Archived decisions

Contact: John Clarke, Assistant County Education Officer, Standards and Improvement Branch, County Office. Tel 01962 846459

1. Summary

1.1 This paper describes the judgements on the current effectiveness of Hampshire schools, based on the categorisation carried out during the late autumn 2001. It analyses the proportion of schools which are judged to be highly effective, effective, requiring some improvement or requiring substantial improvement, by phases and by type. It provides information to Members in relation to the monitoring and support, which is planned during the financial year 2002-2003, the first year of Hampshire's second Education Development Plan (EDP). It also sets out the costs of the programme of monitoring and support that is planned within this part of the EDP.

2. Background

2.1. A report to the last meeting of the Panel explained how the system of categorisation has been changed. A seminar has been arranged for 28 February 2002 to explain the system in more detail and to allow Members to practise on some case study material.

2.2. Schools are divided into four categories, ranging from highly effective to requiring substantial improvement. No direct comparison between a school's previous category and its current category can be made because the criteria against which judgements are made have changed. However, it will be possible to make direct comparisons in future years, using this year's categorisation as a baseline.

2.3. The process of categorisation is very important. The County Council and especially its school improvement service, are called to account by the DfES and Ofsted for the number of weak schools in the county.

2.4. The first step in preventing school failure is to identify the weaker schools correctly. That was done this year during November and December. The next step is to ensure that schools that do need to improve are provided with the right balance of challenge, monitoring and support so that they do so. That was done at a full day meeting of senior managers in the Standards and Improvement Branch on 7 January 2002.

3. The Results of Categorisation 2002

3.1. Most schools in Hampshire are effective. Overall, 18% of schools were judged to be highly effective and 47% effective - 65% in total. Of the remainder 28% were judged to be in need of some improvement and 7% in need of substantial improvement.

Table 1 shows the breakdown by schools of different phases and types

Table 1: Percentage of Schools by Phase and Type in each Category: 2002

4. Monitoring the performance of schools which have been identified as requiring some or substantial improvement

4.1. There are 186 schools that are not yet effective, 146 that require some improvement and 40 that need substantial improvement. It is the County Council's responsibility to make sure that they become effective. The Standards and Improvement Branch will regularly monitor the progress of all these schools. Each will receive at least a visit a term to monitor progress and written reports will be made to the headteacher and chairman of governors. Where the level of concern is greatest, the schools will be monitored each half term. Summaries of progress will be made available to Members of this Panel at each of its meetings from September 2002.

4.2 Where progress is judged to be insufficient through the year, further action, which may involve use of the LEA's formal powers, will need to be taken. The Members of this Panel will be made aware of any case where these powers are used. The powers include the issuing of formal written warnings, the appointment of additional governors and the removal of the school's delegated powers.

5. Supporting schools to become effective

5.1. It is the school's responsibility in all cases, to secure its own improvement. Schools have delegated budgets that are used to raise standards and improve the quality of education. Their budgets have been rising much faster in recent years than those available to the LEA, which have remained static. There is a clear expectation that schools will purchase the support they need to improve and that this support will come either from the county's school improvement service or from other sources. There are two exceptions to this rule.

5.2. There is a range of activities within the rest of the EDP and these are targeted on schools in most need. For example, support for literacy and numeracy which is additional to that offered to all schools, will be offered to many of the primary schools which require improvement, usually in the form of literacy or numeracy consultants, to work alongside teachers. Those secondary schools that require most improvement will receive more support than other schools in terms of that provided to improve standards in Key Stage 3 and that provided to weaker subject departments.

5.3. The second exception is in respect of those schools that lack the capacity to improve by themselves, even with close monitoring, and in addition find themselves in a poor budget position or have particularly difficult issues to resolve. The prime directive is for the quality of education for pupils in the school to improve and if that sometimes means providing additional support from the LEA's central budget rather than the school budget, then that is what is done.

5.4. Even if there was a desire to provide more support to schools for `free', i.e. from the central budget, there are insufficient resources to allow this to happen without skewing all the school improvement work within the EDP. In past years the DfES provided a targeted improvement grant, as part of the Standards Fund. This has been substantial, £820,096 in 2001-2002, and it has allowed the county some flexibility in providing support for weaker schools. For 2002-2003, that grant has reduced dramatically. It is contingent upon the number of schools in special measures or having serious weaknesses. Hampshire's track record in this area has been good and the county has been the victim of its own success. This year the grant is £325,000 and will be passported directly to the schools in special measures or with serious weaknesses.

6. Resources

6.1. The core time to monitor the performance of schools, to agree targets with schools and to undertake the annual categorisation process, is one day per school. This includes the time taken to write the report of visit and to periodically check for any problems. The total cost of this work in effective and highly effective schools is £176,000.

6.2. The periodic check for problems, or `remote monitoring' as it has come to be known, will become easier during 2002-03 because of the institution of an electronic school improvement file within the Education Department, on which will be stored all records of visits in respect of each school.

6.3. All the 146 schools requiring some improvement receive extra monitoring at a cost of £148,500 in total, (£1,017 each on average), as well as their core monitoring time. In addition, a small amount of extra support is provided to some of them at a total cost of £22,500. This does not include the additional support they receive from elsewhere in the EDP.

6.4. All the schools requiring substantial improvement will receive further monitoring visits at a cost of £85,500 (£2,137 each on average), as well as their core time. Some will receive additional support at a cost of £6,500 from the central budget. This does not include the substantial support which these schools receive from other activities within the EDP. Schools requiring some or substantial improvement, where governance is an issue, will receive extra monitoring and support for governing bodies from Governor Services at a total cost of £30,000.

6.5. As well as this work, which is planned with individual schools, the whole process has to be managed and Area School Improvement Managers and their deputies have an important role in pulling all the information together and overseeing school quality throughout the year. This involves setting up and attending meetings, writing reports, visiting schools, talking with headteachers and chairs of governors and monitoring the performance of their teams to ensure consistency of judgement and process within their areas and across the county. The overall cost of all this school improvement work is £510,500.

7 Recommendation

That the Panel is asked to:

1 note the outcomes of categorisation for 2002 and endorse the
approach taken to further monitoring, support and, potentially,
intervention, for schools that need to improve.

Section 100D - Local Government Act 1972 - Background Papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

N.B. The list excludes;

1. Published works

2. Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

None