Agenda and minutes

1.         Mrs Crabtree made a declaration regarding Item B8 as her sister was a school governor at Bower Grove School, Maidstone.

2.         Mr Balfour made a declaration regarding Item B8 advising that he was the Chairman of Governors at Grange Park School, and for Item B9 as his wife ran a Montessori school.

Mrs Dean attended as a substitute for Mr Vye.  Apologies were received from Mr Vye, Mr Tear and Mr Roper.

RESOLVED that an additional Education Cabinet Committee Meeting had been set for Tuesday, 22 April 2014 at 10.00 am to discuss the proposal to close Chaucer Technology School, Canterbury.  The agenda for the meeting would also contain any proposed Cabinet Member decisions due to be taken in that period.

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 January 2014 are correctly recorded and that they be signed by the Chairman.

1.         The Cabinet Member, Mr Gough, and the Corporate Director, Mr Leeson, gave their verbal updates and highlighted work undertaken since the last meeting of the Education Cabinet Committee meeting, which included the following:

Chaucer Technology School - Proposed Closure

2.         Mr Gough explained that proposing to close a school was a difficult issue.  A public consultation on the proposal to close Chaucer Technology Schoolwas currently being held from 25 February until 8 April 2014.  Members of this Cabinet Committee would have the opportunity to discuss the proposed closure of Chaucer Technology School at the additional meeting on 22 April 2014.

Basic Need Allocation

3.         Notification of the Basic Need allocation was received before Christmas in 2013 and it was disappointing compared to the previous allocation which kept pace with the number of additional primary school places that had been identified in the Commissioning Plan.  It had been advised that there was still funding held back by government which could be applied for by local authorities.  Discussions were being held with the Department of Education for additional funding identifying Kent’s requirements to meet the targets identified in the Commissioning Plan for 2015/17.

Universal Infant Free School Meals

4.         Mr Gough advised that £2.7 million had been allocated for Kent maintained schools and £300k for voluntary aided schools.  A survey and audit of Kent schools kitchen facilities concluded that the funding allocation fell short as there were still 141 schools without facilities.  A meeting with the Funding Forum was to be held on 25 March to discuss the allocation of that funding. 

Academies and Free schools

5.         Mr Gough advised on a recently published document submitted to the Education Select Committee on the relationship between the local authorities and academies and free schools.   The document sets out the local authorities responsibilities for the welfare and education of children in its area.  Mr Gough reflected that on the whole Kent had forged excellent relationships with all schools in Kent although the relationships were different.  He had concerns that the national policy was not wholly consistent on what the relationship should be with academies and free schools and clarification was being sought.  Mr Gough was clear that Kent should avoid opting out of being accountable, as other local authorities had, for academies and free schools.  Kent’s view was that they are all Kent children and the local authority needed to play its part in ensuring they received a good education. 

Development of Preventative Services

6.         The new Preventative Services Unitwould operate from 1 April 2014 within the newly named Education and Young People’s Services Directorate [formerly Education, Learning and Skills Directorate] to provide a joined up service for vulnerable young people from 0 to 19 year olds.  Every district of Kent would have a dedicated team as a single point of access. There would be one process where the needs of those young people can be identified and responses made to those needs.  There would be a clear systematic allocation of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 177.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr K Shovelton, Director of Planning and Access and Mrs M White, Area Education Officer, East Kent were present for this item)

1.        Mr Shovelton introduced the report and advised that the response to the public consultation was largely positive on the proposal to commission an enlargement of Cliftonville Primary Academy from 3FE to 4FE from September 2015.

2.        Mr Scobie, (Local Member for Margate and Cliftonville), advised that there were 2 highway issues raised, which were being addressed; and he was in support of the proposal.

3.        RESOLVED that the Education Cabinet Committee endorsed the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to:

                      i.        allocate £2,900,000 from the Education, Learning and Skills Capital Budget in order that the school may be expanded;

                    ii.        authorise the Director of Property and Infrastructure Support in consultation with the Director of Law and Governance to enter into any necessary contracts/agreements on behalf of the County Council; and

                   iii.        authorise the Director of Property and Infrastructure Support to be the nominated Authority Representative within the relevant agreements and to enter into variations as envisaged under the contracts. 

