Warblington School –Staffing and Professional Development Committee- Minutes of meeting on 10 November 2015
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE STAFFING AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE HELD ON 10 NOVEMBER 2015
AT 9.30AM AT WARBLINGTON SCHOOL
Present:Campbell McMurray (from 10am)Community Governor and Chair
Ian CrabtreeCommunity Governor and Vice-Chair
Julia VincentHeadteacher
Cara ChambersStaff Governor
In attendance:Jane WoodAssistant Headteacher
Hilary PicklesClerk to Governors
1.Welcome and apologies
Ian took the Chair and welcomed everyone to the meeting which was quorate. Apologies for absence were received and accepted from Robert Page, Community Governor, and Andy Palmer, Parent Governor. Ian said he was hopeful that Campbell would be joining the meeting shortly.
2.Declaration of Pecuniary Interests
Governors were reminded to declare any pecuniary or other interests and none were declared. They were also reminded to advise should any item on the agenda change their interests during the meeting.
3.Matters of urgent business
There were no matters of urgent business.
4.Minutes of previous meetings
Cara proposed,Julia seconded and governors agreed that the minutes of the meeting on 11 June 2015 were agreed as a true record and they were signed.
5.Action report
There were no outstanding actions.
6.Leadership reports
(i)Headteacher’s report. Julia referred to her report and the associated paperwork as previously circulated. She discussed two resignations and said the posts would be covered internally initially until a more permanent solution was decided but assured governors that KS4 graphics would be protected. Julia discussed the appointment of an IT teacher and explained how KS4 ICT would be delivered to support students and improve P8. She also discussed the government’s plans to remove ICT as a GCSE subject. Governors questioned whether they should express their concern about the matter and it was agreed that Ian would write to the local MP.
See action report
Governors discussed the computer science curriculum. Jane explained how the teaching and learning team had looked at the key priorities of the school in order to support teaching and learning strategies and deliver CPD. She said the team had identified some interesting comments to feedback to departments and that it was early days but the impact would be seen very soon.
Question: How is it going down in departments?
Answer: Staff have not had much to do with it yet but it is slowly filtering down.
Julia said the new staff had settled in well and she was very pleased with the appointments made. She said one was a former ITT student at the school so his transition had been easier as the students already knew him. Julia said the performance management process had been completed and the Pay Review Committee had met on 21 October 2015, accepted her recommendations and completed the performance management audit. She explained the three targets set for teaching staff for 2015-16.
Question: Did you find that there were more objectives met this year?
Answer: Yes, the process was very clear. Blue Sky has improved as a tool for the process and we could not manage without it.
Cara discussed the process and said that staff now had a much better understanding of it. Julia discussed the programme of CPD which had included safeguarding training, attachment theory, moderation activities, department data entry, coaching training and growth mindset language in report writing.
Campbell arrived at 10am and apologised for his late arrival.
Question: What is attachment theory?
Answer: If the family set up is not nurturing or stable then students can form attachments to other adults and this is not good if it is with teachers as they will move on and students will leave the school so we have to develop students’ understanding of it.
Campbell took the chair.
Julia added that some support staff and younger teachers had no understanding of the attachment theory and it was important that they understood there were boundaries but that they could offer nurture within them. Julia and Cara discussed other issues regarding the attachment theory.
(ii)Dashboard. Campbell pointed out that boys’ attendance was higher than girls’ attendance and that overall attendance was higher than the government target. Julia said that a new Attendance Officer had been appointed and that one of Vanessa’s responsibilities during her phased return was to support her. Governors agreed the dashboard was encouraging with regard to attendance and targets.
(iii)TLA statistics. Jane said some of the lesson observation statistics were cautious and some of the RI results were very close to good and mainly due to NQTs or new or unqualified staff. She discussed the support being offered to various departments and said that the results for MFL and Performing Arts had significantly improved.
Question: There seems to be a discrimination between the outcome of departments and good or outstanding teachers so are we happy with overall performance management or are we missing something?
Answer: Some of the statistics are because one or two departments are not considering how they teach to the test.
Question: How is this reflected in process?
Answer: Performance management is part of it. Targets reflect their professional development in the classroom, their subject in the exam and teaching the theory where appropriate. Support is being offered to some departments with this.
Question: How does this get reflected in the assessment of teaching and learning?
Answer: We have changed our drop-ins. First we look at data and then look at what is happening in the classroom. We take three or four underperforming students, look at their books and work, talk to them about their progress and observe lessons. We now believe we can see that teaching is good but outcomes are not always good so we are addressing this.
Question: Where in assessment do you correlate outcomes with teaching?
Answer: Last year’s results were a shock to three Heads of Departments so we are working with them but it is also about leadership and management as well as outcomes.
Cara explained what support was offered to staff so they understood teaching to the exam. Julia discussed the TLA report with regard to individual information, causes for concern, proposed actions and how new staff were being supported.
Question: Can you summarise the work of the teaching and learning team?
Answer: There are ten teachers across a range of subjects to cover every faculty. They meet with Jane W and Jackie regularly to work on key priorities particularly stretch and challenge/ English literature, PE/literature theory and teaching to the exam.The team has already identified some key actions and will now develop the appropriate CPD.
Question: What about SMSC?
Answer: Not yet but Jackie is working on a document and it is a focus.
