Agenda item

(Report by Mr M Whiting, Cabinet Member, Education, Learning and Skills and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director, Education, Learning & Skills)

1.               The Chairman invited Mr Whiting and Mr Leeson to give their verbal updates.  Mr Whiting began by congratulating Mr Cooke and Mr Ridings on their appointments as Chairman and Vice Chairman respectively.  He then highlighting the following:

• The Draft Plan “Growing Places” was currently being drawn up to look at the provision by district, which he considered would eventually be by Ward so that more detailed information can be gathered on birth rates and housing developments.  Members were invited to submit their comments.  The Plan would be review bi-annually.
• “Bold Steps for Education” Strategy is being launched charging KS2 Members views were welcome
• He advised that since January 15 schools had improved 15 schools had kept at the same level.  There were now 86 academies    with 25 further schools of interest. 
• The Government has now accepted an application for the proposed new Tiger Primary Free Schoolin Maidstone with 78 places to open in September 2012. 
• Mr Whiting advised that there were a further 5 Free school applications in Kent being considered by the government (1) Dorton House co ed with 100 places, Sevenoaks, (2) Hadlow Free School co ed 180 places, (3) Wye Christian School, Ashford with 600 places, (4) The Wells Free School 154 places, Tunbridge Wells and (5) Sevenoaks Christian School with 790 places.
• The Kent Association of Headteachers had appointed an independent Chairman, Christine Gilbert.  Mr Whiting congratulated Mr Nigel Utton for his perseverance in setting this up.

2.               Mr Leeson gave his verbal update and advised Members on the following:-

• Mr Leeson advised that since January 2012 there had been 40 Ofsted inspections; 23 schools were “good” with a number of stars in that group and the rate of improvement was good; 2 schools were “outstanding” and would lead the way to other schools under the new Framework; 15 schools had improved, although, 10 remained satisfactory. Letters of congratulations would be sent by Mr Leeson to those schools that had improved.
• Mr Leeson considered that there was significant improvement but there were still 10 schools that remain satisfactory.  He agreed to report back regularly to the Committee to monitor progress.
• Members were advised that after the initial flurry of applications to convert to academy status which stands at 85 this had now subsided. There were currently 25 schools applying for academy status many were sponsored schools.  [There was an interest in stronger schools sponsoring academy arrangement with weaker Primary schools]
•  He was encouraged with schools pursuing other ways to be coterminous, creating partnerships and long term commitments.  Schools were sharing best practise and supporting one another.
• The Catholic Arch Diocese Southwark had converted all 33 Catholic schools to academy status.

3.               Members were given the opportunity to make comments and ask questions.  Points raised included:

a)    In reply to a question Mr Leeson advised that every school in Kent below “floor level” was receiving support from KCC.  This support was targeted to improve the teaching and the learning. This was done by in service training and teachers sharing best practise. This was well organised and was carried out in partnership with the schools by the Kent Lead Advisory.  Mr Leeson agreed to produce a summary of the work being undertaken. 

b)    In reply to a request Mr Leeson agreed to produce a monitoring report to be submitted at each meeting under Section C of the agenda.

c)     In response to a comment, Mr Leeson advised that the Chief Inspector was carrying out a consultation on “satisfactory” to redesignate this to “school requires improvement”.  Schools that were “satisfactory” would be regularly inspected, once a term, and if after 3 inspections they had not improved the school would be put into “special measures” which he considered a more robust approach.  He considered that it would be possible for a school to improve in one term.  Data on the Ofsted inspections would be circulated to Members.

d)    In reply to a question, Mr Leeson advised that a school was not inspected on the level of academic achievement alone, that there were other key ingredients including, making “outstanding” or “good” progress, consistent quality of teaching, and evidence of the good progress of the children.  A school with low academic achievement can receive “good” or “outstanding”.

e)    In response to a request Mr Leeson agreed to provide the data on; how many academies were Primary/Secondary and an update on the recruitment of Headteachers/teachers to a future meeting.

4.               RESOLVED that the information presented by Mr Whiting and Mr Leeson and the requests and comments made by Members be noted with thanks.