Policy Commission for Children and School Results Notes

POLICY COMMISSION MEETING

Meeting	Children and School Results Commission
Ref	CPC 7/9/05
Date	Wednesday, 7 September 2005 6.00pm – 8.30pm
Place	Committee Room 1, County Hall, Newport, Isle of Wight
Purpose of meeting	Formal public meeting
Attendance	Commission members – Cllrs Melanie Swan (Commissioner), Wendy Arnold, George Cameron, Deborah Gardiner, Gill Kennett Apologies – Cllr Lady Pigot The Commissioner reported that Cllr Garry Price had resigned from the Commission and this would leave a vacancy for a Liberal Democrat representative. Officers – Mr Rob Faulkner, Mr David Pettitt, Mr Keith Simmonds, Mr Paul Thistlewood, Miss April West
Agenda Items
1. School Improvement Programme C1/05 – Evidence from School Governor representatives	Papers considered :-. Written comments from Mr P Fuller, Chairman of the Island Governors Association. Mr Paul Fuller, Mr Stuart Clements and Mrs Sarah Sheath from the IW Governors Association, together with Mr Tony Wake, Chairman of Nodehill Middle School Governing Body were present. Evidence :- a) Governors supported the Council’s drive to raise the level of school attainment. b) Increase in standards for 14 – 19 year olds would benefit the wider community. c) ‘A’ level students have a restricted curriculum. d) Not helpful to blame governors for poor school performance in the press. e) Role and responsibilities of Governors regularly being expanded by the Government. f) Training provision for new Governors is excellent but for other courses insufficient Governors signing up for courses which then have to be cancelled due to lack if interest. Other methods of delivering training needs to be investigated. g) Process required for updating all Governors on latest developments. h) Governors can be unsure how to proceed as a critical friend particularly if they form close links to school staff. i) Evidence suggests that not all Governors understand issues relating to school targets. j) Representatives not aware of how targets can be hidden from Governors by Head Teachers. k) Difficulty for Governors to challenge on school performance when an Ofsted issues a satisfactory report. l) Each school needs to be challenged on their value added score. m) Requirement for open, effective and clear data for each school and remove the air of confidentiality about this. n) Governors should be able to see where their school performance is in relation to all others on the Island. o) More effective recruitment techniques required to attract high quality teachers. p) The LEA should advise schools where performance is failing and Chair of Governors should be encouraged to discuss the matter informally in the first instance with Head Teachers. q) Training and support should be offered to teaching staff where improved performance is identified. Need to make a poor teacher good and a good teacher excellent. r) Governors can get too involved in drawing up policies and procedures rather than seeing at first hand whether children are benefiting from the teaching offered by the school. s) Governors should ensure that meetings are effective. Can delegate responsibility for policy review and development to a sub committee. t) Chair of Governors should be trained on how to manage meetings effectively. u) No clear evidence to suggest that there were overall advantages in the Clerk to the Governing Body being a person not connected with the school. v) Governors have an important part to play in attracting more parental involvement in schools. Appropriate advice on how this can be achieved is required. w) Extended schools can be one way in which parental involvement can be increased. x) The Governors Association could look at establishing a support mechanism for Governors so that confidential issues can be raised. y) The Governors Association will be seeking views of all Governors on issues relating to improving school attainment and forward these onto the Overview and Scrutiny Team. z) The involvement of Councillors as LEA Governors should be balanced against any potential conflict in taking an independent view. aa) Ability of schools to outsource training where appropriate and this could be extended to include other schools. bb) Governing Bodies should be encouraged to share information and best practice. cc) The School Improvement Service should discuss the content of the explanatory leaflets agreed at the Policy Commission meeting on 3 August 2005, with the Governors Association. dd) The LEA were to produce a DVD on school governance which would assist in the training of school Governors. ee) Training for Governors should include actions that have to be taken when things go wrong. Outcomes :- i. The Governors Association to forward views obtained from Governors on issues relating to improving school attainment onto the Overview and Scrutiny Team for consideration by the Policy Commission. ii. The School Improvement Service to discuss the content of the explanatory leaflets, agreed at the Policy Commission meeting on 3 August 2005, with the Governors Association. Action required :- i. Mr P Fuller to liaise with the Overview and Scrutiny Team ii. Mr K Simmonds to discuss with Mr P Fuller.