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr K Shovelton, Director of Planning and Access and Mrs M White, Area Education Officer, East Kent, were present for this item)

1.         Mrs White and Mr Shovelton introduced the report and explained that the consultation had 114 responses; 70 responses supporting the proposal; and 19 objecting to the proposal of which a large number was based on traffic and parking in the area.  The traffic and parking concerns were being addressed through a traffic management survey.

2.         Mrs White advised that a public meeting of the Local Residents Group took place and a site visit was held.  In addition the Local Residents Group held its own local consultation and the responses to that consultation largely mirrored the overall public consultation where the vast majority agreed to the expansion with reservations on the construction of the site and traffic issues which would be addressed through the planning consent application and traffic management survey.

3.         RESOLVED that:-

a)     the Education Cabinet Committee endorsed the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to issue a public notice to expand Joy Lane Primary School by 210 places from 2FE to 3FE; and

b)     subject to no objections being received to the public notice:

                       i.       expand the school; and

                      ii.       allocate £1,500,000 from the Education, Learning and Skills Capital Budget.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mrs M White, Area Education Officer, East Kent and Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access were present for this item)

1.         Mrs White and Mr Shovelton introduced the report and advised that under the new school organisation regulation 2013 a school did not have to go through the statutory process if the capital was secure to provide the additional accommodation, this project had planning agreement and the increase to the PAN had been consulted on as part of the Admission Arrangements consultation for entry in September 2013.

2.       RESOLVED that:-

a)        the Education Cabinet Committee endorsed the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to:

                          i.    permanently increase the PAN to 60 and temporarily increase the PAN to 90 for September 2014;

                        ii.    allocate £1,500,000 from the Education, Learning and Skills Capital Budget;

                       iii.    authorise the Director of Property and Infrastructure Support in consultation with the Director of Law and Governance to enter into any necessary contracts/agreements on behalf of the County Council; and

                       iv.    authorise the Director of Property and Infrastructure Support to be the nominated Authority Representative within the relevant agreements and to enter into variations as envisaged under the contracts.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr J Nehra, Area Education Officer, West Kent, and Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access, were present for this item)

1.         Mr Nehra and Mr Shovelton introduced the report and advised that the consultation had produced a largely positive response on the proposal to increase the designated number of places at Broomhill Bank School from 80 to 136 places.

2.         RESOLVED that:-

a)           the Education Cabinet Committee endorsed the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to issue a public notice to increase the designated number of places from 80 places to 136 places; and

b)        subject to no objections being received to the public notice;

                                  i.    expand the school;

                                ii.    allocate £1.75 million from the Targeted Basic Need budget and £250,000 from the Basic Need budget;

                               iii.    authorise the Director of Property and Infrastructure Support in consultation with the Director of Law and Governance to enter into any necessary contracts/agreements on behalf of the County Council, and

                               iv.    authorise the Director of Property and Infrastructure Support to be the nominated Authority Representative within the relevant agreements and to enter into variations as envisaged under the contracts.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education. Learning and Skills)

(Mr J Nehra, Area Education Officer, West Kent, and Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access, were present for this item)

1.        Mr Nehra and Mr Shovelton introduced the report and advised that the consultation was largely positive.  Loose Infant and Junior schools had been federated since 2011 and share a Governing Body and an Executive Headteacher.  The schools occupy the same site with a single vehicular entrance point and both schools had pedestrian entrances.

2.        RESOLVED that:-

a)        the Education Cabinet Committee endorsed the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to issue a public notice to discontinue Loose Infant and Loose Junior School; and establish a single, three form of entry community primary school by September 2014; and

b)        subject to no objections being received to the public notice, recommendations be made to the School Adjudicator for determination for implementation by September 2014.

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for, Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr J Nehra, Area Education Officer, West Kent and Mr K Shovelton, Director of Planning and Access, were also present for this item)

1.         Mr Nehra and Mr Shovelton introduced the report and advised that the consultation was largely supported.  There were 91 written responses received of which 89 were in support of the proposal and 2 objected the proposal.  The Infant School had been judged by Ofsted as outstanding.  Following the Headteacher of the Junior School tendering his resignation; the subsequent inspection of the Junior School which was judged by Ofsted to require Special Measures and the appointment of a New Chair of Governors, the Governing Bodies of Madginford Infant and Junior Schools recommended to the Local Authority that the most appropriate solution to securing and maintaining outstanding education provision for both infant and junior age ranges at Madginford was to have a single all through school.  This proposal was aligned to the Commissioning Plan for Education Provision and Bold Steps for Education.

