Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 5 November 2009 were agreed subject to the wording in Minute15 paragraph (4) being altered to reflect that Mr Burgess was suggesting “that there was very little incentive when a person had a job to acquire qualifications for that job and suggested that money should be used from ‘Train to Gain’ for bespoke training to enhance or compliment the work that they were doing” and that they be signed by the Chairman.

(Mrs J Whittle, Deputy Cabinet Member, learning, Mrs P Harris Interim Head of Standards Improvement were present for this item)

(1)     The Chairman explained that Ms M Haeusler, Director of Learning and Mr M Baker, Interim Director of Learning were not able to attend the meeting due to the launch of the formal consultation for the Children, Families and Education Directorate Restructuring Review that day.  He invited Mrs Whittle to give a verbal update.

(2)     Mrs Whittle outlined the work that she had undertaken since the Committee last met, this included; visiting a mixture of secondary, special, Grammar and primary Kent schools where she was please to see the enormous work being undertaken to improve both Key Stage 2 results, which had been a primary focus of attention and what hoped to be a significant increase in the 5 A* to C in mathematics and English examination results achieved which meant reaching the 2011 target a year early.

(3)     Mrs Whittle advised that various campaigns had been launched which included; improving teachers pay in Kent with an aim to narrow the gap between their colleagues in outer London and the wider issue of teacher recruitment and retention, which linked with the pay and expanding the ‘Teacher First Programme’ which encourages bright young graduates to the teaching profession.  The launch of restructuring CFE Directorate started today with a 3 month consultation, one aspect of this was looking at the role of the School Improvement Partner (SIP), Ms Haeusler would give and update on this at the next meeting. There was also a lot of work being undertaken to improve the links with Primary and Secondary schools she gave the example of a secondary school mathematics teacher in Swale teaching mathematics in primary schools to help improve those schools that were struggling to reach the floor targets with Key Stage 2.

(4)     Mrs Whittle went on to advise that she and Mrs Allen met with the Children in Care Council to discuss how to improve educational outcomes for children in care. She advised that 6% of children in care reached 5A* to C at GCSE in English and mathematics which was too low.  The focus would also include Gypsy/Traveller children whose attainment was also too low.

(5)     Members were given the opportunity to ask questions and make comments  which included:

(6)     In response to a question by Mr Richardson, Mrs Whittle advised that the increase in teachers pay if achieved would be for every grade.

(7)     Mr Demoyers-Davis suggested that Mrs Whittle should be mindful of the  areas in the County where the ‘Fringe Area Allowance’ applied; Dartford Gravesend and Sevenoaks and Westerham, which aimed to cover the differences in housing costs, when looking at teachers pay.  He was fully in support of Fringe Area Allowances being substantial and not spread too thinly.  Mrs Whittle agreed that the Fringe Area Allowance should not be spread thinly and aligned to housing costs.  She agreed to report back to an appropriate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

(Report by Mrs R Turner Managing Director and Mrs S Hohler, Cabinet Member for Children Education and Families)

(Mrs P Harris, Head of Service – Advisory Service Kent, and Mrs J Whittle were present for this item)

(1)         The Chairman advised the Committee that he felt that the content of the report was the basis of the Committee’s function.  There were 2000 teachers in Kent and it was the Committee’s responsibility to measure the outcomes of their teaching. This meant having confidence to rely on Mrs Harris and her Team for data and for them to submit items for Members to celebrate achievements when appropriate and to scrutinise when necessary.

(2)         Mrs Harris explained that her role was to oversee that work had been undertaken to look at how best to share the headlines, vast validated data and national data on primary and secondary schools.  It was suggested that for the new cycle the new area would be the priorities of the Department.  Other suggested options were; identifying primary schools that were not achieving, Secondary schools in the National Challenge Programme and children receiving free school meals.  It was possible to look at the impact during the summer months, as well as sending the Committee regular summaries of OFSTED outcomes, this information could be sent to Members between meetings.

(3)         Mrs Whittle reminded the Committee that any request for confidential information would need to be held in closed session or instigate a Member Monitoring Group.

(4)         Mr Vye referred to a document sent to a Cabinet meeting that detailed trends and suggested that there needed to be data of at least 5 years to view trends, although he did find the information in the report valuable and asked that Members receive the data/information in the same format as in the Cabinet papers and requested that the number of schools on special measures be included in the report.  Mrs Harris explained that there were 3 Primary Schools that were on special measures, Bellwood Primary, Maidstone, Milton Court Primary, Sittingbourne and St Georges Primary, Wilmington Enterprise College.

(5)         Mr Vye referred the Directorate staff restructuring with the loss of 65 back office staff in the Learning Group.  He felt that in order for the front line staff to operate there was a need for back room staff.  He sought assurance that the same level of staff would remain in the schools.

(6)         Mr Vye declared an interest advising that he was the Chair of Governors at a Canterbury School that was not reaching the floor target even with very good leadership and teaching and asked what more could be done.  Mrs Harris advised that there would be an increase in targeting schools with one to one teaching.

(7)         Mrs Allen congratulated Mrs Harris and her team on the work already carried out in raising the attainment of looked after children (LAC) and Gypsy and Romany children.  She suggested that there was a common thread that some of the those children moved  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

(Report by Merril Hauesler, Director – Learning Group, Mrs R Turner, Managing Director, Children, Families & Education Directorate and Mrs S Hohler, Cabinet Member for Children, Families & Education Directorate)

(Mr A Foster, Lead Curriculum Adviser and support to SACRE was present for this item)

(1)         The Committee considered a report that presented the Annual Report (2008-2009) on the work of Kent’s Standing Advisory Council for Religious Education that highlighted particular developments and the need to commence the review of the locally agreed syllabus for RE in September 2010.

