BOROUGH OF POOLE
MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT AND EDUCATION SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
HELD ON THURSDAY 16TH SEPTEMBER 2004
The meeting commenced at 6.40 p.m. and concluded at 10.05 p.m.
Present:
Members of the Committee
Councillor Mrs James (Chairman)
Councillor Smith (Vice Chairman)
Councillors Belcham, Brooke, Bulteel, Clements (substitute for Cllr Meachin), Mrs Hillman, Mrs Moore, Newell and Rampton.
Diocesan Representative:
Mr Keith Newman
1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies for absence had been received from Councillor Mrs Butt, Councillor Meachin, Diocesan Representative Canon C Rutledge and Parent Governor Representative Mr Peter Crouch.
The Chairman explained that apologies for absence had also been received from the Headteacher and Chairman of Governors of St Joseph’s RC VA Combined School, as they were undergoing a Section 23 Inspection. It was noted that they would instead report to the November 2004 Scrutiny Committee meeting.
2. MINUTES
Resolved that the minutes of the meeting held on 29th June 2004, having been previously circulated, be approved as a correct record and confirmed and signed by the Chairman, subject to the interest declared at minute No.3 by Councillor Rampton being corrected to read:
“Councillor Rampton declared an interest as his step-son was in one of the Council’s sheltered homes.”
3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Councillor Rampton declared a personal interest in item 8 as his step-son was a resident of one of the Council’s sheltered homes.
Councillor Bulteel declared an interest in item 4 as a Governor at Old Town First School.
Councillor Mrs Moore declared a personal interest in item 5 as a Governor of Rossmore Community College.
Councillor Clements declared a personal interest in item 4 as a Governor of Manorside School and in item 6 as a member of the Learning and Skills Council.
4. SCHOOL OFSTED REPORTS
(a) Old Town First School
The Headteacher and Chair of Governors further expanded upon the summarised OFSTED Report contained within the agenda, highlighting that Old Town First School was the smallest school in Poole, run by only five teachers.
In explaining that they had been inspected by a team of four, they highlighted that the key messages from the inspection was that the school worked well together as a team, but that the teaching of literacy and numeracy needed to be more integrated in all subjects across the curriculum.
They asserted that, to achieve an overall “very effective” appraisal, was an improvement on a previous inspection, when the school had been assessed as being unsatisfactory. Highlighting that the quality of education was very positive in the school, the Headteacher and Chair of Governors nevertheless accepted that more work needed to be done on the improvements highlighted by the Inspectors, particularly with regards to teacher presentation skills, and to further integrating the teaching of literacy and numeracy across the curriculum.
The Headteacher went on to explain how the Borough was helping the school in tackling the improvements highlighted, and then to record her thanks to the Borough, her staff and family, and how proud she felt of her staff.
The Chairman of Governors then expressed her own pride in the school, referring to the difficult start it had had seven years previously, adding that the achievements had exceeded Governors’ expectations.
During the ensuing discussion Councillor Bulteel, as a Governor of Old Town First School, expressed his pride in being able to receive this positive report, remarking upon the fact that the school was situated within the heart of the community, and that the children appeared to attend the school with great enthusiasm.
He highlighted how rare it was for OFSTED to use words such as “excellent”, which they had felt appropriate to use in the case of the leadership and management of this school, and remarked upon how well deserved this comment had been.
Councillor Brooke then congratulated the Headteacher on the very positive report, but remarked upon the fact that an unsatisfactory grade had been given to the category of “how well the curriculum meets pupil needs” and asked the Headteacher to account for this.
In response, the Headteacher explained that this rating had referred to literacy and numeracy needing to be integrated across the whole of the school curriculum, and that the length of lessons in year one in particular needed to be reduced. She explained that work had already begun on this area of improvement, with careful planning and provision being revised.
Noting all that had been discussed, the Chairman thanked the Headteacher and Chairman of Governors for attending the meeting and for explaining their report. The Committee’s congratulations were offered for the positive Inspection result.
AGREED that the Chairman, on behalf of the Committee, thank the Headteacher and Chair of Governors for attending the meeting and presenting their report.
UNANIMOUS
(b) Sylvan First School HMI Report
The Headteacher and Chairman of Governors presented a summarised version of the HMI report on this school, explaining that the report detailed progress against the action plan that had arisen from the OFSTED inspection previously carried out. The Headteacher highlighted how the school was making reasonable progress in raising attainment and eliminating under achievement. She considered that the Inspector had reported a fair impression and sound judgement upon the school and its current performance. She then listed what had been regarded as significant improvements:
· attitude and behaviour of children was good in all classes and across all year groups
· lines of delegation had improved
· the performance of the Governing Body had improved significantly
· teachers were now more accountable for their subjects
· planning for learning had improved and there was greater consistency, although other inconsistencies to eliminate
· the sharing of good practice was having an impact across the school in the quality of teaching
· targets had been met and in some cases exceeded, with hope that the school would rank well when next compared against other schools in Poole.
With regards to those areas which were still classed as “unsatisfactory”, the Headteacher explained that this could also be attributed to the new guidance and new measures of achievement which had been issued by OFSTED, which meant that performance which would have been classed “satisfactory” in previous years was now ranked as “unsatisfactory”.
With regards to future improvements, the Headteacher referred to the new School Improvement Plan, highlighting that the key aim of the Improvement Plan was to improve leadership across the school to raise achievement. In doing this the Headteacher explained that the school would be returning to its original vision and values.
During the ensuing discussion the following points were made and clarification sought:
· 9 out of 24 of the lessons had been considered “unsatisfactory”
· the Governing Body had been remarked upon as “improving significantly”. It periodically attended training sessions and was always careful to reflect reflected upon its performance;
· the teaching of science was one of the areas for improvement.
