Agenda item

Laurie Baker – Manager: Education Strategy and Quality, and Dan Kennedy - Deputy Director, Housing, Environment, Education, Health & Wellbeing

Residents Services, introduced a report on Standards and Quality in Education 2017-18.

The key points of the report were summarised, and it was confirmed that overall academic performance within Hillingdon was improving. Attainment within Early Years had risen, alongside improved outcomes at both Key Stages within primary phases. Within the secondary phase, Key Stage 4 outcomes continued to improve and were outperforming national averages.

However, challenges remained. At post-16 level (academic A level), Hillingdon schools continued to underperform, with academic outcomes lower than national averages. Hillingdon was working to address these challenges, and improving outcomes for vulnerable groups remained a priority for 2018/19.

Members asked a number of questions:

While overall improvement was recognised, a report to Cabinet setting out Hillingdon’s performance versus other London boroughs had stated that, for one measure, Hillingdon’s performance was rated as 29^th out of the 33 boroughs. How was Hillingdon addressing this?

Hillingdon had seen marked improvement in overall performance in recent years, and now ranked mid-table against statistical neighbours – the key comparator for Ofsted and DfE comparison -  for most phase-specific key measures. However, it was understood that challenges remained in some areas and regular dialogue with head teachers and other stakeholders responsible for the direct delivery of education was taking place to highlight these challenges and to better determine the reasons for issues with performance, so that they could be addressed. Further information could be provided to the Committee, if Members wished to forward specific questions to the clerk.

Attainment of white/English pupils, at both primary and secondary levels, was a concern. Why was this, and how could it be overcome?

This issue reflected a London-wide and national performance trend that had been evident in Hillingdon for the last three years.  The issue has a high profile at a local level and was being looked into in conjunction with head teachers and schools. Possible reasons included wider community issues for sub-groups within this cohort in Hillingdon and the comparison with high-performing pupils with English as a second language in the borough. In previous years, the school sector has led a cross-phase project to explore this challenge.  In order to accelerate improvement a new project incorporating school improvement resources and wider Council teams was now being commissioned to look at improving literacy and numeracy outcomes for these pupils.

Previous reports issued by the Department of Education and the House of Commons Education Committee had highlighted the performance of white/British pupils as a concern some time ago. Would it be sensible to focus on earlier years, such as Key Stage 1, to address the issues before they become more serious?

Officers agreed that this would be sensible. Key Stage 1 and Early Years cohorts could be focussed on to instil higher aspirations which, it was hoped, would lead to better literacy and numeracy performance over time. It was likely that this would be a focus of the new project previously referred to.

Members suggested that an update report on this topic be considered for inclusion on future work programmes.

It was possible that a new Ofsted report on adult learning would be issued in the coming weeks. Could the Committee be briefed on its findings?

The report could be made available to Committee Members, once available.

What was being done to address children not in education, employment or training (NEET)?

The cohort of NEET children was small, though were challenging to engage with. The Council and its partners needed to find ways to better engage and promote education and vocations to these young people. Moving forward, an area of focus would be a review of the success, or otherwise, of steps being taken to address the needs of NEET children.

Members requested that a report on NEET children be considered for presentation at a future meeting.

The Participation Team offered a service to schools in Hillingdon to provide case-work and advice on matters of school attendance and exclusions. Could officers provide further detail on this service?

Officers could provide details of this service to Members following the meeting. Exclusions were reducing, and reasons for this included an increased focus on working with schools to manage moves, as well as the adoption of other measures, such as split timetables. The nature of the issue and resultant potential risk of an exclusion would dictate what actions could be taken.

What powers did the Council have to monitor the attainment of children being home-schooled?

Council powers to inspect performance of home-schooled children were limited. Information held by the Council on such children included year groups and the reason for the choice to educate at home, but was dependant on parents engaging with the authority.  New Government legislation was awaited, which would require parents to register their home-schooled children with a local authority. Further information could be provided to Members following the meeting.

How could the Council challenge unauthorised absences from schools?

Council powers varied according to the kind of school in question (i.e. academies). Penalty notices were issued for regular unauthorised absences, and while it was felt that these notices acted as a deterrent for parents, it was accepted that the notices were obviously punitive in nature. Often the reason for the absence was complex and included issues with family situations and vulnerable people. Strong casework, in conjunction with regular contact with families and schools, was important to address such issues. The Council was now reviewing its model for how such interventions were carried out.

Had the number of Participation Team officers reduced?

Staffing numbers had remained steady.

Was home schooling subject to Ofsted Inspection?

Home schooling was not subject to Ofsted inspection.

Members thanked officers for the report, and their efforts. Some Members requested that future reports to the Committee focus on Hillingdon’s performance versus neighbouring authorities and other London boroughs.

RESOLVED:

1.    That the report be noted;

2.    That a further information item on the performance of white/British pupils be considered for presentation at a future meeting;

3.    That any future Ofsted report on adult learning be forwarded to Members, once available;

4.    That a report on NEET children be considered for presentation at a future meeting;

5.    That officers provide Members with additional information relating to the Participation Team’s work to address exclusions; and

6.    That officers provide Members with additional information on new Government legislation regarding Council powers to monitor and inspect children receiving home education.