty clear that, in talking to Cambridge University, we have been assured and are clear that there will be an independent investigation into the particular circumstances here. I have also been clear, in response to the question from the noble Lord, Lord Mohammed of Tinsley, that when we know what the conclusions of that review are, there may well be further action that we want to take. If the noble Baroness wants me to take knee-jerk action on the basis of news headlines, I am afraid that is not something I am willing to do.
My Lords, the Minister—inadvertently, I am sure—creates an impression of if not complacency then certainly inertia. I emphasise that I am sure it is inadvertent. What many of us find surprising is the question of what would be necessary to allow the Office for Students to launch an investigation, rather than a general periphery discussion going on among institutions. Surely that office should have the power to take dynamic action.
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether they will consider giving the Office for Students power to investigate serious allegations of academic misconduct where a university has declined to commission an independent inquiry.
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether they will consider giving the Office for Students power to investigate serious allegations of academic misconduct where a university has declined to commission an independent inquiry.
My Lords, our world-class higher education system is built on the principle of institutional autonomy. As autonomous institutions, universities are responsible for setting and maintaining the academic standards of the qualifications that they award. The Office for Students regulates these standards through its regulatory framework. When providers fall below minimum requirements, it already has the power to investigate and take regulatory action.
My Lords, our world-class higher education system is built on the principle of institutional autonomy. As autonomous institutions, universities are responsible for setting and maintaining the academic standards of the qualifications that they award. The Office for Students regulates these standards through its regulatory framework. When providers fall below minimum requirements, it already has the power to investigate and take regulatory action.
My Lords, our world-class higher education system is built on the principle of institutional autonomy. As autonomous institutions, universities are responsible for setting and maintaining the academic standards of the qualifications that they award. The Office for Students regulates these standards through its regulatory framework. When providers fall below minimum requirements, it already has the power to investigate and take regulatory action.
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether they will consider giving the Office for Students power to investigate serious allegations of academic misconduct where a university has declined to commission an independent inquiry.
I have already identified that the Office for Students has that power already. The death of Jason Arday is of course a tragedy. I am sure that, for many people, our heartfelt condolences are with his family and friends and everybody who cared about him. Cambridge is rightly establishing an independent investigation. I had the opportunity yesterday, along with the Secretary of State, to talk to the vice-chancellor and senior leaders of Cambridge University about that, and they will be imminently announcing the detail of the terms of reference for that investigation. Importantly, they gave assurances to me and the Secretary of State that it would be independent and rigorous.
I have already identified that the Office for Students has that power already. The death of Jason Arday is of course a tragedy. I am sure that, for many people, our heartfelt condolences are with his family and friends and everybody who cared about him. Cambridge is rightly establishing an independent investigation. I had the opportunity yesterday, along with the Secretary of State, to talk to the vice-chancellor and senior leaders of Cambridge University about that, and they will be imminently announcing the detail of the terms of reference for that investigation. Importantly, they gave assurances to me and the Secretary of State that it would be independent and rigorous.
I am grateful for that reply. Does the Minister accept that the Jason Arday case, where serious allegations of academic misconduct were initially dismissed by Cambridge as a “vile smear”, with an investigation launched only after months of damaging public scrutiny, illustrates why the Office for Students needs this power? Will the Government commit to consulting about it?
That would clearly be an unsatisfactory position for any junior academic involved in that situation. It is slightly less a job for government and slightly more for the leadership of universities, which, as I have said, are autonomous institutions that are rightly responsible for maintaining their academic standards. I am sure that they and others will have heard the concerns that the noble Baroness has expressed today.
That would clearly be an unsatisfactory position for any junior academic involved in that situation. It is slightly less a job for government and slightly more for the leadership of universities, which, as I have said, are autonomous institutions that are rightly responsible for maintaining their academic standards. I am sure that they and others will have heard the concerns that the noble Baroness has expressed today.
My Lords, one area of academic misconduct that does not get addressed is the exploitation of junior academics, particularly women and minority-ethnic academics, by older academics who sometimes force their names on to papers to which they have not contributed, use the work of junior academics to secure millions of pounds of research funding and then discard them from projects. Sometimes there are tribunals, settlements and NDAs, but there is no accountability and the cycle continues. What are the Government doing, and what can the Office for Students do, to address this?
We always keep the powers of the Office for Students under review. I am sure that it, like others, will want to look carefully at any recommendations that come out of the independent inquiry that Cambridge University has instituted. Universities UK may also want to think about the way in which any lessons learned from this episode can be reflected across the whole sector, and we will obviously want to work with it on that as well.
We always keep the powers of the Office for Students under review. I am sure that it, like others, will want to look carefully at any recommendations that come out of the independent inquiry that Cambridge University has instituted. Universities UK may also want to think about the way in which any lessons learned from this episode can be reflected across the whole sector, and we will obviously want to work with it on that as well.
