ITEM LC3LEARNING & CULTURE SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – 28 SEPTEMBER 2004Minutes of
the Meeting commencing at 10.00 am and finishing at 13.26 pm Present: Voting
Members: Councillor
Alan Bryden Officers: Whole of meeting: Ms M Holyman (Chief Executive’s Office).
Part
of meeting: The Director for Learning & Culture,
Mr R Munro (Head of Cultural Services), Mr A Coggins, Ms
M Hanaway, Mr R Harris and Mr R Howard (Learning & Culture);
Mr D Bishop (Head of Democratic Services) and Mr J Hehir
(Democratic Services) The Scrutiny Committee considered the matters, reports and recommendations contained or referred to in the agenda for the meeting, together with a schedule of addenda tabled at the meeting and agreed as set out below. Copies of the agenda, reports and schedule are attached to the signed Minutes.
59/04. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND TEMPORARY APPOINTMENTS
Apologies for absence and temporary appointments were received as follows:
Councillor Ferriman welcomed Councillor Laver to his first meeting of the Committee.
60/04. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Brian Hodgson declared a personal interest in item 5 as a lifelong member of NATFHE.
61/04. MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 29 June 2004 were approved and signed. On minute 48/04 (Scrutiny Development – Key Issues and Drivers, School Issues, Workforce Remodelling), a member asked about progress on providing 10% non-contact time for teachers. The Committee asked the Director for Learning & Culture to advise all members of the Committee of the position.
62/04. PETITIONS AND PUBLIC ADDRESS
The following requests to address the meeting were agreed:-
Mr Jackson said that, according to Gabbitas’s Complete Guide to Schools for Special Needs, there was no provision for post-16 students with special educational needs within the local Learning and Skills Council’s area. He pointed out that there was limited provision within Oxfordshire. He said that he was representing a local parent group, CHOICE. CHOICE represented parents with children at the majority of the special schools in the County. Over thirty of these parents had formed CHOICE following a meeting to discuss provision within the County. A further 30 parents had apologised for not being able to attend the meeting. He outlined some of the reasons why CHOICE wished to see improvements to local provision: there were currently no sixth forms in special schools in Oxfordshire; there was a lack of medical support within the existing limited provision; the range of disabilities and behavioural problems that were within the scope of the County Council’s Inclusion Policy or Special Schools provision was not replicated in the post-16 provision and was thus inconsistent with the provision for students below the age of 16 and the existing provision was not distributed evenly across the County to facilitate access. He said that post-16 students with special educational needs did not have same access to further education as their non-disabled peers. The students were being disadvantaged because of their disabilities and were also being prevented from receiving further education. He added that CHOICE, in the last two months, had sought to work in co-operation with the other stakeholders by: holding a dialogue with the Learning and Skills Council, seeking support from the Learning Disability Partnership Board, seeking a meeting with the heads of special schools, considering effecting the possible availability of grant from the European Social Fund and addressing this Committee. CHOICE sought to be involved in the decision-making process. It supported the principles of the Government White Paper Valuing People. CHOICE asked that the Council work in consultation with it and publicly support its mission that disabled young people post-16 be offered the same educational choices as those without disabilities. Ms
Hulin, CHOICE, referred to the handout, which had been circulated to
members at the meeting and a copy of which had been appended to the
signed copy of the minutes, in which a number of case studies had been
presented. She highlighted three of the cases: the first case concerned
a 16-year old young person with profound and complex learning difficulties
and a severe medical condition. At the special school, the young person
had been given medication by qualified medical staff when needed. The
college had a medical policy which was implemented by staff trained
to deal only with specific eventualities, with a fallback position to
call an ambulance. However, the likelihood of an emergency had been
increased by the lack of adequate medical supervision because the young
person’s pain and anxiety were not clear to the untrained eye. The second
case concerned a young person with poor communication skills and severe
learning difficulties but capable of independent interaction and who
was also very active physically. The only placement offered at first
included this young person in a group of students with profound and
multiple learning difficulties and little mobility. The young person
was eventually moved to a more able group, but still with the possibility
of only limited physical activity. The young person’s self confidence
and independence were being rapidly undermined. The third case involved
an autistic young person who was offered a place at a local college.
