BOROUGH OF POOLE

CHILDRENS SERVICES OVERVIEW GROUP

18 JANUARY 2006

REPORT OF POLICY DIRECTOR (CHILDREN’S SERVICES)

SCHOOLS FOR THE FUTURE

1.PURPOSE OF REPORT

1.1To inform the Overview Group of (i) the outcome of public consultation on the educational principles for school organisation and (ii) the strategic issues identified in drawing-up the business plan.

1.2To seek the agreement of Members to recommend Cabinet to proceed to the next phase of public consultation, with a preferred option for transfer at age 11.

2.DECISIONS REQUIRED

(a)That the Overview Group note the outcome of consultation to date and agree to recommend Cabinet to proceed to the next phase of public consultation on the detailed models.

(b)That Cabinet be recommended to agree that the Council’s preferred option for school organisation is for a single system of pupil transfer at age 11.

(c)That the outline capital programme as set out in the Summary Business Plan for the Schools for the Future be adopted.

(d)That Cabinet, subject to the outcome of statutory consultation, be requested to proceed with Project 1a as set out in paragraph 3.3 of this report and further work be undertaken to identify additional sources of funding for this project.

(e)That further work be undertaken to identify and secure other sources of funding so that the capital programme for Project 1a can be implemented within the timescales indicated in the business plan.

3.BACKGROUND

Consultation

3.1The Council has been undertaking consultation on school organisation in the Borough since January 2004. The latest round of consultation on the education principles was undertaken by the School Organisation Consultation Group in December 2005. The results of that consultation were considered and endorsed by the Steering Group and Project Board in January 2006. A copy of that report is attached at Appendix A.

Business Plan

3.2In parallel to the public consultation being undertaken, a business plan has been prepared identifying the funding issues arising from a change in school organisation, including the risks involved. A summary of the business plan is attached at Appendix B. The full business plan has been placed in each of the Group Rooms and copies will be available at the meeting.

3.3Until future funding streams are secure, it is proposed at this stage that the Council only proceeds with Project 1 – Poole High School, Poole and Parkstone Grammar Schools – permanent buildings. Carter Community Sports College, Rossmore Community College, St Edward’s RC CE VA School and Ashdown Technology College – temporary buildings.

3.4Further work will continue to be undertaken to identify and secure other sources of funding so that, if approved, all of the capital programme can be implemented within the timescales indicated.

JOHN NASH

POLICY DIRECTOR (CHILDREN’S SERVICES)

APPENDIX A

BOROUGH OF POOLE

CHILDREN’S SERVICES OVERVIEW GROUP

18 JANUARY 2006

REPORT OF THE SCHOOL ORGANISATION CONSULTATION GROUP ON THE OUTCOME TO DATE OF CONSULTATION ON THE VISION FOR EDUCATION IN POOLE AND THE AGE OF TRANSFER

  1. PURPOSE OF REPORT

To inform the Children’s Services Overview Group of the outcome of public consultation on the educational reasons to be taken into account when considering the future organisation of schools in the Borough. The options being a two tier model – Primary/Secondary or a three tier model – First/Middle or Combined/Secondary.

  1. DECISIONS REQUIRED

(a)That the views expressed during the consultation on the educational principles for school organisation be noted.

(b)That the CSOG recommends Cabinet to proceed to the next phase of public consultation on proposed detailed models for school organisation in the Borough, with a preferred option for transfer at age 11.

(c)That the outcome of that further round of public consultation be reported to Cabinet on 25 April 2006 for consideration and recommendation to Council on the proposed arrangements for the structure of education in the Borough.

3.SUMMARY

3.1Since the Council became a Unitary Authority in 1997 it was clear that it would, at some stage, need to address the problems faced by having inherited such a complex school organisation structure for a small Borough. A working group on school organisation was established in 1998 which reported in 2000. It felt that disruption to the current system so soon after becoming a Unitary Authority, together with the large capital costs involved, was not desirable and that the focus at that time should be on raising standards.

3.2However, both the Audit Commission in successive years and Ofsted in 2002 said the Council needed to address the issue. A conference was held in January 2004 at which all mainstream schools were represented and in the Spring of 2004 the Council agreed to undertake public consultation. Two rounds of consultation have now been undertaken and a further round on detailed proposals is planned for Spring 2006. Details of the consultations to date are set out in Section 5 of this report.