2.         Mr Nehra explained that subsequently the Headteacher of Madginford Park Infant School who was appointed as Interim Executive Headteacher of Madginford Park Junior School had stood down and as a result the Local Authority was supporting the governing body to appoint a new Headteacher; and putting a wide range of support in place to raise the education standard of the Junior school cohort.

3.         RESOLVED that:-

a)     the Education Cabinet Committee endorsed the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member of Education and Health Reform to issue a public notice to discontinue Madginford Park Junior School; and enlarge and change the age range of Madginford Park Infant School, to become a single all-through primary school; and

b)     subject to no objections being received to the public notice; make recommendations to the Schools Adjudicator for determination for implementation by September 2014. 

(Report by Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access was present for this item)

1.        Mr Shovelton introduced the report and advised that the school had accommodated a bulge reception class in 2011 due to pressures on school places in Ashford and two temporary modular classrooms were provided in 2012.  The local authority was seeking to provide two permanent classrooms and expand the hall to a sufficient size to accommodate 210 pupils. The two class modular would be re-used at another site.

2.        The proposals were fully supported by the Headteacher and Governing Body; and the Director of Education Planning and Access.

3.        RESOLVED that:-

a)        the Education Cabinet Committee endorsed the decision to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform to:

                          i.    allocate a total of £725k from the Education, Learning and Skills Capital Budget in order that the proposal may go ahead;

                        ii.    authorise the Director of Property and Infrastructure Support in consultation with the Director of Law and Governance to enter into any necessary contracts/agreements on behalf of the County Council; and

                       iii.    authorise the Director of Property and Infrastructure Support to be the nominated Authority Representative within the relevant agreement and to enter into variations as envisaged under the contracts.

(Report by Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr D Adams, Area Education Officer, South Kent and Mr K Shovelton, Director of Education Planning and Access, were present for this item)

1.        Mr Adams and Mr Shovelton introduced the report and gave an update on the Special School Review and ongoing public consultations involving Kent’s maintained Special schools.  The report also gave details of further consultations that needed to be undertaken in order to enlarge or relocate a number of Special schools.  Mr Adams highlighted that the key issues were undertaking statutory proposals to significantly enlarge the schools and regularising the situation.

2.         Mr Adams advised that Goldwyn School had been revised following further negotiation with the school.  It was now proposed to redesignate its number of pupils to 115 by adding 10 places in Ashford and 40 places in Folkestone via a satellite, and the remaining places through Goldwyn Plus, which delivered the curriculum off site. The residential element was likely to be withdrawn.

3.         RESOLVED that the Education Cabinet Committee noted the consultations that were currently taking place and recommended to the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform that the public consultations on the remainder of the proposals set out in the report be undertaken.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director, Education, Learning and Skills)

(Ms A Gamby, Head of Early Years and Childcare, and Mrs S Rogers, Director of Quality and Standards, were present for this item) 

1.        Mr Leeson introduced the report and advised that the consultation had received a largely positive response supporting the ambition, strategic aims, priorities and proposed ways forward. 

2.        The Chairman highlighted that the percentages referred to on page 147 needed to be amended.

3.        Mr Leeson Ms Gamby and Mrs Roger responded to comments and questions which included the following:-

·   A comment was made that it was good to see the importance of the Children’s Centres and early intervention being highlighted.

·   In response to a question regarding the gap of Free School Meals, Mr Leeson advised that this was a good news story. Kent’s attainment gap for Free School Meals was the third least wide nationally and that gap continued to be narrowed through more targeted support for vulnerable children in the early years settings so that every child going to school at the age of five years had the best start. This gap needed to continue to be narrowed when the child went to school.   Ms Gamby added that Kent was concluding a restructure on the Early Years  and Childcare Service this month to ensure that the service was in a position to deliver this refreshed strategy.  It would create an Early Years Team and that Team would feed into Key Stage 1 and 2.  There would be a programme of support to build on successes recognising the gaps.

·   In reply to a question, Ms Gamby advised that the issue of salaries that would attract graduates was largely outside of the local authorities control as the graduate targets relate to private, voluntary and independent provision and was completely independent and autonomous.  Each individual Early Years and Childcare provider determined their own salaries in line with legislation regarding the minimum wage etc.

