Agenda and minutes

Mr Wedgebury declared an interest regarding Item B2 as his child had been assessed as gifted and talented and Mr Ozog declared an interest regarding Item B2 as his child attended one of the schools mentioned in the report.

Members are asked to note the revised meeting dates for this Committee for 2010 as set out below:

Friday, 15 January (Joint meeting of all 3 POCs)

Tuesday, 23 February 

Thursday, 20 May

Thursday, 16 September 2.00 pm

(All meetings will commence at 10.00 am unless otherwise stated)

(1)                  Mr Vye suggested that there was a need to have an ‘Urgent Items’ heading on future agendas of the Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committees to give Members the opportunity to raise urgent committee business  if necessary.  Mr Wickenden advised that following the decision of the County Council on the new Policy Overview and Scrutiny Committees (POSCs) there was work to be undertaken on how the committees are going to operate.  An informal meeting of the Scrutiny Board (formally the Policy Overview Co ordinating Committee) would be held on 18 November 2009, this was one of the issues that would be discussed.  The POSCs would be kept informed of progress.

(2)          RESOLVED that the comments made in paragraph (1) above and the     meeting dates for 2010 as set out below were noted by the Committee.

                              Friday, 15 January (Joint meeting of all 3 POSCs)

Tuesday, 23 February

Thursday, 20 May

Thursday, 16 September at 2.00 pm

(All meetings will commence at 10.00 am unless otherwise stated)

RESOLVED that subject to the word ‘Moral’ being altered to read ‘Morale’ on page 3, paragraph 8 (1) the Minutes of the meeting held on 18 September 2009 are correctly recorded and that they be signed by the Chairman.

(Mrs J Whittle, Deputy Lead Member and Mr M Baker, Interim Director of Learning were present for this item)

(1)         Mr Smith introduced Mr Baker, Interim Director of Learning and invited him and 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 Nationally Challenged Schools (those schools that had not reached 30% of students achieving at 5A*-C grades including English and Mathematics); Ashford Computer College, Swan Valley, Wilmington Enterprise College, Dartford, Astor of Hever, Maidstone and Aylesford Sports College, Maidstone.  Mrs Whittle explained that there had been problems with the recruitment of and retaining teachers in these schools, which was stabilising.

(3)               Mrs Whittle went on the highlight the 8% vacancy rate for School governors and appealed to Members who were not already Governors to apply. 

(4)               Mrs Whittle advised that during her visits to schools she was aware of the need to look at education as a whole from 4-14 years there was a clear interlink with all schools. Tthe secondary schools could assist with identifying gifted children and those that would need additional help in secondary school.

(5)               Members were advised that Mrs Merril Haeusler had been appointed Director of Learning, Mrs Haeusler previously worked for the London Borough of Bromley.  Mr Baker would continue in his role until March 2010.

(6)               Mr Baker added that two Advisors had been appointed by the Secretary of State to visit 12 Kent Schools, over two weeks, as part of the “National Challenge”.  Part of the Advisors work would include interviewing Members and school representatives.  This work had to be completed and a report written by 16 November.  Mr Baker said that at this time it was unclear when KCC would be able to make comments on the findings but he would be strategically involved as the report had to have the Secretary of States approval.  Members noted that a report on the findings would be submitted to a future meeting of this Committee.

(7)               Mr Baker highlighted that the key activity in schools at the time was focusing on target setting for sitting the Kent Test from 2011.  The School improvement Partners would be setting targets.

(8)               Members noted that an analysis of GCSE results was in progress and a report was being drafted.

(9)               The Committee received an update of the transfer of the Learning Skills Council’s role to KCC and noted that 16 Members of the LSC staff would be transferring to KCC in March 2010.  The 16 Members of staff would be interviewed separately to ascertain their skills and match those skills to the future needs of the service.  A programme of work would then be made.  The Transition Plan had been agreed.  Mr Baker advised that an Executive Group had been set up that would meet on a weekly basis to ensure a smooth transition.

(10)          Mr Baker advised that measures had been taken to ensure school preference  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

(Report by Roger Silk, Gifted and Talented Adviser, Advisory Service Kent ASK)

(1)               Members of the Committee received a report that highlighted both the national and regional initiatives for gifted and talented young people, in particular a nationally funded pilot for Gifted and Talented pupils of which 5 Nationally Challenged schools in Kent were taking part. The specific aim of the pilot was to support students from disadvantage backgrounds during Key Stage 4 who would have fallen into the Gifted and Talented criteria if it were not for the circumstances that they face.

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

(3)       In answer to the questions on the ethos behind Gifted and Talented education Mr Silk agreed to forward a summary to Members of the Committee as there was already a large bundle of published literature on the topic.

(4)         In response to a question by Mr Vye, Mr Silk advised that Gifted was based on academic ability and Talented was ability in art, sport, music, drama etc. Mr Silk said that there was a grey area, at the age of 14 years, with the development of diplomas more high academic element.  Within the annual census this information went into the same box, this meant a school may achieve 100% with their academic level but it could be only 70%, 30% may be the talented.  Each school identifies its top 10%, by schools identifying there own cohort.  The schools knew which pupils had succeeded and who had improved and who would do well.  Mr Silk said that it was his role to encourage schools to look at all areas of subjects.  He advised that specialist schools were also reaching out  in terms of outreach and working with Primary Schools.  The links with higher education were supported through the links of the Regional Partnership.  There was tremendous support through higher education institutions for Summer schools.