3.3The current round of consultation has been complicated by the need to submit a Targeted Capital Bid to Government and the timescales imposed by that regime (see Section 8)

3.4Our consideration of the presentations and representations has, at its core, been based on the principles of Every Child Matters/Children’s Services and the need to maximise the opportunities for all Poole children. Also, one that encourages collaboration between schools and all the other agencies involved in pupil wellbeing.

3.5From a parent’s perspective it is clear that the current system is unnecessarily complex and from the Council’s point of view time consuming and expensive.

3.6Based on the educational reasons put to us as set out in detail in this report (Section 5), including alignment with the national curriculum stages, in particular Key Stage 3, reduction in pupil transitions, community role, best use of resources, curriculum principles, greater consistency with national education structures (including professional training, and mindful of the needs of all children with different abilities and backgrounds, including the most vulnerable, a single transfer at age 11 would be our preferred option.

3.7There is one Middle school (Broadstone Middle – Middle deemed Secondary) that because of its age range, 9 – 13, is able to provide good specialist facilities and specialist teachers, and overall produce good results. This was well supported by evidence from staff, governors and parents from the school. It has been suggested to us that this arrangement could be adopted across the Borough. However, the Broadstone catchment area provides that Middle school with pupils with at least average ability on entry, and from family backgrounds which are overwhelmingly supportive and encouraging, which is not the case in all other parts of the Borough. Also, to provide such a system across the Borough would also mean the closure of some schools and this would be counter to the Council’s and the Governments intention of having schools at the heart of their communities. Whilst there were arguments in favour of 9-13 schooling, the evidence does not suggest that a system of 9-13 age Middle Schools is either in the best educational interests of all pupils or in the interests of all the Borough’s communities.

3.8The headteachers of the secondary school and all the first schools in the Broadstone pyramid support the principle of a two tier structure. However, it is felt that implementation of this principle will necessarily be delayed until capital bidding and catchment area issues have been resolved. The current Broadstone Middle/Corfe Hills arrangement also certainly appears to have the support of the parents in those catchment areas.

3.9During the consultation we have received representations in respect of the Borough’s three Special Schools (Section 9). We are concerned that the SEN review undertaken in 2002 resulting in the Campus Model is not side-lined, but is part of a planned way forward. The SEN Review predates the review of school organisation, and funding should be available in a timescale which reflects this in order for SEN schools to proceed with the campus model of provision. We have been impressed by the hard work and commitment of the staff in those schools to make progress over the past three years and would not wish to see their efforts go unacknowledged.

3.10Section 8 of our report focuses on capital funding arrangements. It is clear that the timing and co-ordination of funding streams to enable any proposals for re-organisation to proceed will be paramount. The timing requirements of the current Targeted Capital Bid have already had an impact on the Borough’s consultation arrangements. It is essential that a transparent business plan is put in place encompassing all our schools.

3.11As part of Every Child Matters we are aware of the Council’s and Government’s desire to provide ‘extended’ services at schools or between a number of schools. The provision of these services is integral to schools being at the heart of their communities and this needs to be considered in any school re-organisation proposals.

3.12Finally, the Council needs to be mindful of the Poole/Bournemouth/ Dorset border catchment issues. On the evidence we have received, close collaboration with our neighbouring Authorities will be essential to ensure a smooth transition to any new arrangement of schools in the Borough and on our borders.

4.BACKGROUND

4.1Since the Council became a Unitary Authority in 1997 and therefore took over responsibility for education in the Borough, it was clear that it had inherited a complex school organisation structure.

4.2A working group on school organisation was established in 1998 which reported in 2000. Although it considered the issues in some depth there was not the level of consultation that has taken place since January 2004. The working group agreed that disruption to the current system so soon after becoming a Local Education Authority was not desirable, and it was also mindful of the large capital costs that would be involved. Instead it felt that the focus at that time should be on improving standards. The Education Committee in 2000 endorsed that view.

4.3However, the Audit Commission in successive annual Management Letters criticised the Council for not addressing the issue, and in January 2002, Ofsted in its inspection of the LEA cited as a Key Issue – School Organisation, in particular it said that the LEA should “ analyse the impact of school organisational features and consider ways of rationalising the present complex system”.

5. CONSULTATION

5.1A conference was held in January 2004 at which all mainstream schools were represented and following decisions taken by Council in Spring 2004, the first round of public consultation was undertaken in May-July 2004. The consultation involved the distribution of leaflets and posters to all schools and Early Years providers in the Borough. 5000 questionnaires being sent to parents with children of school age; focus groups and Saturday drop-in sessions.

