Archived decisions

HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Decision Report :

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1) Summary of Decision Area:

1.1. `Every Child a Reader' is a government intervention that provides one-to-one tuition for 6 or 7 year olds who are at risk of not achieving the national expectation in reading by the end of Key Stage 1. The project is based on the Reading Recovery programme - and there is a large body of evidence that demonstrates its success - and will support around 600 children per year in Hampshire. There is unlikely to be sufficient funding to implement this programme for as many children as will need it. Some decisions need to be taken, therefore, that will result in reduced capacity to improve schools in other ways.

1.2. Consideration should be given to the implications of funding Every Child a Reader from within existing resources of the primary strategy (Standards Fund 107) and whether an allocation of additional resources should be granted in order to address the resulting shortfall.

2) Issues Covered in Report:

2.1. An explanation of Hampshire's position with regard to the `Every Child a Reader' project and proposals for the way forward.

3) Recommendations:

It is recommended that:

3.1. A post of `Primary English Intervention Consultant' is created from April 2009, for two years in the first instance. The post would involve being the Every Child a Reader Teacher Leader, but would also involve implementing Every Child a Writer and other interventions such as Early Literacy Support and Further Literacy Support

3.2. Every Child a Reader is implemented first in Havant and Gosport.

3.3. A training/pilot school is identified where the work will begin.

3.4. Additional funding is drawn from other school improvement budgets in order to support this work, with the effect of reducing the overall volume of work undertaken to improve leadership, management and teaching in other schools.

MAIN REPORT

1) Contextual Information:

1.1. The purpose of this report is to explain our current position with regard to the `Every Child a Reader' project and to propose a way forward. This is one of a suite of early intervention strategies that are predicated upon one-to-one tuition, which is itself a strategy outlined within the government's Children's Plan Brighter Futures published in December 2007.

1.2. Every Child a Reader provides one-to-one tuition for pupils in Years 1 and/or 2 (6 and 7 year olds) who are at risk of not achieving Level 2 (the national expectation) in reading by the end of Key Stage One. The project is a development of the Reading Recovery programme. Based on historical data from 2004-6, the National Primary Strategy has calculated that Hampshire LA should, ultimately, be aiming to support around 600 children per year with this intervention.

1.3. Hampshire LA has been situated within a consortium called `Hampshire Plus', joining Portsmouth LA, Southampton LA and Isle of Wight LA. The purpose of the consortium is to develop joint-working that achieves an economy of scale with regard to training the two key kinds of roles critical to the implementation of the programme - Teacher Leaders and Reading Recovery teachers.

1.4. During 2009-10 the LA will receive funding from the primary standards fund (grant 107) to partially support the appointment of the Teacher Leader, and the establishment of a Reading Recovery centre (while precise allocations of this funding will be announced in early 2009, we are aware that this will not cover the full costs). In 2010-2011 the funding to support the Teacher Leader will decrease, the support for the centre will disappear, and there will be substantial funding to support the appointment of Reading Recovery teachers in the LA. One other LA in the consortium will also receive this level of funding between 2009-11.

1.5. Teacher Leaders spend one year training and piloting the use of the programme. In year two of implementation, and beyond, they will be responsible for training the Reading Recovery teachers who will deliver the programme in schools. This will involve establishing a Reading Recovery Centre where this training will take place.

1.6. Reading Recovery teachers deliver one-to-one tuition to around 8-12 identified pupils in Years 1 and/or 2 per year to support their development as functional and effective readers. Every LA receives funding to support the recruitment of these posts (£10,000 per teacher) but schools will need to provide part-funding, and will ultimately fully fund them (beyond 2011). This may mean that schools will need to collaborate financially to co-fund these posts - which would clearly be complicated. The number of teachers (and the related funding) has been calculated according to the target number of pupils each LA should be aiming to support - so by 2011 Hampshire LA should have 67 Reading Recovery teachers. Reading Recovery teachers must have qualified teacher status.

1.7. While most of a teacher's time will be spent on one-to-one reading recovery tuition, an element of that person's time will be used in disseminating good practice in the teaching of reading across their respective school/s. This means that the benefit will be greater for those reached through the reading recovery programme.

1.8. Every Child a Reader is one strategy among a group of four. The others are:

· Every Child Counts. This is again an intervention programme for Year 1/2 pupils, this time focusing on mathematics and will operate in a similar way to ECaR. However, at the time of compiling this report the full details have not been received, although Hampshire is expecting to be involved in 2009/10.

· Every Child a Writer. This is an intervention programme to improve children's writing and will focus on Years 3 and 4 (ages 7/8). More details will be available shortly.

· Every Child a Talker. This is for Early Years children and Hampshire is expecting to be involved in 2010/11.

