To receive an update.

Kevin McDaniel introduced the item on education standards. He also highlighted that the DfE (Department of Education) had reduced the school improvement grants to local authorities by half from 1st April 2022 and then to 0 from April 2023. He added that during the Schools Forum meeting earlier in the day, the maintained school representatives agreed to fund the shortfall from a reserve of school’s budget to continue school services as well as collaboration on how to keep the services running.

Clive Haines, Schools Leadership Development Manager, gave a presentation on the standards and quality of education, starting off with Ofsted results. As of January 2022, the Borough stood at 97% where schools were judged as good or outstanding, compared to the last reported position of 94%. Only two schools, including a PVI (private voluntary and independent nurseries) were judged as requiring improvement.

As for disadvantaged pupils, Clive Haines reported that the pandemic had led to a growing gap between disadvantaged pupils and their non-disadvantaged peers. Methods to resolve this included catch-up strategies in schools, pupil premium strategies such as the National Tutoring Programme, continuing Pupil Premium Networks and encouraging Quality First Teaching.

Clive Haines then discussed Key Stage 4 Attainment. Due to the pandemic, summer examinations were cancelled in 2020 and 2021; therefore, alternatives processes were set up to award grades. The proportion of pupils who achieved a grade 5 or higher in both GCSE English and Maths was 55.7%, about 3.8% above the national average of 51.9%.

Clive Haines then moved on to the School Centre Initial Teaching Training (SCITT), a school-led teacher training programme to aid in the recruitment of teachers in RBWM which would lead to Qualified Teacher Status (QTS). The programme was overall successful: 29 teachers (16 primary, 13 secondary) were successfully trained during the last academic year, training continued throughout the lockdown, all trainees had at least two teaching experiences, all trainees received QTS, and 100% of primary trainees received employment.

Clive Haines then discussed absences. The rate of absences due to positive Covid cases in RBWM had reduced from 3.1% in 2021 to 2.7%; compared to the national average from 2.8% to 2.5%. As for persistence absence, 11.3% of pupils were persistently absent during the autumn term 2020/21 compared to the national rate of 13%. The Education Welfare Team continued to support schools with persistent absence through a traded service for allocated education welfare officer.

Clive Haines moved on to permanent exclusions in schools. The number of exclusions in RBWM decreased from 31 in 2018/19 to 20 in 2019/20 and 2020/21, though lockdowns influenced this reduction. In 2019/20, there were 4 permanent exclusions of primary pupils. Because of this, the SHEMH programme was launched in the same academic year to reduce primary exclusions.

Clive Haines then discussed the SEMH programme (Social Emotional Mental Health Service), which was established in September 2019 to reduce primary permanent exclusions. Evidence suggested that this was beginning to have an impact: the programme had supported 23 pupils at risk of exclusion and no pupil who had received support from the service had been excluded. The programme had evolved to include a secondary model in the 2021/22 academic year.

Clive Haines then moved on to Elective Home Education.  There had been a significant increase in children being electively home educated (EHE) in RBWM from 77 children in 2019/20 to 232 children in 2021/22. To ensure all children who were electively home educated were receiving adequate education, an additional fixed-term, full-time post was appointed, funded by a one-off pandemic grant.

Clive Haines then moved on to Young People Not in Education, Employment or Training (or NEET for short). The percentage of NEET and Unknown in RBWM was 5.3 % in 2021, which was below the England average of 5.4%. Meanwhile, the percentage whose status was “Unknown” was 3.7% in August 2021, which was higher than the England average of 2.3% but had fallen from 19.7% in 2017.

Clive Haines then discussed the SEND (Special Educational Needs and Disabilities) service, which was responsible for carrying out statutory Education, Health and Care Assessments of children and young people with special educational needs in RBWM and manage the placement and provision for all children and young people with EHCPs.

The service had managed 1,043 EHCP across the 0-25 age range, including 452 in mainstream school, 123 in FE College, 253 in state-funded special school and 137 in independent/non-maintained sector.

The highest primary need in RBWM was Autism, followed by Speech and Language Needs and Social, Emotional and Mental Health Difficulties.

The 2021/22 budget for SEN expenditure on independent, non-maintained and free special schools was approximately £5.7 million.