(5)         The Chairman suggested there was a definite link with extended schools.

(6)         Mr Burgess suggested to the Committee that all Members should check that their schools had the G&T programme and at least one governor was responsible for this.  He advised that there was bespoke training for this role.

(7)         In response to questions raised by Mr Burgess, Mr Silk advised that the Gifted and Talented criterion on page 5 was provided by the Department of Children, Schools and Families (DCFS).  Chatham House was a different Scheme and was a high achieving school.  The school applied for the scheme under their redesignation.   Mr Silk advised that the figure of 10% was a guideline, he advised schools to be flexible about this percentage. He explained that school Information was transferred with the child and with the transfer arrangement the child’s ability was stressed, but their new school may have a higher bar for their 10%, however this did not mean that the child’s ability changed, but it may mean the child would not be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

 (Report by Mr M Baker, Interim Director of Learning)

(Ms K Phillips, Policy Officer was present for this item)

(1)         The Committee considered a report on the number of people who were Not in Employment Education or Training (NEET) in Kent, and details of strategies in place to address the issues for this cohort of young people.

(2)         Ms Phillips introduced the report highlighting the key issues.  She advised that there was a move away from using the label NEETs as a noun as young people did not feel it was helpful to their needs and made assumptions about them.  Many have qualification and many have a level 2 qualification or above   There were 5.02% young people who were NEET in September 2009, which was better than September 2008’s figure of 5.71%. Dover, Folkestone and Maidstone had the highest decrease. There was a strategy in place and a County Group with representation from Children, Families and Education Directorate, Communities directorate, the Learning Skills Council and Connexions.  There were now effective NEETs groups at local level.  The ‘September Guarantee’ Kent was ahead of the national benchmark.  The plan was to look at a selection key areas to establish of  to find why they a doing so well in NEETs or why they were struggling

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

(4)         Mr Burgess said that he felt the ‘September Guarantee’ was an excellent initiative as 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.

(5)               In response to questions and comments by Mr Burgess, Ms Phillips explained that; in Part 1 of the Strategy there was a key focus on early identification.  A lot of work was being undertaken with years 10 and 11 to start supporting young people before they reached 16 years old, a key transition stage.  There was a need for more communication between schools and colleges in terms of making them aware of young person’s particular issues too.

As well as a continued responsibility for reducing the young people who were NEET, from April 2010 the Local Authority would have the opportunity to scrutinize the quality of the post 16 provision, as the completion and succession rate could be improved.  It was not enough to engage young people, then say the young people were off the NEETs register, there was a need to know what young people were progressing 18 months on, how long they stayed in those positive opportunities. Ms Phillips said that she would be speaking to Connexions.

From now Schools would be monitored by OTSTED on Post 16 Progression Measure. The schools would be monitored on what the young people were doing when they leave the school and what qualification they had up to age 19 years. This was still  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

(Verbal report by Mr K Smith, Chairman of the Learning and Development POSC)

(1)               The Chairman summarised the current list of issues identified where the POSC thought it would have impact on the work of the County Council at the last meeting held on 18 September as listed below, and the work that was due to commence on the Select Committee Topics; Extended Schools and Education Attainment of Pupils in Schools in Areas of high Deprived.

·        Transition from Primary to Secondary School

·        14 -24 provision

·        Universal coverage of Children’s Centres.

·        Performance at Key Stage 2 and reasons for low attainment.

·        Support from KCC staff for early years settings.

·        The creative curriculum.

·        Safe and Secure learning environment

·        Leadership in Schools

·        Extended schools

(2)       The Committee noted that the Select Committee on Educational Attainment had been agreed and would be lead by this Committee.  

(3)       The Chairman suggested that the Committee looked at the issue of Parents literacy and numeracy skills.  The Committee was advised that the Chairman of Vulnerable Children and Partnerships had requested an in depth report on numeracy and literacy.

(4)       Mr Pascoe suggested that the Committee revisited the Autistic Deficit Disorder Syndrome recommendations.

(5)       Mr Vye suggested that there needed to be time given at each meeting for short update reports that had been previously considered by the Committee.

(6)      It was suggested that there was a need for the Policy Overview Coordinating Committee to decide which POSC should lead on a particular issue to prevent duplication within the three Children, Families and Education POSCs.

(7)      Mr Baker confirmed that progress report be submitted to a future meeting on standards and outcomes on 2008 and on the National Challenge.

(8)       RESOLVED that the requests and comments made by the Committee   Members be noted.

(Report by Overview Scrutiny and Localism Manager)

(1)               Members considered a report that outlined the progress with establishing a Select Committee Topic Review Work Programme 2009/2010.

(2)               The Committee noted that the following topics would form part of the work programme for 2009/10

·                    Extended Schools

·                    Renewable Energy

·                    Dementia

·                    Educational Attainment of Pupils and Schools in Areas of High Deprivation

(3)                     The two Select Committees which were within the remit of the Children, Families and Education portfolio were Extended Schools (which would be a joint review with Communities POSC) and Education Attainment of Pupils in Areas of High Deprivation under the Learning and Development POSC.

(4)          RESOLVED that the topics to be included in the Select Committee Topic Review Work Programme for 2009/2010 as set out in paragraph (2) above, be noted.