In conclusion, the Headteacher and Chairman of Governors were thanked for attending the meeting and congratulated upon for the positive report they had received from HMI.
AGREED that the Chairman, on behalf of the Committee, thank the Headteacher and Chair of Governors for attending the meeting and presenting their report.
UNANIMOUS
(c) (Former) Alderney Middle School HMI Report
The Head of School Advice and Support Services introduced the HMI report on Alderney Middle School, reminding Members that following its Inspection in 2003 and it becoming subject to special measures, an interim Headteacher had been put in place, who had subsequently led the school from a very difficult situation to now being classed as making “reasonable progress”.
Maurice O’Brien, the interim Headteacher, explained the situation he had been brought into, and outlined what action had been taken to address the improvements, which the Inspectors had suggested needed to be made.
He remarked upon the fact that the Inspectors had also used “good” to describe some of the improvements that had been made, which he considered signified outstanding results, due to the very dedicated nature of staff team. He commented on the very helpful contribution made by the LEA in devising a Steering Group, and paid tribute to Wayne Roberts and David Alderson for their high level of professionalism.
The Head of School Advice and Support Services then requested that her thanks be publicly recorded to the interim Headteacher, for his hard work and dedication to the school.
The Chairman of Governors was also offered thanks for her effort, with the HMI report commenting that the Governing Body had been “exceptionally well led by the Chair”.
Finally, the interim Headteacher felt it appropriate to highlight that, not only had the school been working hard to improve its performance, but that it had had to do this in the context of the merger with the First school, which had involved an extensive building programme.
During the ensuing discussion Councillor Clements made the following comments:
· the progress that had been made in the school had taken very good leadership and support, and a tremendous collaborative effort between staff and children
· there was a very good spirit in the school which had managed to open on time, despite outstanding difficulties relating to the refurbishment programme, and thanks needed to be attributed to Karen Davis as the Site Advisor.
The Chairman then thanked the interim Headteacher and Head of School Advice and Support Services for the report and congratulated the staff and pupils at the school for the progress they had made.
Councillor Mrs Hillman then questioned what contingency plans had been put in place to stop the school returning to special measures, and to ensure that other schools learnt from this experience. In response the Head of School Advice and Support Services explained that there were many lessons to learn from the example of this school, and that teachers and Education Officers would be meeting formally to record these lessons, in order that good practice could be shared and progressed.
The Policy Director (Education) then recorded his thanks to the Governing Body of St Mary’s School, which had allowed Maurice O’Brien to be released to assist Alderney Middle School. In turn, Maurice O’Brien recorded his thanks to his staff for all that they had done in his absence.
As a concluding remark, Mr Newman suggested that a team of interim Headteachers, with the similar expertise of Maurice O’Brien, be put together as a stock pool of available teachers who could be pulled on in the future to help with those schools classed as being in special measures.
AGREED that the Chairman, on behalf of the Committee, thank the Headteacher for attending the meeting and presenting the report.
UNANIMOUS
(d) Poole High School
The Committee noted that the Headteacher of Poole High School had declined the invitation to attend the meeting, and noted the contents of the report in his absence.
Councillor Brooke made the following comments:
· That the minutes of this meeting should be forwarded to the school.
· He found it difficult to equate the words in the report with the statistical data included in the table on page 53, noting that there were a number of categories that had been classed as “unsatisfactory”, yet the overall evaluation had been headed as “good”.
By way of a response to these comments, the Policy Director (Education), whilst not in a position to defend the comments and contents of the report, nonetheless offered an explanation, that, with regards to the sixth form grades, there were no similar school comparisons to make in Poole. He clarified that many of the pupils going on to take O’ levels in this school, started from a lower GCSE grade base and were therefore more likely to attain grades of D’s and E’s as opposed to A’s to C’s.
Councillor Brooke then went on to assert that there were a number of issues in the report which the Committee would have preferred to have been able to ask the Headteacher to account for.
The Vice Chairman of the Committee expressed his disappointment that the Headteacher had declined his invitation, and stressed that more needed to be done to welcome him and his staff to future Scrutiny Committee meetings. The Policy Director (Education) noted this comment, claiming that much effort was already carried out to welcome the school.
As a final comment, Councillor Newell expressed his opinion that the report accurately reflected the strong performance of the school, and that the management of the school was very strong. He continued that the key issues of performance had been identified and that the school was currently addressing these.
In conclusion the Chairman and Committee noted the contents of the report.
AGREED that the report be noted.
UNANIMOUS
5. MANAGEMENT OF CAPITAL ASSETS
The Head of Financial Services presented his report explaining that Cabinet had requested Audit to examine the financial management of the Hamworthy and Rossmore Schools Capital Projects to seek a way forward and to ensure that the same mistakes were not repeated. He explained that the Audit Reports identified the weaknesses which needed to be considered, and which the Committee were asked to evaluate, in addition to assessing whether or not the action plans addressed the weaknesses.
In presenting the report the following points were highlighted:
· the Rossmore and Hamworthy Schools Projects had resulted in significant overspends, which was not to be viewed as a misuse of resources, but which was due to initial estimates of the cost of each project being inaccurate, and not as fully informed as was needed in projects of this scale
· this was not a ‘value for money’ issue, as the Council would achieve a £5 million asset as an outcome, but that both the capital and revenue consequences of the project had not been anticipated
· both the capital and revenue costs that had subsequently been identified, signified key issues which impacted upon projects which the Council would have otherwise been able to fund
· careful evaluation of how the projects had been allowed to progress before recognising the true costs, needed to be carried out to ensure that the same mistakes were not made on the Council’s XL projects