2. School Improvement Programme C1/05 – Briefing on Provisional Levels of Attainment for 2005	Papers considered :- None but power point presentation given by Mr K Simmonds, Principal Inspector and Head of Learning Effectiveness. Evidence :- a) Provisional figures received for 2005 except for Key Stage 3. All results were subject to appeals and final clarification. b) Key Stage 1 saw a sustained performance but still too many pupils at level 2C. c) Key Stage 2 improved English performance and gap to National average closing. Writing still a problem area and a consultant was working on a strategy to improve speaking and listening skills. There was a decline in maths over 2004. Improvements required in conceptual development in Year 3 maths. Science performance sustained but investigation skills at Years 3 and 4 required improvement. d) Key Stage 3 results still had not been released. e) Key Stage 4 showed a weak performance with no overall improvement. Achievement in foundation subjects such as Art and Design was strong. An improved performance by 220 students would bring attainment up to national levels. f) Post 16 attainment was slightly down on 2004 but points score had improved. There was also an improvement in the grade A pass rate. Wide entry policy needed to be reviewed. g) Generally schools needed to move away from just looking at where they were in relation to each other in Island league tables. h) Island Schools had a number of small steps to take in a number of areas so that attainment improved. Two such areas were authorised attendance levels, particularly where this was of a casual regular basis rather than for a family holiday, and completion of coursework. Both these areas relied greatly on better parental involvement in children’s education and improved communication between schools and parents. i) The performance of 15 pupils equated to a 1% difference in attainment levels. Outcomes :- i. An informal meeting of the Policy Commission be held to enable members to receive an in-depth briefing on Island levels of attainment for 2005. ii. A full report from Mr K Simmonds, Principal Inspector and Head of Learning Effectiveness be considered at the November meeting and Head Teacher representatives be invited to attend. Action required :- i. The Overview and Scrutiny Team to arrange. Mr K Simmonds to prepare a report and invite Head Teacher representatives.
3. Schools Exclusion Centre C3/05 – Briefing Paper	Papers considered :- Report of Mr R Faulkner, Head of Pupil Services (SEN and Inclusion) together with a power point presentation. Evidence :- a) No definition of a Schools Exclusion Centre in legislation or guidance. Council had two Pupil Referral Units supporting the education and training of pupils off mainstream school sites. b) The unit at Thompson House catered for Year 1 to Year 6 pupils and up to Year 13 if due to medical reasons. c) The Clatterford unit at Watergate Road dealt with Year 7 to Year 11 pupils. d) The WISE workshop (Workshop Initiative for Support in Education), located on Dodnor Industrial Estate, offered a part time facility for pupils from Year 6 upwards. e) Permanent exclusions from Island schools were low and featured on the DfES Best Practice website. f) No agreed definition of what constituted challenging behaviour. g) Most common form of poor behaviour was low level disruption of lessons. This could be as the result of lack of pupil engagement with the curriculum matter. h) The development of vocational options could benefit those pupils who exhibited poor behaviour in class. i) Governing Bodies were responsible for dealing with the behaviour of pupils in schools. The Pupil Referral Units had their own Management Committees. j) Range of options, with outline costings provided ranging from the construction of a special centre to expanding upon existing units. Outcomes :- i. A visit to be arranged for the Lead members to the Pupil Referral Units and WISE. ii. More detailed debate on the options by the Lead members and relevant officers be arranged. Action required :- and ii. Mr R Faulkner to liaise with the Overview and Scrutiny Team.