·   Referring to the performance targets set out on page 170, a request was made for comparatives with neighbouring local authorities.

·   Ms Gamby advised that Kent County Council (KCC) had a three year Service Level Agreement with the Professional Association for Childcare and Early Years (PACEY) which worked with and on behalf of KCC and was accountable to KCC.  PACEY made sure that the KCC had sufficient childminding where its data said that childminding was needed.  PACEY also provided advice, information and training and reported to KCC on the quality of that provision.

·   In reply to a question, Mr Leeson explained that to receive support and funding childminders needed to be registered. They were regularly inspected.  The local authority also received local intelligence regarding childminders. 

·   In response to a comment on the difficulty of having a graduate attending training and gaining qualifications whilst being employed by an Early Years provider, Ms Gamby advised that there was a bursary fund to target where there was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 186.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Ms S Dunn, Head of Skills and Employability, was present for this item)

1.         Mr Leeson introduced the report and advised that the first phase of the review and reorganising of the Preventative Referral Unit (PRUs) provision was held in 2013. The second and last phase of the review was the review of the provision of the Health Needs PRUs, one in East Kent; and one in West Kent. Those provisions addressed the needs for the pupils with long term health needs and mental health needs and included The Oakfields Unit, which was a CAMS Tier 4 hospital for the short term care of severely ill children.  The review was about access and organisation; and the needs of young people that needed to be responded to.  It was now expected that the physical medical short term needs of young people would be the responsibility of their mainstream school.  

2.         Mr Leeson and Ms Dunn responded to comments and questions by Members which included the following:

·         In response to a question, Mr Leeson advised that the current Child and Adolescent Mental Health Services (CAMHS)contract was still in place but there were a number of things happening to improve it. Although Sussex Partnership worked to make some improvements regarding assessment waiting times and response times, all the data suggested that it was generally unsatisfactory. The concerns regarding CAMHS had been considered by the Health and Wellbeing Board and Kent County Council had written to central government regarding its concerns.  Regarding this piece of work, there had been discussions with CAMHS service colleagues so that when this reformed provision moved forward Kent could be insure that there was a commitment from CAMHS for support when children were referred.

·         A comment was made that this review was welcomed as a start to monitoring the work of CAMHS.

·         In reply to a question, it was advised that there had been a lot of consultation with the Health Services on this review.  This was a Tier 3 provision for children with complex needs and CAMHS support was necessary.

·         In response to a question, Ms Dunn advised that this provision was the education of children with mental health needs.  Schools needed to be clear about their role in supporting young people with mental health needs.  This provision was for the top end, Tier 3 and 4.  Discussions had also been held with GPs about having a clear process on the early work at Tiers 1 and 2 that can be carried out on early prevention and early intervention that would mean young people may not need to enter Tier 3 provision.

·         Mr Gough advised that there had been improvements in assessment times and maintaining those improvements was a priority.  The Health Overview and Scrutiny Cabinet Committee considered this issue; and it was also considered by the Health and Wellbeing Board with regards  ...  view the full minutes text for item 187.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr S Bagshaw, Head of Fair Access was present for this item)

1.        Mr Bagshaw introduced the report and highlighted key points that included the following:

·     13,000, 84%, of children received their first preference of school for entry in September 2014 and 9.3%, of children received their second preference of school, with an additional 700 children in the cohort these statistics were considered a success which was credited to the work carried out by the schools and a result of having the right number of school places.

·      400 children were allocated a school that they had not named and the admission appeals could be made now.

2.        Mr Bagshaw and Mr Leeson responded to comments and questions which included the following:

a)    There was a wide choice of schools in Kent which made it difficult to compare Kent with neighbouring authorities.

b)    Parents had the right to indicate any school, including London schools, as a preference on their application form.  The Kent Admissions Team would contact the local authority of that school regarding the request for a place in their authority.  A local authority can only allocate school places where there are places available within their authority eg KCC cannot allocated places in Medway, London etc. Mr Leeson advised that there were concerns regarding the 400 children that were not allocated one of their four preferences.

c)    There were four schools within the Dover and Folkestone areas that were setting their own test separate to the Kent test.  The schools’ tests were aimed at giving those schools flexibility to offer places.

d)    A request was made for flexibility for Service children.  Mr Bagshaw advised that there was provision within the legislation for Service children who were admitted outside the normal admissions round and due to the nature of the Service there had been difficulty in gaining certainty from the Ministry of Defence on when Service personnel were moving into and out of an area.

e)    Mr Leeson agreed to provide a list of amendments to the documents in future.