5.2At the time of consultation the organisation of schools in Poole was as follows:

  • 12 First schools ages 4-8
  • 3 First schools ages 4-9
  • 1 Primary school ages 3-11
  • 5 Combined schools ages 4-12
  • 9 Middle schools ages 8-12
  • 1 Middle school ages 9-13
  • 2 Secondary schools ages 12-16
  • 5 Secondary schools ages 12-18 (including 2 selective schools)
  • 1 Secondary school ages 13-18
  • 3 Special schools varying age range (separate consultation has taken place on special schools)

5.3The challenges facing education in the Borough are:

  • Pupil numbers are falling in some parts of the Borough. This could mean some schools may close, and some communities could be left without a local school
  • The National Curriculum assumes that pupils will transfer to secondary school at age 11
  • Some Poole children living on the borders attend schools in Bournemouth and Dorset. These schools take different age ranges to those in Poole
  • We need to develop more of our schools to play an important part in their local community
  • We must ensure that we make better use of available funding for our pupils
  • We must ensure that our school buildings are appropriate for the needs of pupils in the future

5.4The options for consideration during the 2004 round of consultation were:

Option 1:Move to a two tier system for all schools:

Primary (ages 3/4-11) and

Secondary (ages 11-16/18)

Option 2:Move to a three tier system for all schools:

First (ages 3/4-9)

Middle (ages 9-13) or

Combined (ages 4-13) and

Secondary (ages 13-18)

Option 3Schools bordering Dorset (in the Broadstone/Corfe Hills area) retain their current structure:

First (ages 4-9)

Middle (ages 9-13) and

Secondary (ages 13-18)

The rest of the Borough move to a two tier system:

Primary (ages 4-11) and Secondary (ages 11-16/18)

Option 4Keep the current structure for all schools:

First (ages 4-8 and 4-9)

Middle (ages 8-12 and 9-13)

Combined (ages 4-12)

Primary (ages 4-11)

Secondary (ages 12-16/18 and 13-18)

5.5The outcome of this consultation was that:

  • Parents and carers agreed that the current complicated system of school organisation needs to be changed
  • The overwhelming majority (82%) want a single system of school organisation throughout the Borough
  • 66% were in favour of a two tier system (Primary and Secondary) with pupils transferring at age 11
  • 33% favoured a three tier system (First, Middle or Combined and Secondary) with pupils transferring at age 9 and age 13 (parents/ carers in the Broadstone area particularly favour this system)
  • Parents and carers also wanted a system that works across the Borough’s boundaries with Bournemouth and Dorset

Feedback also showed that:

  • 94% of parents and carers agreed that the organisation of schools should make the best use of resources
  • 93% agreed that schools should be organised to play an important part in their local community
  • 89% agreed that there should be a sufficient number of children in schools to allow them to provide a full range of subjects
  • 84% wanted an appropriate number of schools so that parents/carers could express a preference
  • 82% wanted local schools, so that Primary School aged children could walk to school

5.6In November 2004 leaflets were again circulated widely setting out the above results and advising parents and carers that further consultation would be undertaken on the two options – a two tier (Primary/ Secondary) or three tier (First/Middle or Combined/Secondary) model.

Parents were also advised that :

  • the LEA needed to fully cost each option based on projected pupil numbers and other factors on a school by school basis
  • whatever the outcome of the further consultation there will be no change to the overall organisation of schools in the Borough before September 2008
  • any future changes would be based on sound education principles and will have children’s progress and welfare at its heart
  • parents and carers will be kept informed throughout the process
  • we will make every effort to limit the impact of changes on those children in schools at the time of any re-organisation
  • in the meantime, we would be working hard to continue to improve standards of education even further

5.7As a result of these findings, in Spring 2005 the Council agreed to establish a Project Board (Councillors) and a Steering Group (Headteachers and Governors) to oversee the next rounds of public consultation in 2005 and 2006 and authorised detail work to be commissioned on possible models on a school by school basis.

5.8In November 2005, over 20,000 leaflets together with posters were circulated to schools, parents and carers and Early Years providers advising them of the further consultations on the two (Primary/Secondary) and three tier (First/ Middle or Combined/Secondary) models that would be undertaken in December 2005 and in the Spring of 2006. The December 2005 consultation would focus, in particular, on the educational reasons for either the two or three tier model. The outcome of that consultation is covered in the following sections.

  1. PRESENTATIONS AND REPRESENTATIONS ON THE EDUCATIONAL REASONS FOR A TWO TIER (PRIMARY/SECONDARY) MODEL

The following educational reasons were put forward by the Policy Director (Children’s Services), Senior LEA Officers, a Headteacher of a Middle school, two Headteachers of Secondary schools, five Headteachers of First schools and a Headteacher of the Primary school in favour of moving to a two tier model across the Borough.

