Transcript Document

Spring Term Governor Briefing
18 March at and 19 March at
Future House
Victoria Primary
Department of Children’s Services
Education and Schools
Update
Monday 18 March – Cindy Peek
Deputy Director Children’s Services
Tuesday 19 March – George McQueen
Assistant Director Access and Inclusion
The number of students gaining 5 A*-C
grades at GCSE was in line with the
national average and also closed the
gap on the year before (Bradford 81.7,
National 81.8).
Department of Children’s Services
More than half of the students - 52.4% gained 5 good GCSEs including English
and mathematics (the national
benchmark).
This figure was below the national
average of 59.4 – but closed the gap on
the previous year.
It was also Bradford’s best ever figure.
Department of Children’s Services
Three quarters of the pupils assessed at
the end of Key Stage 2 reached Level 4
and above.
This was the District’s best ever but
below the national average of 79%.
Department of Children’s Services
The progress made by primary age
pupils in Bradford in English between
Year 2 and Year 6 outstripped the
national performance.
The District's figure rose by 5% to 91% 2% above the national average.
Department of Children’s Services
Schools are now recording their best
ever attendance levels.
Primary school attendance has risen to
95.3% for the full school year 2011/2012
compared with 93.9% for 2007/2008.
Secondary school attendance was not
as high at 93.2% in the same 12 months
(91.4% in 2007/2008).
Department of Children’s Services
Latest figures show record numbers of
Bradford young people leaving Year 11
are staying in education or going into
training.
Only 141 pupils (2.4%) were Not in
Education, Employment or Training
(NEET) in 2012 which is almost half the
figure of 273 for the previous year.
Department of Children’s Services
Pupil Premium
March 2013
Ros Garside
Department of Children’s Services
Closing the Gap
• Council Priority to decrease gaps between under-achieving
groups and others while raising standards overall
• Children living in poverty (FSM)
– Looked after children
– Children from particular ethnic minority groups (Pakistani
heritage; Gypsy, Roma, Traveller heritage)
– Boys
• Ofsted expectation that all pupils are making good progress; that
gaps have been identified and are being addressed
Pupil Premium (from April 2011)
• Not only provides additional funding but shines a spotlight on
disadvantaged groups: aims to break the link between deprivation
and under-achievement
• Allocated to children who have received Free School Meals (FSM)
at any time in the last six years
• Also allocated to children who have been looked after for six months
or more (and children of Service families)
• Not ring fenced but it is expected that the money will be spent on
eligible children and others with similar disadvantages
• The money is for raising achievement but this may include social as
well as academic support
Pupil Premium in Bradford
Phase
Minimum
Maximum Total
Primary
£1914
£253008
£14,043,076
Secondary
£71011
£681936
£6,944,611
Special
£1800
£156000
£218700
Bradford Case Studies
• Looked at five schools with high standards at the end of KS2
and small gaps
• Currently undertaking action research with a group of schools
where there were significant gaps in 2011
• Action research intended to provide further examples of good
practice
Case Studies: Quality of Provision
•
•
•
•
•
•
Quality first teaching which is well
matched to the needs of all learners
Pupils’ involvement in planning their
own learning, linked to creativity in
the curriculum
Effective feedback to children on
their work
Development of Social and
Emotional Aspects of Learning and
skills of resilience, motivation,
perseverance, self-esteem
Peer Tutoring within lessons
Peer mentoring, eg ‘big brothers,
big sisters’
•
•
•
•
Involving families in supporting
education, eg support in parenting,
improving their own learning,
aligned expectations between home
and school
Creativity in the curriculum,
appealing to diverse learning styles
Enrichment activities to broaden
children’s experience and widen
their horizons
Assemblies and other events which
present role models and provide
information about how to succeed
in different careers
Case Studies: Leadership
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Distributed leadership, building collective capacity
Focus on attendance, including hard to reach families
Teaching and learning as the school’s core purpose
Closing gaps an ethical imperative
Rigorous and honest self-evaluation that is firmly based on observation
of lessons, a robust analysis of data on outcomes and scrutiny of
progress in pupils’ work
Rigorous monitoring and follow-up action to address breaches in
attendance or behaviour
Rigorous and systematic planning, resource management and data-rich
strategies and impact analysis
Tracking of the performance of different groups and modification of
teaching and learning as a result
Collaboration within and between schools
Focus on transitions as gaps widen over time
What should be in place in all schools
•
Schools are accountable for how they use the additional funding to
support pupils from low-income families and the other target groups
•
New measures have been included in the performance tables that show
the achievement of pupils who attract the Pupil Premium
•
Expectation that schools report on the pupil premium on the school’s
website. The Best On-line Information is:
– Easy to find!
