Agenda item

The Chairman welcomed the witnesses representing Hillingdon schools' executive committees.  It was noted that six executive committees had been invited:

·            Primary Forum Executive

·            Hillingdon Association of Secondary Headteachers Executive

·            Schools Forum

·            Schools Strategic Partnership Board

·            Governor Executive Committee

·            Regional Schools Commissioner

Of these, only the Regional Schools Commissioner had not been able to send a representative.

The terms of reference of the executive committees had been circulated to Members with the agenda.

Witness 1 - Representing Primary Forum Executive: Manjit Bringan (Chair of the PFE) and Veronica Shepherd (Member of PFE)

The following points were made by Manjit Bringan and Veronica Shepherd during their presentation and in response to questions from members of the Committee:

·            The focus of the PFE was to get the best outcomes for all children, regardless of the type of school they attended.  In general, parents did not understand the different school types.

·            Headteachers of maintained schools considering conversion questioned "what's in it for us?" and were looking at whether they needed to formalise partnerships with other schools.

·            Headteachers of academies represented on the PFE felt the relationship with the local authority (LA) was not as positive as it could be and would like the relationship to be closer.  They used most of the services provided by the local authority, and considered Children's Centres, LADO and Safeguarding to be the most useful.  They would like the relationship with the LA to be more than a statutory one.  The greatest challenge they identified going forward was the financial constraints that all public sector organisations would be suffering.

·            PFE members acknowledged that it was difficult for the LA to develop a strategy for supporting conversion when government policy changed and funding arrangements were unclear.

Witness 2 - Representing Hillingdon Association of Secondary Headteachers Executive: Kim Rowe (Chair of HASH)

The following points were made by Kim Rowe during his presentation and in response to questions from members of the Committee:

·            20 of the 22 secondary schools in the Borough were academies.

·            There was a lot of interaction between HASH members and the LA.  HASH described the current relationship between academies and the LA as "positive but arm's length".  It acknowledged that the LA provided both statutory and non-statutory support that was vital to schools.

·            As the LA's role in schools had diminished as a result of the government's academisation agenda, the Borough's secondary schools had become more collaborative. Working jointly, schools and the LA had developed innovation and improvement networks and tended to exchange expertise and experience rather than draw upon the LAs school improvement work.  The level of support and challenge provided by the LA to HASH members was limited, which HASH felt was also due to all the schools being OFSTED good or outstanding.

·            HASH concurred with the PFE's view that any school's primary consideration was the children it taught.

·            Maintained schools needed support from the LA to convert.  Some maintained schools perceived academisation as the school being 'taken over'.

Witness 3 - Representing Schools Forum: Jim Edgecombe (Chair of Schools Forum) and Phil Haigh (Deputy Chair of Schools Forum)

The following points were made by Jim Edgecombe and Phil Haigh during their presentation and in response to questions from members of the Committee:

·            The Schools Forum was a statutory body which was mainly concerned with financial matters.  Its members were from all sectors, with roughly half being from academy schools.  There was no difference in the way different school types were treated.

·            The LA had a duty to look after all children irrespective of their school type. It should be remembered that many of the children taught in Hillingdon's schools were not Hillingdon residents.

·            A proliferation of free schools would have an impact on school place planning.

Witness 4 - Representing Schools Strategic Partnership Board: Andrew Wilcock (Member of the SSPB)

The following points were made by Andrew Wilcock during his presentation and in response to questions from members of the Committee:

·            The SSPB described the relationship between academies and the LA as "a cordial partnership".

·            The SSPB worked closely with the LA's school improvement team to support schools that were at risk and seeking improvement.  No distinction was made between academies and maintained schools.

·            There was significant partnership between the LA and schools which was not always recognised.

·            The main issue facing schools was a lack of secure funding.

·            If a school chose to become a grammar school, it would impact on all other schools.

Witness 5 - Representing Governor Executive Committee:

Jo Palmer (Chair of Governor Executive Committee) and Graham Wells (Member of Governor Executive Committee)

The following points were made by Jo Palmer and Graham Wells during their presentation and in response to questions from members of the Committee:

·            Some academy chains were working well but it was necessary to be clear where responsibility lay for identifying and dealing with failing academies.  Regardless of school type, the LA should be able to step in if concerns were raised about a school.

·            School improvement was very important to ensure best outcomes were achieved for children.

·            Schools converting to academy status should do so for the right reasons, because they want to.  Some schools may choose never to convert.

·            It was essential that governors were trained in their roles, as effective governance was key to a school's success.  Members stated they would be interested to know which school governors attended training sessions to see if there was a correlation between academy, free school and maintained school governors.

The Chairman thanked all the witnesses for their valuable insights and advised that a copy of the final report would be available on the Council's website after the major review had concluded.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the witness sessions be noted and recorded for collating into the Major Review Draft Report;

(2)  the representatives of the Governor Executive Committee be requested to send information on governor training attendance to the Clerk to the Committee;

(3)  it be noted that a questionnaire would be sent to headteachers seeking their views, and a representative cross section of headteachers would be invited to attend the third and final witness session, on 14 February 2017.