Agenda item

To consider a report of the Director of Children’s Services

Mark Bayley attended to provide a report which captured the performance of Cheshire East Schools in relation to Ofsted Inspection judgements/outcomes as well as summarising the interventions which were in place within Cheshire East’s schools.

In opening, it was reported that the service published a spreadsheet which outlined all of the available Ofsted Inspection data on Cheshire East’s schools. It was explained that whilst this was already in the public domain it would be useful if a hard copy could be distributed to Committee Members for information and review. It was also outlined that it was difficult for the service to make accurate comparisons of data from each Ofsted Inspection framework to the next. This was due to the parameters of measurement often changing and Members were asked to bear this mind when reviewing information.

Mark Bayley continued to outline the main headline issues from the report. Attention was drawn to paragraph 1.3 in which it was described how the commissioning of support from external Ofsted Inspectors to work with targeted schools had been introduced this year. It was reported that this had been a very successful initiative and had proved excellent value for money.

Further to this, it was reported that the recent Government White Paper had suggested that the frequency of inspections would be reduced for some schools. As had been previously explained, Cheshire East had been very successful in working alongside schools to improve performance. There were concerns therefore regarding how the Council could maintain the momentum of improvement if the ability to offer a wide range of interventions was reduced due to budgetary pressures. It was suggested that Members could get extra training on the inspection regime and intervention options and form a sub-group to gain a better understanding of the relevant issues in a changing policy landscape. It was noted that this issue would be discussed at the next mid-point meeting.

A breakdown summary of the recent Ofsted Inspections was provided. It was explained why the figure for Primary schools achieving ‘good’ or ‘outstanding’ appeared lower than expected (54%). Principally, this issue related to the fact that Ofsted targeted schools in terms of those where the data or previous inspection suggested ‘lower performance’. Consequently, there had been a reduction in the number of inspections taking place in ‘higher achieving’ schools therefore skewing the results.

Attention was drawn to the fact that Ofsted Inspections were only ever a snapshot of school performance and that they should always be followed up by the Council’s own inspection work.   

As a final point, the issue around diversity of interventions was highlighted. It was explained that with such a wide range of interventions, it can be difficult for a strategic management team to understand all of the work and its subsequent outcomes. As a result, Cheshire East had produced a document (example provided as Appendix B in the report) to bring all of the intervention data together to help schools look strategically at issues and to monitor spending and impact.

A query was highlighted by Councillor Westwood who wanted the apparent discrepancy between the number of schools involved in the ‘Improving Outcomes Programme’, outlined in table two of Appendix A in the report, and the number of schools categorised as ‘Intensive’ in table three explained. It was reported that at the beginning of the academic year, schools were allocated a category and this had close links with subsequent interventions. In between inspections, schools are able to move between targeted and intensive interventions when deemed necessary, without always changing their original label.

Jill Kelly questioned that with the SIP (School Improvement Plan) funding coming to an end in 2011, what would be Cheshire East’s role in supporting struggling schools. It was reported that the SIP had been replaced by a ‘Professional Lead’ initiative which would still be provided by Cheshire East to some schools and a wider SIP style process was currently being costed.

Councillor Simon commented that most of the schools outlined in table two were in the Crewe and Nantwich area. It was queried why this was so and whether any steps had been taken to make improvements in a collective way. It was confirmed that there was recognition that a ‘holistic’ or community approach to educational attainment was desirable. It was suggested that the ‘Crewe Vision’ was something that should be filtered down to schools and that LAPs should have a role in this.

In providing a final comment, Councillor Gaddum suggested that school governors needed to be asking tough questions in struggling schools. The Committee also wished their congratulations to the service be noted for its excellent performance.

RESOLVED:

a)      That the report be noted.

b)      That the spreadsheet outlining all of the available Ofsted Inspection data on Cheshire East’s schools be made available to Members.

c)      That the Crewe LAP works to cascade the ‘Crewe Vision’ to relevant schools and stakeholders.

d)      That the possibility of forming a sub group of Members who would receive extra training to improve understanding of the inspection and intervention options around education support be discussed at the subsequent mid-point meeting.