– Gives overview of PPG and why it has been introduced
– Provides access to Pupil Premium Policy
– Gives total allocation of PPG and breakdown of expenditure for
each year
– Gives impact for 2011/12 and intended impact for 2012/13
Uses in Bradford
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A full year of swimming for all
•
pupils in Year 5
•
Consultancy support
•
Counselling and behaviour support
Help fund a Breakfast Club
•
Early intervention for targeted
pupils
•
Easter holiday booster classes
Enrichment activities, including
•
extension of outdoor learning
Increase the hours of our Parental •
Involvement Worker
•
Increase teaching assistant
support aimed at targeted groups •
Nurture group
•
•
Nursery nurse
Provide one to one tuition
Providing small group support
focused on closing gaps in learning
Provide an additional after school
homework support group
Provide quality, effective feedback to
individual pupils by way of weekly
tutorial meetings
Provide staff training for above
Software to support independent
learning
Speech and Language support
Support for families
Support materials
Subsidies for trips and residential
visits
Ofsted’s View
•
•
•
•
•
•
68 schools visited in Autumn 2012; report in Feb 2013
Many schools are getting it right – they know how funding is spent and
the impact it is having
Some schools struggle to demonstrate how the funding is making a
difference because:
– Systems for tracking the spending of the funding are not
rigorous
– Mechanisms for evaluating its effectiveness are not good
enough
Inspection reports from now on will focus more sharply on how well
schools are using PP
Criticism will be clear in Ofsted reports if pupil premium is not being
well spent to close gaps
Ofsted has also produced an audit and action planning tool
Successful schools (Ofsted Feb 2013)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Carefully ring-fenced funding
Never confused PP with low ability
Thoroughly analysed which pupils
are under-achieving and why
Drew on research evidence to judge
likely impact
Expected good teaching for all
Allocated best staff to intervention
groups to improve maths and
English or employed experts
Checked success through regular
use of data
Gave pupils clear feedback on how
to improve
•
•
•
•
•
•
Trained support staff to support
achievement
Had a designated senior leader for
expenditure and impact
Focused on barriers such as
attendance or behaviour
Made sure staff knew which pupils
attracted PP and included this in
performance management
Thoroughly involved governors in
decision making and evaluation
Were able to demonstrate impact
of each aspect of spending
The Governors’ Role
•
•
•
•
Do you know how pupil premium is spent in your school(s)?
Is its use based on evidence of what works?
What is the impact of PP?
How is use of PP reported to governors? How is use of PP
reported to parents?
• If your PP budget is increasing in 2013/14 how is the additional
sum going to be spent?
• Are you using Ofsted's ‘Pupil Premium: analysis and challenge
for schools’ document?
• Did you know there are awards for the best use of pupil
premium? See DfE website; closing date is 13 April
School Places
Tony Sinkinson
School Organisation and Place Planning
Number of children by age group known to the Health Authority
9000
8500
8000
7500
7000
6500
6000
5500
5000
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
Age as at 31/08/12 from Health Authority data
4
3
2
1
Primary cohorts
8000
7900
7800
7700
7600
7500
Population
7400
7300
7200
2012/13
7100
7000
6900
6800
6700
6600
6500
6400
R
1
2
3
Year Group
4
5
6
Primary cohorts
8000
7900
7800
7700
7600
7500
Population
7400
7300
2008/09
7200
2012/13
7100
7000
6900
6800
6700
6600
6500
6400
R
1
2
3
Ye ar Group
4
5
6
Primary cohorts
8000
7900
7800
7700
7600
7500
Population
7400
2008/09
7300
2009/10
2010/11
7200
2011/12
7100
2012/13
7000
6900
6800
6700
6600
6500
6400
R
1
2
3
Ye ar Group
4
5
6
Primary cohort changes over time
8000
7900
7800
7700
7600
7500
Population
7400
2008/09
7300
2009/10
2010/11
7200
2011/12
7100
2012/13
7000
6900
6800
6700
6600
6500
6400
R
1
2
3
Ye ar Group
4
5
6
Primary cohort changes over time
8000
7900
7800
7700
7600
7500
Population
7400
2008/09
7300
2009/10
2010/11
7200
2011/12
7100
2012/13
7000
6900
6800
6700
6600
6500
6400
R
1
2
3
Ye ar Group
4
5
6
Secondary Cohorts
6100
6000
5900
Population
Jan 2008
Jan 2009
Jan 2010
5800
Jan 2011
Jan 2012
Jan 2013
5700
5600
5500
7
8
9
Year Group
10
11
Primary - spare capacity
8000
7900
7800
7700
7600
7500
Population
7400
7300
2012/13
7200
PAN
7100
7000
6900
6800
6700
6600
6500
6400
R
1
2
3
Year Group
4
5
6
In year pressure on places
• In excess of 7000 in year applications each
year
• On average, 15 applications for each year
group each week
• Not evenly distributed across District
• ‘Delay’ in removing leavers from school
rolls, hence releasing places
• Available places ‘locked into’ the system
Implications
• Increased flexibility and willingness of
all schools to respond
– A ‘system wide’ approach is required
– All schools to consider possible expansion
– All schools to implement quicker and more
flexible response to in year applications
• Significant increases in populations will
start to impact on Secondary sector
– Similar response required
Teachers Pay and
Conditions
HR Advisory Service
Department of Business Support
Department of Children’s Services
What will this session cover?