There was no support outside the lessons and the young person was expected
to interact in coffee areas which were precisely the kind of environment
in which the young person was most vulnerable. The parents fought for
an out-of-county placement at a special school with a sixth form that
offered all day support. This was an expensive option for the County
and a stressful procedure for the family. CHOICE argued that even one
term in the wrong placement could, for some, result in the years of
progress they had made being undone. This did not contribute to a smooth
transition into adulthood. The experiences could have been avoided if
the young people had been offered the choice of remaining through the
sixth form in fully qualified special schools. (Agenda Item 5) The Committee considered the Learning & Skills Council’s (LSC) Annual Report for 2004/05 with invited local LSC representatives, Christine Doubleday, Executive Director and Gill Webb, Director of Learning Provision. An aide memoire and the Annual Report had been circulated separately to members of the Committee with the Scrutiny Review Officer’s letter of 16 September 2004 (copy appended to the signed copy of the minutes). Ms Doubleday outlined the role of the LSC and she and Ms Webb of the LSC and the Director for Learning & Culture responded to members’ questions. The Scrutiny Committee AGREED to: (a) RECOMMEND the Executive to:
(b) note that the Learning and Skills Council would notify the Committee of the number of applications received for education maintenance allowances in Oxfordshire;
(c)
thank the Learning and Skills Council’s officers for providing written
responses to the questions and for attending the meeting. (Agenda Item 6(a)) The Committee considered a report (LC6(a)) which met the requirements of the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) for library authorities to submit an account of their current performance and future prospects in the new format of position statements. The headings of the Position Statement stemmed mainly from the 2003 DCMS report "Framework for the Future: Libraries, Learning and Information in the Next Decade". As the priorities of the Framework accorded well with the priorities of Oxfordshire’s Library Service in its Best Value Review Action Plan, the draft Statement provided a comprehensive assessment of the progress the Service was making. The Chair reported that Mr Coggins, the County Librarian, would be retiring at the end of September and she thanked him for his work for the County Council. The Committee asked questions/made comments on the following issues: How would the Library Service work in partnership with the community over the next 10 years to increase the number of electronic work stations available to the public, particularly in areas where there were no permanent libraries? How well was the implementation of the ICT proposals for the County’s library service progressing? Would the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act be met? Would the Standard PLS3(ii) (Proportion of aggregate opening hours that fall outside 9 am to 5 pm on weekdays) be achieved this year and would the proportion be higher in the future? Welcomed the partnership working between schools and their local libraries to encourage children to read more. Could the Position Statement in future be more succinct and written in a simpler style of language so that it was easier to read? The Scrutiny Committee AGREED to ADVISE the Executive:
65/04. DIVISIONAL YOUTH COMMITTEE REVIEW
(Agenda Item 6(b)) The Committee considered a report (LC6(b)) which set out proposals for a County Youth Advisory Group to replace the existing five divisional youth committees. The Scrutiny Committee AGREED: (a) to ADVISE the Executive to approve the revised governance structure and Implementation Plan for implementation by 1 December 2004 for the Youth Service subject to the Group comprising five (instead of three) County Councillors (1 per district council area) and five (instead of up to four) young people from the young people’s forums (1 representative from each of the proposed five young people’s forums); (b) to ASK the Executive to provide an additional budget to cover the travel expenses for the people attending meetings of the proposed bodies so that meeting these costs was not a barrier to attendance; (c) to
ASK the Executive to review, after twelve months, whether the
revised governance structure had met its objectives;
66/04. OPTIONS FOR INCLUSION IN THE COMMITTEE’S WORK PROGRAMME FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE COUNCIL YEAR 2004/05
(Agenda Item 7 and Addenda) (1) The report (LC7) set out options for the work programme until the end of the Council year in May 2005 and beyond and sought endorsement of this process of developing the programme again for the future. (2) The Committee was advised that the City Council’s Community Scrutiny Committee would be considering at its meeting in September whether to undertake a review on the effectiveness of the Youth Service. The County Council had been asked whether it would be willing to undertake a joint review. The Committee was also advised of the Social & Health Care Scrutiny Committee’s decision (set out in the Addenda) on the City Council’s request. Councillor Mrs Fitzgerald O’Connor reported that the Social & Health Care Scrutiny Committee was proposing to undertake a review on Children and Healthy Eating/Healthy Living and that she had volunteered to be a member of the review group. The Scrutiny Committee AGREED: (a) to undertake three reviews in the following order of priority for the remainder of the Council year 2004/05:
and to note the other issues shown in Annex 1 as possible options for future reviews;