My Lords, I also pay tribute to Jason Arday. In the Minister’s response to the noble Lord, Lord Young, she talked about the Office for Students having the powers already, but is she willing to carry out a review to ensure that it has sufficient powers and, if possible, look at the possibilities of beefing up its powers if she found that it needed more?
To ask His Majesty's Government what safeguards they will retain to ensure national consistency in educational standards following the implementation of plans to reform funding for special educational needs and disabilities provision in mainstream and specialist schools.
To ask His Majesty's Government what safeguards they will retain to ensure national consistency in educational standards following the implementation of plans to reform funding for special educational needs and disabilities provision in mainstream and specialist schools.
We have appointed an independent panel of experts, led by education and health co-chairs, to advise on what approaches, strategies, and tools should be included in the National Inclusion Standards and Specialist Provision Packages.
The Standards will set out the provision that ordinarily should be in every setting across the 0 to 25 system. This is in addition to the evidence-based tools, strategies and approaches for educators to support children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities.
Specialist Provision Packages describe the support available for children and young people with the most complex needs. These measures are designed to create a consistent, high-quality offer, wherever they live, thereby ending the post code lottery of support.
We will develop a national cost framework for these packages, and we expect to engage with stakeholders and consult on any new funding arrangements in due course.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of school closures on educational outcomes; and what support they are offering to students whose school has closed.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of school closures on educational outcomes; and what support they are offering to students whose school has closed.
The department recognises that the decision to close a school is difficult and sensitive and expects alternatives to closure to be explored before a decision is made. Where closure is considered the right option, the department expects proposers to minimise disruption to pupils’ education during the closure process and to support a smooth transition to alternative educational provision.
The evidence does not suggest a simple causal link between school closures and educational outcomes. However, we know that falling pupil numbers can create pressures on school finances, staffing and curriculum delivery, which may lead to closure being considered along with other options. The department is considering the impact of demographic change on educational outcomes, including for disadvantaged pupils, in line with recommendations made by the National Audit Office.
Proposers and local authorities should work together to ensure there are alternative places available for pupils, suitable transport arrangements and support for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities as part of closure plans. Where the proposer is an academy trust, the department scrutinises these plans before agreeing to closure.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Smith of Malvern on 14 July (HL1473), what mechanisms are in place to ensure that (1) the expert panel is publicly accountable, and (2) the wider community can submit feedback on the standards and specialist provision packages being developed.
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Baroness Smith of Malvern on 14 July (HL1473), what mechanisms are in place to ensure that (1) the expert panel is publicly accountable, and (2) the wider community can submit feedback on the standards and specialist provision packages being developed.
The independent expert panel has been appointed to oversee the development of the National Inclusion Standards and Specialist Provision Packages. The panel will draw on evidence from academics, education leaders and practitioners, the Education Endowment Foundation, health and social care professionals, and UKRI. They will promote high-quality, evidence-based practice, to ensure accountability and alignment across the system.
The panel will also engage with stakeholders from the wider community, including children, young people, families, practitioners, local authorities and representative organisations to make sure their recommendations are informed by a wide range of views and lived experience. A parent engagement group to support the panel's work is being established.
The panel will publish their recommendations on draft Specialist Provision Packages for the department and the Department of Health and Social Care to decide on. The departments will be accountable for decision-making on the Specialist Provision Packages.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effect of persistent absence from school on GCSE attainment in England.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effect of persistent absence from school on GCSE attainment in England.
Tackling absence is at the heart of the government’s mission to break down barriers to opportunity. The pandemic had a significant impact on attendance across the country, with persistent absence rates roughly doubling. Attendance has been improving year on year, though persistent absence remains above pre-pandemic levels.
The causes of persistent absence are complex and often overlapping. They include physical and mental ill health, special educational needs and disabilities, disadvantage, insecure housing, transport difficulties and other practical barriers.
Persistent absence is substantially higher among disadvantaged pupils. In the 2024/25 academic year, 32.35% of pupils eligible for free school meals were persistently absent, compared with 12.10% for pupils who are not eligible.
Absence also has a significant effect on attainment. Departmental analysis found that pupils who miss just 10 days in Year 11 have around half the odds of achieving grade 5 in English and mathematics compared with otherwise similar pupils. However, measures taken by the government and the sector are having an effect. In 2024/25 pupils attended over 5 million more days than in the previous year, and around 150,000 fewer children were persistently absent.
To ask His Majesty's Government what independent evaluation they have commissioned into the educational effectiveness of (1) one-to-one screen-based devices, and (2) educational technology applications, currently used in schools in England.
To ask His Majesty's Government what independent evaluation they have commissioned into the educational effectiveness of (1) one-to-one screen-based devices, and (2) educational technology applications, currently used in schools in England.
The department supports schools to make evidence-informed decisions about technology and trends in technology use in schools and colleges through the Technology in Schools Survey.
To consider the effectiveness of these technologies the department has a series of programmes underway, including the £24 million EdTech Testbed programme, which will generate stronger evidence on the impact of educational technology in real-world school and college settings. A pilot EdTech Evidence Board has also been established and uses independent expert panels to review evidence of the quality and impact of EdTech tools. Finally, artificial intelligence benchmarks are being developed as an independent way to assess the effective development of generative AI tools for education.