• Identify and discuss those changes to the STPCD
2012, that governors need to be aware of.
• The consequences of the content and
recommendations within the recent 21st report by the
School Teachers Review Body.
Changes within the 2012 STPCD
• The 2012 STPCD contains a number of changes
from the 2011document that governors need to be
aware of.
• No longer any reference to the Core Standards.
• A new Appraisal Policy has been introduced.
• Teacher availability over the school year.
• A Headteacher can no longer be paid on a higher
ISR range than that stipulated in the STPCD.
Department of Children’s Services
Changes within the 2012 STPCD
(cont)
The following areas, no longer form part of the determination
of the ISR and are dealt with as discretionary payments
• schools causing concern
• difficulties filling a vacant Headteacher post
• difficulties retaining the current Headteacher, and
• temporary appointment as a Headteacher of more than one
school
Changes within the 2012 STPCD
(cont)
Governing bodies may also make discretionary payments to
Headteachers for the following reasons’
– continuing professional development undertaken outside the
school day;
– activities relating to the provision of initial teacher training as part
of the ordinary contract of the school;
– participation in out-of-school hours learning activity agreed
between the Headteacher and the Governing Body;
– additional responsibilities and activities due to, or in respect of the
provision of services by the Headteacher relating to the raising of
educational standards to one or more additional schools
Changes within the 2012 STPCD
(cont)
The total of all discretionary payments made to a
Headteacher in respect of any school year must not
exceed 25 per cent of the amount which corresponds
to that individual’s point on their ISR for that year.
Things are going to change!
• In February 2012, Michael Gove asked the STRB to
review current provisions for teachers’ pay with a view
to raising the status of the profession and contributing to
improving the standard of teaching in schools.
• The report makes a number of recommendations to the
government, Michael Gove has accepted them all.
What are the key areas of the report?
• Replacement of increments based on length of service.
• Extension to all teachers pay progression linked to
annual appraisal.
• Abolition of mandatory pay points within the pay scales
for classroom teachers. Points at present are to be
retained for reference only in the main pay scale, to
guide career expectations for new teachers.
What are the key areas of the report?
(cont)
• Retention of a broad national framework, including
the higher pay bands for London and fringe areas
and an upper pay scale as a career path for
experienced teachers who make a wider contribution
to the school.
• Replacement of the unnecessary detailed threshold
test for progression from MPS to UPS, with a simple
criteria based on one set of Teachers Standards.
What are the key areas of the report?
(cont)
• More discretion for schools to use allowances for
recruitment and retention.
• Reinforcement of the responsibility of Headteachers
and of governing bodies.
• A much more simplified STPCD
Further recommendations…
The report also made a number of further
recommendations, which have been accepted by the
government, these are,
• Retention of four geographical pay bands
• Differentiated performance based progression on MPS
• More flexible performance based progression within
the UPS
• Local discretion to pay a higher salary to the most
successful teachers
Further recommendations…
(cont)
• No change to the current core TLR provisions,
however fixed term TLR’s for time limited projects
introduced.
• Removal of 3 year time limit on recruitment and
retention payments.
• DfE to communicate clearly to schools the scope of
greater use of existing discretionary recruitment
and retention payments.
Further recommendations…
(cont)
• No obligation when schools are recruiting to match a
teacher’s existing salary on either the main or upper
pay scales.
• The requirement for two consecutive successful
appraisals for progression purposes on the upper pay
scale be discontinued. The existing post-threshold,
AST and ET standards are abolished.
What are the next steps?
• NEOST have already made comments on a draft 2013
STPCD document, which it is stated will be released in
advance of September 2013, in order that stakeholders
can prepare for the changes ahead.
• Upon the release of the new STPCD, governors will
need to re-look at their school’s pay policy.
•The school’s HR Advisory Service are available for
advice, guidance and model policies in relation to this.
Any Questions?