Agenda item

As set out in the minutes of the meeting on 16 February 2011,

The Committee AGREED to undertake a Select Committee style review of Educational Attainment at KS1 across the whole of Oxfordshire. The meeting would take place in July. A number of initial questions were identified. These were:

• How does Oxfordshire, and in particular the City, compare with similar places elsewhere?
• If some are better; what are they doing that Oxfordshire could adopt?
• What is being done already to try to deal with this problem?
• English as an additional language (EAL) is often put forward as a major factor in low attainment - but is it?
• Did the change from 3 tier education to 2 tiers have any effect on attainment?
• How do the figures appear when added value/improvement is taken into consideration?

 

Officers and Head Teachers will attend to participate in the review discussion.

 

Papers supporting the discussion will be circulated separately prior to the meeting.

The Chairman opened the meeting by explaining the purpose of the morning and how the meeting would be conducted.

 

Creighton Muirhead (Joint Interim Head of Service for Raising Attainment in Schools) presented a paper setting out the main performance data and other issues around Key Stage (KS) 1 attainment (the main body of the report attached to the agenda).

 

During the presentation Mr Muirhead made the following points:

 

KS1 is a milestone and it is important not to ignore the influence of both Early Years Foundation Stage Performance (EYFSP) and KS2. By the age of seven, most children are expected to achieve level 2.  The Local Authority encourages schools to use 2B+ as a measure of success.  The most able children would be expected to reach Level 3.  Children who are judged as Level 2C are within the expected range, but just below average.  Less able children will be scoring at Level 1.

 

Historically, many of the children starting in City primaries begin from a very low baseline i.e. with low recorded scores in the EYFSP and it takes beyond Year 2 for them to ‘catch up’ with their peers. However, in 2010 EYFSP is much improved upon 2008 and it is in fact above the national average. The greatest improvement for this age group has been made in the Central area, i.e. the area containing the City. The performance of this cohort of children will be seen in the KS1 figures for 2012 and it is hoped that the improvement in EYFSP will be matched then.

 

Compared with KS2 tests evaluation at KS1 is much less formal. The tests last for less than three hours altogether.  The results are not reported separately, but are used to help the teachers assess children’s work. KS2 performance is assessed on set days through formal tests which are externally marked. It is possible for teachers at KS1 to err on the side of caution so that contextual value added (CVA) looks better at KS2.

 

Mr Muirhead suggested that there were three major questions:

 

• Why are there inconsistencies in how schools respond to challenges?
• What are the reasons for varying success levels between schools with similar profiles?
• How can performance levels of all schools be improved?

 

Next, Fiona Craig, Local Authority lead for the Developing Successful Schools (DSS) programme and formerly Head Teacher of Shellingford CE Primary School and School Improvement Adviser, Oxford City Schools gave a presentation on “Background to the DSS programme”.

 

The aim of the programme is to secure school improvement, raising standards of attainment and accelerating pupil progress by;

 

• Securing an ethos of collaborative learning
• Strengthening LA  and schools’  capacity for improvement
• Supporting schools in improving  teaching and learning & leadership and management

 

DSS is a two year programme involving 27 schools across Oxfordshire in two cohorts (2010 and 2011).

 

In cohort 1 (2010); out of 14 schools 13 showed improved rates of progress KS1 –KS2 while attainment at KS1 improved to above the Oxon and National Average in 9 schools.

 

In cohort 2 (13 schools) 2 that have been inspected have moved from Satisfactory to Good. 2011 results so far indicate similar improved attainment to 2010 and accelerated rates of progress

 

The main lessons from the programme are:

 

• Systems and leadership must be right if things are to be right at the teaching level.
• There must be a clear focus from the headteacher and governors on the ethos of the school and the drive for improvement has to come from the top.
• The importance of core skills must be borne in mind at all times in teaching.
• Expectations for all pupils and teachers must be set high.
• External support and challenge are vital in improving performance.
• There has to be a creative curriculum.
• Collaboration within the school between early years/foundation stage, KS1 and KS2 is vital.
• Most teachers improve provided that they are supported and encouraged – however there may be a need for weeding.
• All schools are different – one size does not fit all.
• Challenge should be a constant – “Why can’t you be the best”?

 

The next speaker was Julie Quarrell, formerly LA lead for the Improving Schools Programme and now Acting Head of Chalgrove Community Primary School. The Improving Schools programme is a national project aimed at schools that are falling below Government “floor” targets (i.e. schools falling below the government target of at least 60pc of 11-year-olds getting level four in English and maths tests and pupils making at least average progress between age seven and 11). So the main focus of the ISP was on KS2 and heads were driven to raise attainment at that level. However there is a correlation between improvement at KS1 and KS2 attainment and the drive and determination of schools that improved at KS2 were reflected in their work at all levels including KS1. The most effective schools recognise the importance of raising attainment across the whole school.