3.        RESOLVED that:-

a)        the outcome of the consultation on the proposed scheme for transfer to Primary and Secondary schools in September 2015 including the proposed process for non co-ordinated In-Year Admissions be noted; and

b)        the Education Cabinet Committee recommended the following to the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform on the Cabinet decision to determine:

                          i.    the Co-ordinated Primary Admissions Scheme 2015/16 incorporating the In Year admissions process as detailed in Appendix A of the report;

                         ii.    the Co-ordinated Secondary Admissions Scheme 2015/16 incorporating the In Year admissions process as detailed in Appendix B of the report;

                       iii.    the oversubscribed criteria relating to Community and Voluntary Controlled Infant, Junior and Primary schools in Kent 2015/16 as detailed in Appendix C (1);

                       iv.    the Published Admissions Number for Community and Voluntary Controlled Infant, Junior and Primary  ...  view the full minutes text for item 188.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.        Mr Gough introduced the report and highlighted the following points:

·        there had been a good performance in GCSE results in English and Mathematics which bucked the national trend where there had been a decline. 

·         The attainment gap remained an issue of concern.  This was an issue for the South East, in particular.  A Narrowing the Gap Conference had taken place when the good outcomes in SEN statements were discussed. 

·         There had also been encouraging news on the declining number of those Not in Education Employment or Training (NEETs). 

2.          Mr Gough and Mr Leeson responded to comments and questions by Members which included the following:

a)    Mr Leeson advised that the standards in all Key Stages were improved   by most schools.  Post 16 mixed A level results were not good and were below the national average, although there had been some gains in 2013.  Mr Leeson explained that this was a result of too many pupils being on the wrong courses and the dropout rate being too high at 17 years.  Some pupils attained lower grades at AS level and continued on to take their A levels and did not gain the best A level results.  These pupils required help to stay on track in order for them to improve.      

b)    Members congratulated officers on their achievements regarding the number of children gaining their first school preference.

c)    Mr Leeson explained that a school judged by Ofsted to be unsatisfactory was required to show significant improvement within a year.  76% of schools were judged to be good or outstanding; this was an improvement on the results of two years ago when it was 56% of schools.  This was broken down as 87% of secondary schools (higher than the national average) and 73% were primary schools.  There needed to be more good schools if not outstanding.  There were 119 schools requiring improvement and there were particular concerns regarding 19 of those schools.

3.        RESOLVED that:-

a)        the responses to comments and questions by Members be noted; and

b)        the Education, Learning and Skills Performance Management Framework and the current performance on key indicators be noted.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Mr J Reilly, Strategic Business Advisor, was present for this item)

1.         Mr Gough introduced the report and highlighted the key risks outlined on page 298 of the report that stated what was going well and what the challenges were.

2.         RESOLVED that the Education Cabinet Committee noted the key strategic priorities for 2014/15 prior to the approval of the Statement by the Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and the Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills before the start of the new financial year.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform, and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

(Ms S Dunn, Head of Skills and Employability and Mrs S Rogers, Director of Education Quality and Standards, were present for this item)

1.         Mr Leeson introduced the report and advised that the 14- 24 Strategy which was launched in 2013 was about developing the whole skills agenda in Kent and helping young people to become more employable.

2.         Mrs Dunn advised that, in terms of attainment, there would be five new accountability measures for Key Stage 5, which were due to be announced by the Department for Education.  The accountability measures would be challenging for schools as traditionally key performance measures had been at Key Stage 4.  Mrs Dunn said that the performance measures would be rigorous.  She gave the example that if a school or education provider that did not provide access to level 2 in English and maths would not receive their funding.  Mrs Dunn welcomed the Destination accountability measure as it questioned what a Post 16 Programme was for. 

3.         Currently the Skills and Employability Team was working with 20 schools on a Profiling Project which was talking through the new accountability measures on what that may mean in terms of their post 16 offer.  As a result schools were considering reducing the number of subjects at A level as the standards reached were not appropriate and instead were looking at applied vocational learning and more clear progressions routes into apprenticeships.