(2)          Mr Foster introduce the report and in response to a question by Mr Ozog advised that religious education was a statutory subject but within the legislation  parents had the legal right to withdraw their child from religious education.In Kent, schools are required to comply with the legislation. It was the role of OFSTED to inspect that the schools are providing religious education and report back on the schools compliance or lack of compliance with the legislation. The School Improvement Partners were also encouraged to ensure that the schools comply.  School governors are also expected to ensure that schools meet the requirements of the kent Agreed Syllabus for RE..

(3)         In reply to a question by Mr Jarvis, Mr Foster advised that at present the Government was taking forward the Children Schools and Families Bill, one clause of which was about the statutory provision of sex and relationship education.  Last week the Secretary of State for Education introduced an amendment which had been causing disputes as to whether it was going to water down the requirements for sex and relationship education and enable faith schools to interpret sex education to reflect their ethos and their belief. Mr Foster said that he did not feel that this had any implication on religious education as there was new guidance this month which had been circulated to schools and there were no comments in that guidance on sex and relationship education.  Schools were expected to reflect a broad and balanced view on matters relating to sex and relationships education.

(4)         In response to a question by Mr Desmoyer-Davis, Mr Foster advised that every year all efforts were made to fill vacancies, in the interim members were co opted to fill the vacancies on SACRE.  He advised that it was a national issue to find members for SACRE. 

(5)         RESOLVED that:

(a)   the responses to questions from Members be noted; 

(b)   the Kent SACRE’s annual report 2008-09 be noted;  and

(c)   the work of the Kent SACRE be noted.

(Report by Ms M White, Head of Extended Services and Mrs G Bromley, Strategic Manager/ Project Manager Libraries and Archives)

(Mrs G Bromley, Strategic Manager/ Project Manager Libraries and Archives was present for this item)

(1)         The Committee considered a progress report on the development of a Community Strategy for Reading and Literacy in Kent, known as the “Kent Approach”, endorsed by Cabinet on the 30 March 2009, Chief Officers and the Kent Partnership.

(2)         The Chairman advised that the report had cross cutting issues for the Children, Families and Education Directorate and the Communities Directorates and had already been considered by the Communities Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

(3)         Mrs Bromley said that she viewed this as a corporate piece of work and as a long term strategy.  The strategy recognised that there was enormous good practice in schools and other educational establishments but recognised that there was a need to raise standards in literacy and English and achievement within the communities in Kent.  There were a wide range of agencies that would be working in partnership with KCC to test and try new approaches including those outlined within the report.  The priorities included; Key Stage 2, Looked After Children, Gypsies and Travellers needs, people with dyslexia and others with special needs.

(4)         RESOLVED that:

(a)         the activity that had taken place and the  continuing     momentum of this work be noted; and

(b)                     the advice on ways in which KCC elected Members might act as ambassadors for literacy and reading in their local communities be noted.

(1)         The Chairman advised the Committee that those Members who attended the visits to the schools on 2 February 2010 would be gathering around the webcam to thank the pupils of schools for sharing their views.  Following this the Committee would view a short film from the Leigh Academy, which could not be broadcast as permission was withheld.  The film from the visit to the Skills Centre, Thamesview, was not available in time for the meeting. 

(2)         Mr Pascoe introduced the 4 minute film from Leigh Academy explaining that the Academy was a group of 4 schools under on roof.  Members had visited one of the schools and received a tour of the school and met with 6 year 11 pupils for a discussion.  Mr Pascoe felt that the pupils were smart and articulate and shared a great bond with, and respected, their teachers.  The Chairman added that what seemed to work well at the school was the one to one sessions for pupils with their teachers as the students were fortunate to have a high teacher to pupil ratio.  The pupils also had a clear view of what they wished to do in the future, although this did not seem to feature apprenterships. 

(3)         Mr Burgess referred back to Minute15(5) 2009 and suggested that pupils should all receive independent advice and guidance in year 10 on career paths, the earlier the better, to enable the pupils to match their life skills to what they wish to do.

(4)         Mr  Richardson suggested that as some of the pupils on the visits did not know what they wished to do in the future it may be that more work experience opportunities could be offered in the curriculum.  Mrs Todd advised that in practice it was logistically difficult for pupils to attend work experience as there were many areas that had to be secured such as health and safety and safeguarding before they were allowed to accept the placement. She felt that the culture of the work place accepting work experience pupils was difficult and needed to be made easier through legislation.

(5)         RESOLVED that the Committee noted the content of the short film.

10.15 am    Mr Paul Carter, Carter Consultancy

10.45 am    Doctor Liz Hoult, Canterbury Christchurch University

11.15 am    BREAK

11.20 am    Mr John Casey, Mainstream Training                           

11.50 am    Mr Martin Atkinson HR Manager, Aylesford Newsprint

12.20 pm    Summing up

RESOLVED that the evidence received from four Kent Employers; Mr P Carter, Carter Construction, Dr Liz Hoult, Canterbury Christchurch University, Mr John Casey, Mainstream Training and Mr Martin Atkinson HR Manager, Aylesford Newsprint(attached as appendix 1) be noted.