 

There is some evidence that some headteachers do not understand the importance of the Early Years Foundation Stage in developing future performance at KS1 and above. It was suggested that, because of this misunderstanding, there are occasions when weaker teachers have been placed in Early Years. That is counter to what should happen and that is that the best teachers should be at early years level to ensure that children have the best start.

 

Challenge and expectations should be high for all children.

 

There then followed a question and answer session. Below is a précis of the points made during the conversation.

 

The emphasis for some time has been on KS2 in schools and elsewhere. This is because it is nationally assessed. Furthermore fewer heads come from an early years background and so might not fully understand the foundation levels. Sometimes this can lead to the importance of the Foundation Stage being underestimated. Heads must understand and value the very early years, including nursery, and put the necessary energy and effort into those levels.

 

            Where heads lack vision across the whole school problems arise. Good schools have a consistent and encompassing vision. School improvement has to start at the beginning of the child’s education.

 

Schools will become more independent under present Government policies and will be more able to pick and choose among such external interventions as ISP. However it is hoped that challenge will become more easy as schools and governors are made responsible for performance. School Improvement Officers from the LA will focus much more heavily on performance.

 

The positive elements of support programmes will be emphasised and made part of training programmes offered in schools.

 

It is anticipated that the number of schools falling below “floor level” should reduce in future. As schools improve the person responsible for working on programmes at the school should know when to pull out.

 

The main drivers behind school improvement are leadership and sheer hard work in schools where the concentration is on each element of work in the school contributing to the whole.

 

Schools have the procedures in place to deal with under-performing teachers. However there is a history of weak leadership in schools being unwilling to take the necessary action. First of all teachers should be given the support and opportunities to help them to improve. However if no improvement occurs then action should be taken using the laid down procedures. The same is true of heads if governors consider that they are not doing a good job.

 

Governors have a vitally important role to play and they must be encouraged and supported to challenge heads if they feel things are going wrong. They should ensure that the information that heads and chairs of governors receive are shared and understood by all governors.

 

Local Authority nominated governors have an important role to play in this. They should all receive training to ensure that they can play a leading role on their governing bodies.

 

Support and challenge are two sides of the same coin. Schools may not wish to be worked with but they must be challenged especially where there is no evidence of improvement.

 

Where outside programmes are introduced into schools and succeed it is important that effective leadership succession plans are put in place to ensure that good learning is passed on.

 

Finally in this section the importance of parents was recognised. It was felt that more could be done to help parents understand their role maybe via some form of in-school training and information sessions. These do take place in many schools.

 

Perhaps a publicity drive is required for teachers, governors and parents.

 

The next speaker was Sarah Shoesmith, Deputy Headteacher at Bayards Hill Primary School. Ms Shoesmith talked about “the Extra Mile”; a project aimed at helping to raise the expectations and attainment of disadvantaged children.

 

Bayards Hill was one of five schools to run the programme which they targeted at eight gifted and talented children in their school. The aim was to “broaden pupil horizons” in writing. The children had additional daily sessions with a Teaching Assistant, a series of visits to a variety of sites around the country and took part in a production of “Alice in Wonderland” that was run with an external drama teacher.

 

All of the pupils made progress in reading and writing with three making a whole level increase. Their levels have continued to rise and attendance has improved.

 

It is not possible to run the programme again due to a lack of funding. However all teachers are now being encouraged to broaden their pupil’s horizons by taking them out of school for visits to local amenities.

 

The next speaker was Mark Chesterton, Headteacher at Lark Rise School in Oxford. Mr Chesterton described the underlying principles of the school as being:

 

i           To develop broadly educated, creative children working together in groups

ii          To increase the self-esteem of all children in the school

Lark Rise is a larger than average school with a high in-year turnover of pupils (around 30%). Pupils come from a wide range of backgrounds with number of children from ethnic backgrounds being well above average. Around 50% of pupils have English as an additional language. The Early Years Foundation Stage is in two Reception classes. The numbers entering the lower end of the school, including the Early Years Foundation Stage, are increasing considerably, despite limited accommodation.

 

In spite of these challenges results improve significantly year on year. Mr Chesterton stated that this because the school has an exciting new curriculum framework which has raised the quality of teaching and increased pupils’ enthusiasm for learning.

 

Teachers, governors, parents and pupils were all asked:

 

What makes a successful learner?

What hinders learning?

What promotes learning?

 

From this a new curriculum was created based on story telling. Children are enabled to develop each level of their skills before moving on to the next skill. It all starts at the Foundation stage. At KS1 special groups are identified and given appropriate support. Active reading is supported by students from the University.

 

The quality of teaching has been improved by training, development, monitoring and running demonstration lessons. Support staff receive regular training and the expectations of all staff have been raised.

 

Children are encouraged to learn and develop with the aim of releasing the potential of the whole child.

 

Vicki McClean, Operational Headteacher of the Dashwood Primary School arm of the Banbury Dashwood Schools Federation was the next to speak.