Clive Haines then finished off by giving a summary of the main priorities for education.

Councillor Bateson asked a couple of questions. Referring to GCSE and A-Level results being assessed under Covid, she asked how many pupils had their results reassessed due to challenging their original result. She then asked how many autism schools in RBWM were private or belonged to another association and if children from within or outside RBWM attended them. Clive Haines answered that results went through a peer-to-peer moderation and not only a teacher assessment. He also added that there was a process to allow pupils to appeal their results. As for how many students went through re-appeal, Clive Haines could not give a figure as it was not reported. Councillor Bateson reiterated the importance of knowing about grade appeals.

After agreeing with Councillor Bateson on the need to understand grade appeals, Kevin McDaniel answered that there were a significant number of schools which catered for young people with varying needs, such as autism support.

Councillor Sharpe asked if the issues in education were a key concern for the Borough, or were there other things that should be of concern. Clive Haines answered that the focus as a Borough was the gap between advantage and disadvantage, especially due to the Covid pandemic. In addition, the initial teaching training program was also a focus, which Clive Haines believed meant that the Borough did not have a teacher recruitment issue compared to other boroughs.

The Chairman asked how many pupils had left RBWM for boarding schools. Kevin McDaniel said the exact number was unknown; but he stated that what was known was roughly 10-12% of secondary age young people in RBWM went to grammar schools outside the Borough. He also speculated that approximately 200 children from RBWM go to other schools which were “not necessarily known” to the Borough out of a population of 35,000 children and 22,000 being enrolled into schools in RBWM.

Referring to a presentation slide, Councillor Carole Da Costa asked why children in elective home education (EHE) was considered an issue. Clive Haines responded that the issue was more to do with the reasons as to why children were being electively home educated (EHE). He stated a couple of reasons for EHE, such as continued anxiety from the Covid pandemic and parents seeking to prevent a situation of their child being excluded from the school. Therefore, support was needed to be provided to help children get back into mainstream schools when EHE was not the parental preference.

Councillor Tisi asked some questions regarding school exclusions. Firstly, she asked to shed some light on the exclusions of 60% of children with SEND and children without EHCPs (Education Health and Care Plan). She then asked if there were provisions or services offered to support Gypsy-Roma and Traveller children in education. And finally, she asked about the differences in exclusions between maintained schools and academies, namely what was causing it and what could be done about it.

While not knowing all the reasons as to why some schools excluded more than others, Clive Haines answered that a factor for high rates of exclusion in secondary schools was due to school policy, such as a zero-tolerance policy towards drugs and knives. A countermeasure he mentioned was to encourage the schools to further investigate the context (e.g., a butterknife is not a dangerous weapon). He also stated that style of leadership could also influence the rate of exclusions. He also mentioned that there was a fair access panel to get excluded children back into school as soon as possible.

Kevin McDaniel mentioned factors that influenced the rate of exclusion, including a recent increase in difficult behaviour, such as physical assault, and the school leadership style, namely schools acting early and firmly to maintain behaviour. He also suggested an increase in of young people having a lack of appreciation for the consequence of their actions and the need to understand the importance of a consistent set of rules and boundaries.  This is the aim of the SEMH (Social Emotional and Mental Health) services.

Answering Councillor Tisi’s other questions, Clive Haines stated that exclusions of children without EHCPs or with SENDs was something he was focusing on. He also added that all exclusions went through exclusions panels, allowing for cases to be investigated and be challenged. As for Gypsy-Roma and Traveller pupils, Clive Haines stated that assistance was done within the education welfare for attendance and specialist teachers reached out to these communities.

The Chairman asked if there was an officer who took care of the welfare of Traveller children and schools they attend. Clive Haines replied that there was no dedicated or specialist officer, rather its shared within the services.

Referencing Councillor Tisi’s question regarding exclusions of children without EHCPs and children with SEND, Kevin McDaniel stated that schools without additional resources or finances could be unable to accommodate and meet the needs of pupils requiring support. This had been known to make challenging relations between parents and schools, contributing to exclusions or lack of access to education.

RESOLVED UNANIMOUSLY: That the Adults, Children and Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel noted the report.