The department also works with the Education Endowment Foundation to support independent evaluations of EdTech use. Decisions about one-to-one devices and specific applications remain for schools and trusts, based on their pupils’ needs, infrastructure and teaching priorities.
To ask His Majesty's Government what evidence they hold on the impact of the use of one-to-one screen-based devices and educational technology applications on educational attainment in (1) primary, and (2) secondary, schools.
To ask His Majesty's Government what evidence they hold on the impact of the use of one-to-one screen-based devices and educational technology applications on educational attainment in (1) primary, and (2) secondary, schools.
The department recognises the growing use of education technology in schools and the importance of understanding its impact on pupil outcomes. Through the Technology in Schools Survey, we track the types of devices made available to pupils and the extent to which these are used in lessons. The department is currently launching programmes such as the National EdTech Testbed programme to build the evidence base on the impact of technology. We announced in January 2026 that the Testbed Programme has expanded, and we have now partnered with the Education Endowment Foundation to deliver the £24 million multi-year programme which will build an evidence pipeline, evaluating the impact of education technology and artificial intelligence in schools and colleges, and how it can be used effectively to support teachers, improve inclusion and strengthen educational outcomes. The department will continue to support schools to make evidence-informed decisions about the use of technology.
To ask His Majesty's Government how they assess the educational efficacy of educational technology products before recommending or encouraging their use in schools in England.
To ask His Majesty's Government how they assess the educational efficacy of educational technology products before recommending or encouraging their use in schools in England.
All schools and multi-academy trusts are responsible for selecting technology that meets their own educational needs, context and supports them in meeting statutory responsibilities.
Those choices should be informed, evidence-based decisions. To support schools, our EdTech Evidence Board programme set out a framework of advice and questions schools can ask EdTech suppliers to support evidence-based decisions. We are also in the process of setting up EdTech Testbed Programme to assess and generate evidence on the effectiveness and impact of technology, including artificial intelligence (AI), in real education settings. Lastly, we are developing AI benchmarks as a way to test the effective product development of AI tools.
The department does not currently recommend, endorse or encourage any specific educational technology products for use in schools.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of increasing rates of probable mental health conditions among young people on academic attendance and attainment in England.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the impact of increasing rates of probable mental health conditions among young people on academic attendance and attainment in England.
Regular attendance, engagement in learning and educational success can support positive mental health and wellbeing, while poor mental health can act as a barrier to attendance and attainment.
Evidence shows that children and young people with higher levels of wellbeing, on average, achieve better academic outcomes and are more engaged in their education. Conversely, mental health difficulties are associated with lower educational attainment, including poorer GCSE outcomes.
Evidence also indicates that children and young people with a probable mental disorder are around seven times more likely to have missed more than 15 days of school than those unlikely to have a mental disorder.
This is why the government is expanding Mental Health Support Teams (MHSTs) to cover every school and college by 2029, providing early support for children and young people with emerging mental health needs. As of March 2026, 60% of pupils in schools and learners in further education in England are covered by an MHST, up from 52% in March 2025. We are also working with schools, trusts and local authorities to improve attendance, recognising that supporting pupils' wellbeing and mental health is an important part of helping more children attend and succeed in education.
Lords motion to take note of the future affordability and quality of higher education. Agreed to on question.
Lords motion to take note of the future affordability and quality of higher education. Agreed to on question.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of (1) the use of AI in the delivery of postgraduate teaching at UK universities, and (2) the impact of the use of AI for teaching on higher education quality and regulation.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of (1) the use of AI in the delivery of postgraduate teaching at UK universities, and (2) the impact of the use of AI for teaching on higher education quality and regulation.
It has not proved possible to respond to this question in the time available before Prorogation. Ministers will correspond directly with the Member.
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of barriers to compliance with school food standards in school breakfast provision; and what steps they are taking as part of the free breakfast club rollout to ensure equitable access to nutritious breakfast for all pupils, including those with special...
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of barriers to compliance with school food standards in school breakfast provision; and what steps they are taking as part of the free breakfast club rollout to ensure equitable access to nutritious breakfast for all pupils, including those with special...
The government is committed to offering free breakfast clubs to all primary-aged pupils in England, including those with special educational needs and disabilities, so that all children have access to a healthy breakfast and a soft start to their school day. Food served at free breakfast clubs must meet the School Food Standards, and we have provided guidance to schools on healthy breakfast options.
Early adopter schools are already sharing examples of good practice to support consistent, high‑quality provision across the country.
Parents care deeply about the food their children eat, which is why we plan to overhaul the School Food Standards for the first time in over a decade. Developed alongside nutritionists and public health experts, the new standards will include dedicated breakfast standards, cutting high sugar items and increasing higher-fibre wholegrains.
We have launched a 9 week consultation on these changes and are committed to developing a robust enforcement system, which includes monitoring of compliance.
.