 

Ms McLean explained that Dashwood School had been in special measures. Once it had come out there was a need to secure the future and it was agreed that federation was the best way forward. The federation has an Executive Headteacher and two Operational Headteachers, one in each of the schools.

 

A number of advantages of federation have been identified. Dashwood School staff can tap into the expertise at Banbury School, and vice versa. For example, Banbury School staff are learning from Dashwood staff expertise, particularly with understanding the journey from the foundation stage to year 6 and how to build on this strong foundation for secondary schooling. Staff at Banbury School can help Dashwood staff with ICT, finances, caretaking and grounds maintenance.

 

The learning experience has been broadened with modern languages and performing arts' teachers from Banury School working with Dashwood pupils. There are things to learn on both sides for the advantage of all pupils and students and joint training sessions have been undertaken and proved to be extremely productive.

 

There is also a strong business case for federation. Highly effective strategic leadership (the governing body and executive head) can have a greater positive impact over two schools. Many of the daily aspects of running a school can be done in one central place by well qualified and experienced staff such as finance, health and safety, caretaking, ICT management and so on, leaving the Operational Headteachers to focus on teaching and learning and pupil and student progress and achievements in their own schools.

 

The federation has enabled some of the limited resources to be pooled with staff being employed across both schools. There are teaching assistants, ICT and finance staff, and some teachers employed to the benefit of both schools whom the individual schools would not have been able to afford.

 

The final speakers were the past and present Cabinet Members for Schools Improvement, Councillors Michael Waine and Melinda Tilley.

 

Councillor Waine referred to the relatively recent past when there had been, “an air of complacency [about school improvement] in Oxfordshire”. This had been dispelled but there was still room for improvement. There is still a need for governors to be more challenging. Literature and information is available but not all governors get to see it. In future information for governors will be sent to the headteacher and the clerk to the governors to ensure that it is distributed to all. That should go some way to improve governor challenge.

 

Councillor Tilley confirmed that there is now no complacency and stated that the Council’s aim is “no school below good in Oxfordshire”.

 

Councillors Tilley and Waine remained at the table and they were joined by Jan Paine, Deputy Director Children's Services - Education and Early Intervention. A discussion then followed during which the following points were made:

 

The National Governors’ Association, the representative body for school governors in England, has been pressing successive governments to introduce compulsory training for school governors. Could the LA lobby local MPs to ask them to press for this?

 

Support was expressed for the aim to provide information to all governors to enable them to ask questions and provide robust challenge.

 

Smaller, more strategic governing bodies could be beneficial. All governing bodies should insist on having an annual presentation on progress and performance at their school. County Councillors on governing bodies should be made aware of their responsibility to challenge and they should be given the tools to enable that challenge to happen.

 

Best practice in schools should be passed on by developing partnerships and collaboration between schools. Learning should be passed on through the partnership and schools should challenge each other. The LA must have a role in brokering partnerships and the dissemination of best practice.

 

Around 70% of Oxfordshire’s schools are “good” or better; the good schools should support the not so good.

 

Whilst headteachers must lead they cannot improve a school on their own. Everybody; the head, governors, teachers, parents, children and the LA must be clear of their roles and what is expected of them in order to achieve more.

 

There should not be just concentration on deprived areas and obviously poor performing schools. Schools in more affluent places that should be doing even better should be targeted to ensure that expectations of high achievement are in place and realised. This would have the effect of bringing up the level of performance across the whole County.

 

Schools now have the necessary budgets and they have choices over how they spend that money. It should be used effectively and the pupil premium should be used for the agreed purposes of reducing class sizes and/or providing more one-to-one tuition.

 

Some school argue that there is a lack of clarity on just what they have in their budgets and how it can be spent. More information is also required on early intervention hubs and how they help schools. Overall there is a plea for more and better communication and information.

 

It was stressed that early intervention centres are still being developed and information will be provided as soon as possible.

 

Training teachers is vital in raising attainment. Much of this has been done in the past by the Primary Strategy Team. A question was asked about what would replace that team. In reply it was stated that some staff resources would be available. There would also be “an pot of money” to be used to buy in expertise across the County to help struggling schools. It was accepted that schools must help each other and the LA would look to facilitate this.

 

In summing up it was suggested that the main areas for development where benefits could be achieved appeared to be as follows:

 

• Increased use of federations
• More partnership working to share good practice between school staff and governors and to provide support across schools
• Stronger and more courageous challenge of all schools
• Time limits being set on improvement
• More and improved governor training for all governors and specifically LA governors
• Increasing use of Interim Executive Boards to improve school leadership
• Earlier input, perhaps by formal conversations with heads and governors, when progress is at an early stage of causing concern
• Earlier use of HR processes where progress remains unacceptable
• Improved appraisal and monitoring
• Acceptance of only the highest standards; all children should be able to be within walking distance of a school that is at least “good”
• Closer engagement with the University and other organisations

 

The Committee expressed their thanks to everybody who had contributed to such a positive meeting and in particular to Creighton Muirhead for the work that he had done before the meeting and his contributions to the discussion.