(b)
to ask the Head of Democratic Services to check whether the Educational
Development Plan should be included in the work programme as the Committee
had agreed, at its meeting in May, to continue the work of the Group
for a further year and to review the future of the Group at the meeting
of the Committee in May 2005; (d) to
endorse the comments of the Social & Health Care Scrutiny Committee
set out in the Addenda on the City Council’s request for a joint review
on the effectiveness of the youth service. 67/04 FUNDING FOR SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS SERVICE FOR POST-16 STUDENTS (Agenda Item 8) At its last meeting (minute 43/04), the Committee had asked for a progress report on the funding for the Special Educational Needs Service for post-16 students. The Committee considered a report (LC8) which updated the Committee on the issue. Councillor Janet Godden addressed the Committee in her capacity as Co-Chair of the Oxfordshire Learning Disability Partnership Board. She outlined the main points of concern of the Board which were set out in her letter of 28 September 2004, a copy of which was circulated at the meeting and a copy of which is appended to the signed copy of the minutes. The Scrutiny Committee AGREED to ASK the Executive, jointly with the Learning and Skills Council, to seek additional funding from the Department for Education and Skills for post-16 students with special educational needs. 68/04 OFSTED INSPECTION REPORTS ON OXFORDSHIRE SCHOOLS TO SEPTEMBER 2004 (Agenda Item 9) The Scrutiny Committee considered a report (LC9) on the inspection findings of 32 schools in Oxfordshire. In response to a question about systems for checking on the quality of teaching and learning which had been listed as weaknesses for a number of schools, Mr Howard said that the assessment of the learning initiative was working well and Oxfordshire was hoping to become a pilot for carrying this further forward. More work was needed to improve the transfer of records within and between schools. The Scrutiny Committee AGREED to note the reports and that the next partnership visit would be to the Chiltern Edge and Henley partnerships of schools in the autumn and the following partnership visit would be to the Wallingford partnership of schools in the spring. 69/04 EXPANSION OF THE MUSEUMS RESOURCE CENTRE, STANDLAKE (Agenda Item 10) At its last meeting (minute 53/04), the Committee had agreed to set up a working group to look at the budget for the expansion of the Museums Resource Centre, Standlake. It had agreed to appoint Councillor Bryden or Councillor Moley and Councillors Ferriman and Mrs Fitzgerald O’Connor to the working group. Councillor Moley had subsequently advised that he was willing to be a member of the working group. The Scrutiny Committee AGREED to appoint Councillors Ferriman, Mrs Fitzgerald O’Connor and Moley to the working group. 70/04 FORWARD PLAN (Agenda Item 11) The Scrutiny Committee considered whether there were any matters relating to Learning & Culture in the current Forward Plan on which the Committee wished to have an opportunity to offer advice to the Executive before any decision was taken. The Scrutiny Committee AGREED to note the Learning & Culture topics in the current Forward Plan. 71/04 TRACKING SCRUTINY OUTCOMES (Agenda Item 12) (a) Use of School Premises for Community Purposes – Scrutiny Review On 1 June 2004, the Executive had considered the report of the Scrutiny Committee on the Use of School Premises for Community Purposes. The Executive had agreed to ask the Director for Learning & Culture to arrange for the report of the Scrutiny Committee to be considered by the Extended Schools Strategy Group and to report back to the Executive at the earliest opportunity with a prioritised action plan. The Executive had considered the report (LC12(a)) on 7 September 2004. It had agreed to: (1) welcome the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review Report "Room at School" and thank the members of the Review Group and the officers supporting them for the work they had done on the Review; (2) endorse the action plan in response to the Review set out in the report and Annex 1 subject to the resources identified in paragraph 8 of the report being forthcoming. (b) Faith in our Schools – Scrutiny Review On 20 July 2004, the Executive had considered the report of the Scrutiny Committee on Faith in our Schools. It had agreed to: (1) accept recommendation R1 set out in the report, subject to deleting ‘currently appropriate’ in line 7 and inserting the words ‘viable at present’; (2) request the Director for Learning & Culture to examine recommendations R2–R9 in detail and bring a report to the Executive setting out the implications in early 2005. (c) Heritage Services Best Value Review On 20 July 2004, the Executive had considered the report and this Committee’s advice. It had agreed to approve the review report and action plan for implementation. The Scrutiny Committee AGREED to: (a) note the outcomes on the Scrutiny Committee’s reviews and its advice on the Heritage Services Best Value Review; (b) ask the Executive Member for Schools to report at the next meeting of the Committee on progress on the Committee’s recommendations in the review on Faith in our Schools. 72/04 COGGES MANOR FARM MUSEUM – VISIT (Agenda Item 13) Councillor Ferriman reported that four members of the Committee had visited the Museum on 10 September 2004. She also reported that Rajwinder Pal, currently Head of Museums at Sandwell Borough Council, had been appointed as the County Heritage and Arts Officer during Martyn Brown’s three-year period of extended leave. The Scrutiny Committee AGREED to note the report.
in the Chair Date
of signing 2004
|