(iv)English departmental review. Julia discussed the excellent review and the summary of recommendations and said there was a lot of good practice in English which had resulted in a grading of -1. She said it was still mainly about stretch and challenge for the more able and about teacher predictions in literature. Julia said the full report would be shared with the HoD, line manager and governor linked to that department. She discussed the review process and said that the next reviews would be Mathematics and Science.
(v)Staffing. This matter had been discussed under Item 6(i).
(vi)Coaching and mentoring.This matter had been discussed under Items 6(i) and 6(ii).
(vii)Continuing Professional Development. This matter had been discussed under Item 6(i).
(viii)Performance management.This matter had been discussed under Item 6(i).
(ix)Induction of new staff. This matter had been discussed under Items 6(i) and 6(ii).
(x)INSET programmes. This matter had been discussed under Item 6(i).
7.Inclusion/Seclusion/Exclusion
Julia explained inclusion, seclusion and exclusion and said that there had been no permanent exclusions. She referred to the data for 2013-14 and 2015-16.
Question: Does the data reflect a tightening up of behaviour for learning?
Answer: Yes, the students are in a stable place at the moment and most behaviour issues are low level disruption.
Julia said that the 37 exclusions last year were still low compared to the Federation figures but the school would like to reduce this.
8.School Improvement Plan
Julia said that the key priorities of the SIP had been reduced to twelve but that it was currently under review and would be brought back to governors in January 2016. There was a discussion about governors’ involvement with the SIP and whether a separate session should be arranged to discuss the various sections. It was suggested that it could be touched on at the next Away Day in January 2016 and then a training day could be arranged in February 2016 and that possible dates could be proposed at the next FGB meeting. Ian said it was important that governors had some input as the SIP was at the centre of what they did. Governors agreed that whilst governance was no longer a key priority it was still necessary to maintain and continue the development of it.
9.Governors’ self-reflection and coaching
Governors provided feedback on their SLT/governor meetings since the last FGB:
- Campbell discussed his, Marcia’s and Jane R’s very constructive meeting with Jane W and Jackie at which they had discussed their AHT partnership, meetings for the rest of the year, actions to address the fall-out from the results, challenges faced, splitting of Technology and Science, review of predictions within the department, coaching of Science and Humanities, growth mindsets, monitoring and performance management review.
- Ian discussed his and Nicola’s meeting with Julia and their conversations with the Heads of MFL and English. He said the Head of MFL had discussed the analysis of the results and the way ahead, predictions, teaching and learning strategies, accountability of staff and resources. Ian said that he and Nicola were happy that the issues in the department had been recognised and the strategies identified. Ian said the Head of English had discussed the balance between language and literature and accuracy of predictions. Ian added that meetings for the rest of the year had been arranged and discussions had taken place on the good attendance, excellent student tours and positive parental feedback at the open evenings. Julia discussed the number of parent tours that had taken place for the next admission round and said that 96 first choice applications and significantly more second and third choice applications had been received so far. She said she was hopeful numbers would be good although the school was still losing places to private schools and schools in West Sussex. Julia discussed the outreach programme with primary schools, the positive parental feedback about the sports facilities and increased lettings. It was noted that advertisements had been placed for a new site assistant and a Sunday bookings assistant.
Question: What is the impact of the new pathway?
Answer: It has made a significant difference.
Julia discussed the arrangements for the formal opening of the pathway on 20 November 2015.
10.Policies/documents
There was a discussion about the policies/documentsas previously circulated.
(i)Pay Policy. Campbell saidthe policy had been revised to incorporate all the new amendments and requirements and was a very thorough document which had been discussed by the Pay Review Committee at its last meeting. Ian thanked Campbell for the work he had done on the document. Governors approved the policy.
(ii)Staff Acceptable Use of IT. Julia said that staff had to sign the document and said that an HCC Social Media and IT audit would be taking place in about two weeks. Subject to any amendments that came out of the audit, governors approved the policy.
(iii)Code of Conduct. Julia said the document had come out of a recent dismissal and Ian suggested that governors should also sign up to it. It was agreed that Hilary would circulate the document with the FGB agenda and produce a sheet for governors to sign up at the meeting.
See action report
Governors approved the policy.
(iv)Student Teacher Training Policy. Julia said that, although the policy was not statutory, it was good practice. Subject to some changes of college to school, governors approved the policy.
11.Items for next agenda
In addition to standard items, the following items were requested for the next agenda:
- Mathematics and Science departmental reviews.
- Revised SIP and committee’s section.
- Feedback from CPD.
12.Date of next meeting
The next meeting will take place on Tuesday, 9 February 2016 at 5.15pm and be held at Warblington School.
Ian thanked everyone for attending and the meeting closed at 11.25am.
ACTION REPORT
Staffing and Professional Development CommitteeOutstanding actions from meeting on 10 November 2015Item / Action / Responsible / Due date / Date actioned
or closed
6 / Leadership reports
Ian to write to local MP to express concern about ICT being removed as a GCSE. / IC / 09.02.16
10(iii) / Code of Conduct
Hilary to circulate document with FGB agenda and produce a sheet for governors to sign at the meeting. / HJP / 26.11.15
12 / Items for next agenda
Mathematics and Science departmental reviews, revised SIP and feedback from CPD to be agenda items for next meeting. / HJP / 09.02.16
1
Signed ………………………………………………………………..Date …………………………………….
Chair of Staffing and Professional Development Committee