6.1Children’s Services – Every Child Matters and the Borough’s School Organisation Structure

  • The core of the vision for Children’s Services in Poole is that the child is at the centre of everything the Service does. No child should therefore be disadvantaged by the Borough’s school organisation structure. The structure should enable all children to achieve their potential and provide speedy and effective support for more vulnerable children and those whose life chances are limited by circumstances. The current structure fails those most in need.
  • The analysis of outcomes and needs in Poole shows quite clearly that life chances are directly related to the neighbourhoods where children grow up. Those neighbourhoods are concentrated in four wards and served by the three tier structure with transfer at ages 8 and 12. Within those wards, in the main, there is a range of schools with Combined, as well as First and Middle schools. This structure is complicated and ineffective.
  • For children coming from homes where there is little or no printed material and the skills of literacy are limited, schools must focus on the core skills up to age 11 so that children are then ready for the Secondary curriculum. The Secondary curriculum begins at age 11. This may be an arbitrary age but it is the age chosen and enshrined in statute.
  • Children of Primary age need teachers skilled and trained to teach Primary age children. Although Middle deemed Secondary schools can offer contact with subject specialists this is not helpful if children need contact with another kind of specialist – the skilled Primary practitioner able to teach the skills of literacy and numeracy to children from demanding backgrounds.
  • The system in Poole does very well by middle class children in the more advantaged parts of town. It fails the most vulnerable and those who do not have the opportunity to go onto further education. Our Combined schools are distracted by trying to provide a Secondary experience for a few Year 7s and our Middle (deemed Primary) schools in the poorest areas are distracted by trying to offer both the Primary and Secondary strategy.
  • Exceptional efforts in some schools in the poorest areas produce good results but even these schools are hampered by the structure. The problem is getting worse because these are the areas struck by falling rolls. As numbers drop some Combined schools and some Middle schools will find the Year 7 pupils to be a burden and they will not be able to provide an effective Secondary experience and they will be distracted from their core business.
  • Children’s Services begin at maternity and end at age 19. Early support and intervention are key elements of the strategy to improve the life chances for all of our children. By 2008 we will have six children’s centres offering integrated services for children and families, these include childcare, health care, advice and support for employment and planned development through the foundation curriculum. Each centre will have 0.5 of a teacher and will be linked with a Primary school, which is one of the requirements.
  • The Child Care Bill passing through Parliament requires local authorities to ensure that all parents’ childcare needs can be met. By 2008 half of all schools must be ‘extended’ and provide the ‘core offer’ of childcare for 48 weeks per year, out of hours clubs, and swift referral to specialist services. Parents will expect a seamless progression from birth to school at age four.
  • Schools will need partnerships with private childcare providers, and with ‘locality teams’ for referrals. An education structure based on small Infant schools and small Primary schools linking into, and providing services for children from birth will enable the best possible start in life. Changing the age of transfer will release accommodation where it is needed most, in the Early Years sector.
  • Primary and Infant headteachers will be required to be involved in the management of childcare and child development systems that extend beyond the school. The provision will mix voluntary organisations, health, childcare businesses and education. The current structure mixing Key Stages distracts from this task.
  • Secondary schools will be required to provide out of hours clubs and holiday schemes as part of their core offer. These programmes will clearly be focused more on study support and opportunities to develop learning based on the national Secondary strategy and access to school specialist facilities outside normal school hours. Links to specialist services will include the youth services and youth offending team, teenage pregnancy, and drug support agencies. Interventions from these groups need to be targeted from age eleven onwards. Focus on eight schools rather than the current twenty (Secondary and Middle/Combined) will improve this support.
  • The Children’s Trust (Children’s Services) will commission services from a range of providers but government expects schools to manage the behaviour support system. Secondary schools will be expected to come together to manage the Pupil Referral Centre as a collective. Secondary schools will also be developing new personalised curricula. Students will follow individual courses provided by the school and other partners such as colleges and training centres, including employers.
  • The need for these new approaches is most marked but not restricted to the ‘deprived’ wards of the Borough where young people need a new approach. The partnerships will form with schools in Bournemouth, the Further Education College, and employers across the conurbation. A consistent education structure is vital to ensure that Poole young people get the same opportunities as those in Bournemouth. The current education structure works against their best interests.

6.2Educational issues arising from the current complex arrangements