This report, nevertheless, is concentrating solely on Every Child a Reader.

2) Key Issues:

2.1. Initial feedback from research into the effectiveness of the `Every Child a Reader' programme suggests that it is a highly effective intervention for the target group of pupils, and should be something, therefore, that we support fully.

2.2. Ensuring that children are able to read to a functional standard by the age of 7 is a `protective factor' in their future lives. An inability to read by 7 is correlated closely with further educational failure - including eventually becoming NEET - and with a range of other failures in achieving the 5 outcomes of the Children Act 2004. Every Child a Reader is a very important strand in any early intervention strategy.

2.3. There are several challenges, however, that face the LA in aiming to implement the programme.

a) We will need to rationalise how and in what geographical areas pupils will be identified;

b) Owing to the size of Hampshire, we will need to rationalise how we will support schools to recruit and deploy Reading Recovery teachers;

c) We will need to consider how we will work with other LAs in the consortium.

2.4. The most important challenge, however, relates to funding. The establishment of a Reading Recovery Centre will have a cost implication, and around £110 000, additionally, will be needed to complete the funding of the Teacher Leader for two years. The resource can be found from within existing budgets but only at the cost of reduced work elsewhere. It will not be possible to continue the volume of work in improving leadership, teaching and learning in all the schools where there are concerns. The principle of intervening in inverse proportion to success will continue to be applied but those schools that are not performing as well as they could be but are not the worst performing schools will receive less attention from the school improvement team than is the case currently.

3) Proposals

3.1. It is intended to:

a) Create a post of `Primary English Intervention Consultant'. This post would involve being the Every Child a Reader Teacher Leader, but would also involve implementing Every Child a Writer and other wave two interventions such as Early Literacy Support and Further Literacy Support. This would also build on and bring additionality to the intervention work already in place within the team. The post would be offered from April 2009 for two years, in the first instance;

b) This person would work only in Hampshire and for Hampshire schools, unless schools from elsewhere in the consortium wished to purchase services (subject to usual HIAS protocols);

c) Targeted work would happen in two districts within Hampshire - Havant and Gosport. This would mean that LA funding for Reading Recovery teachers would be used in these districts;

d) There would also be a universal offer to train Reading Recovery teachers across the LA - but no funding;

e) For the first term, this person would work in the targeted districts to establish links with communities and schools, and to identify a training/pilot school that will be used during the first year of the post;

f) After the training year, this person will be responsible for implementing Every Child a Reader and Every Child a Writer across the LA;

g) Additional funding may be drawn from the intervention budget in the Standards Fund to support the appointment of the post and the establishment of the Reading Recovery centre.

4) Financial Implications:

4.1 In order to carry out these plans for establishing the post of a Primary English Intervention Consultant (leading the Every Child a Reader programme) the standards fund allocation for Every Child a Reader will have to be supplement from the intervention budget (now called 'support for targeted schools' and aimed at schools below or in danger of falling below their expected levels of attainment). The implications of this proposal are that in funding this programme, the targeted schools will receive less for improving leadership and pedagogy. The intervention budget for 2009/10 is £978 984, and in following this plan, this amount will reduced by an estimated £60 000 - £100 000 for the Every Child a Reader programme. If it is agreed that Every Child a Reader programme is important, elected members may choose allocate funding from another source.

5) Conclusions:

5.1 Effective management is about taking difficult decisions relating to the deployment of scarce resources. While no one would want to see school improvement work relating to institutions to be reduced, on balance, investment in Every Child a Reader is probably a better use of those scarce resources in terms of the impact on educational standards and children's life chances.

6) Recommendations:

Please see Executive Summary for recommendations.

CORPORATE OR LEGAL INFORMATION:

IMPACT ASSESSMENTS:

1. Equalities Impact Assessment:

a) The inability to read effectively by the age of 7 is an inhibiting factor in the development of children's lives. To be unable to read places a child in an under-class. Seeking to reduce the number of children in this under-class lies at the heart of the County Council's Equalities agenda in respect of children and young people. This proposed early intervention will reduce, though not remove completely, the need to intervene later to ensure that this group of children enjoy the same opportunities as everyone else.

2. Impact on Crime and Disorder:

a) There is a close correlation between educational failure and the prison population. Educational failure is closely correlated with early problems in literacy. While it is difficult to see at first sight the relationship between Every Child a Reader and a reduction in crime and disorder, the relationship is there, and important. Better education leads to less crime.

3. Climate Change:

a) How does what is being proposed impact on our carbon footprint / energy consumption?

· No relationship

b) How does what is being proposed consider the need to adapt to climate change, and be resilient to its longer term impacts?

· No relationship