POLICY COMMISSION MEETING
Meeting |
Children and School Results Commission |
Ref |
CPC |
Date |
|
Place |
Committee Room 1, County Hall, |
Purpose of meeting |
Formal public meeting |
Attendance |
Commission members – Cllrs Apologies – Cllr Cabinet members – Cllrs Dawn Cousins, Patrick Joyce Cabinet Secretary – Cllr David Pugh Officers – Mr Steve Beynon, Mr Paul Thistlewood |
Agenda Items |
|
1.
Notes
of previous meeting |
The notes of the meeting held on 1 November 2006 were agreed. |
1.
Declarations
of interest |
There were no interests declared at this stage. |
2.
Investing
in the Island’s Future C1/06 – 14 to 19 Strategy |
Stakeholders present :- Ms Kay Wood
(
Paper circulated :- Response by Primary Headteachers Cllr Swan outlined the background to the enquiry and the Policy Commissions Scoping Document. General points arising :- Primary Sector (These comments were following discussions with Primary Head teacher colleagues) i. Although no direct impact upon the sector it is accepted that the service cannot stand still. ii. If a 6th Form Centre was established this would add a further transition phase. iii. Effect on recruitment in High Schools if no 6th Forms. iv. 6th Forms play an important part in inspiring other students in High Schools. v. They also assist in a range of activities in local Primary Schools. This could be lost if 6th Form students were located in one facility. vi. Work done by 6th Form Students in Primary Schools also form a vital element in their own course work. vii. If 6th Forms were lost in High Schools how would this impact upon the delivery of Every Child Matters and extended schools to support 16-18 year olds out of school hours. viii. 6th Form Centre would make it difficult to engage families. ix. Important to look at what improvements could be made to existing provision. x. Some good practice on collaboration between schools but this needed to be more widely shared and implemented. xi. Less nervous apprehension for Primary School staff than in Middle and High Schools about proposal. xii. Governors worried that there may be more to lose than gain by the proposed Centre. xiii. Primary schools collaborated with Middle Schools on gifted and talented pupils as well as those with learning difficulties. xiv. Use of data on pupil performance was patchy but where it was working it worked very well. Middle Schools (These comments were personal and not part of any formal consultation process) i. To ensure viability of Middle Schools these should be no smaller than 400 pupils. ii. Larger schools enable greater flexibility in delivering the curriculum and also recruitment. iii. Middle schools provided a “family” atmosphere for pupils. iv. Collaboration between schools was improving and this would assist in helping to raise standards. v. High School staff could assist in provision of teaching support in specialist subjects which could be lost if they had no 6th Forms. vi. Establishments needed good leadership irrespective of structure. vii. Disaffected pupils required a multi agency approach and these were better located at schools. viii. The Government agenda was for 14-19 and schools should be structured to take this into account and a 6th Form Centre would be a backward step. ix. Implications for High Schools if they had no 6th Forms and Middle Schools took responsibility in total for Key Stage 3. x. A number of pupils in Year 9 at High Schools appeared to be coasting. xi.
A xii. The Council had demonstrated new energy to improve educational attainment. xiii. The individual learning needs of each pupil was the key factor for achieving an improvement in the level of attainment. xiv. Level of involvement of High School students in Middle Schools inconsistent depending on schools involved. |