4.         Kent was leading the way nationally in providing apprenticeships; outperforming its statistical neighbours; and hoped to be part of the governments trail blazing initiative in developing the new frameworks for apprenticeships.  This was a huge initiative post 16 agenda and would look at how apprenticeships were going to be delivered, shaped and changed through policy development.

5.         Mrs Dunn then spoke on the participation agenda and advised that the Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEETs) figures were going down and there had been a significant reduction in youth unemployment across the County’s five youth unemployment zones.

6.          An announcement had been made by Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, that a county prospectus was to be published in which all post 16 providers would have to publish their offer. 

7.         Mrs Dunn updated the figures in the report advising that the Kent supportive statistics should read “There were 600 young people who were unemployed for 3 months and were now on an apprenticeship scheme”.  There had been a 90% success rate on this programme.

8.         Targeted work continued to take place on vulnerable learners and learners with behaviour difficulties who traditionally went to a college in September at 16 years old and the placement would break down for a variety of reasons by Christmas.  There had been significant success in the programme outlined in the report. The focus of the Strategy would continue to be on vulnerable learners and narrowing the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 191.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.         Mr Gough introduced the report and advised that there had been a significant rate of improvement with more Kent schools judged to be good or outstanding.  Those schools that were judged by Ofsted to be at risk were being managed.

2.         Mr Leeson added that the targets for 2014 had been exceeded and this rate of progress needed to be maintained. Referring to the table on page 326 in the report he explained that there were risks to this as out of the 18 schools that were inspected by Ofsted some remained “requiring improvement”.  Through working in partnership with the schools, there was confidence that the majority of those schools would achieve a good inspection outcome by July 2014.  The targets were set above 86% to achieve figures above the national average which was 78%.

3.         Mr Gough and Mr Leeson responded to comments and  questions by Members which included the following:

a)     A comment was made that it was good to see that there was a good rate of progress from 56% to 78% of Kent schools above the national average and commended the work undertaken by the Area Officers and the rigorous detailed work undertaken with the teaching staff in Kent schools.

b)     In response to a question about what could be done about schools that were not responding to a poor Ofsted rating, Mr Leeson advised that it was part of the Headteachers’ role in Kent to ensure that the teaching improved consistently in their schools.  The rate of improvement would only happen if we succeed in getting schools to work in partnership.  Few schools now believed in standalone schools.  Kent school were working in clusters and federations to sustain their futures.

c)      Referring to the table on page 326 headed “Requires Improvement to Good” in the report; a request was made for the list of the schools not in the table.

d)     Referring to the Table under the heading “Ofsted Inspections September 2013 to February 2014” a comment was made that the Table showed the movement of schools with an Ofsted rating going up and it would be helpful to have a Table showing the schools with Ofsted ratings that were going down too.

e)     Mr Leeson advised that there could be barriers put up by those academies that did not want to work with the local authority and this may cause difficulties in challenging those academies when they needed to be challenged.  He advised that when he had concerns regarding an academy he wrote to the Department of Education regarding those concerns.

f)       Mr Leeson explained that an Ofsted inspection did take into account the number of children within the school where English was their second language (ESL) although this did not excuse poor rates of progress.  Headteachers were provided with many resources and support for ESL.  The main issue  ...  view the full minutes text for item 192.

(Report by Mr R Gough, Cabinet Member for Education and Health Reform and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director for Education, Learning and Skills)

1.         The Chairman highlighted  typographical errors on pages 356 under the heading “Cabinet Committee recommendations and other consultation” the words Ashford Rural South” should be replaced with “Dover Town”; and on page 371 in appendix 1 within the heading the words “Iwade Community Primary School” should be replaced with “Garlinge Primary School and Nursery”.

2.         RESOLVED that decisions 14/00022 – Proposal to expand White Cliffs Primary College for the Arts, Dover; 14/00023 – Proposal to expand Furley Park Primary School, Ashford; 14/00013 – Proposed expansion of Garlinge Primary School and Nursery, Margate; 14/00012 – Proposal to merge and relocate Foxwood School, Hythe and Highview Schools, Folkestone were taken in accordance with the process in Appendix 4 Part 7 between meetings of this Cabinet Committee be noted.