Agenda item

The Committee considered a National Categorisation Summary Report for Carmarthenshire Schools for the 2016/17 academic year. The information outlined within the report highlighted the current position of the County’s schools as well as areas for improvement. 

The following issues were raised during consideration of the report:

In response to a question as to whether there were enough Challenge Advisors in Carmarthenshire, the Head of School Effectiveness acknowledged that there was a shortage as the core team for Carmarthenshire was only 6 officers at present. However, the shortfall was addressed by commissioning head teachers who acted as additional Challenge Advisors. These individuals all received the same training in order to ensure consistency across the service. The Committee was advised that an additional advisor was joining the Authority after Easter and further recruitment was planned for the summer.

Reference was made to a recent Committee school visit where the head teacher had received visits from three different challenge advisors in one year and each giving different advice. Concern was therefore expressed at the lack of consistency in terms of the advice and challenge given to schools. The Head of School Effectiveness acknowledged that changes of Challenge Advisor have occurred with some schools due to revised Core / Commissioned Team arrangements. He added that officers continue to ensure consistency across their work which is well supported by regular joint-training events. In addition, schools are now working effectively within a ‘self-improving’ environment. For example, numerous ‘Green schools’ provide support for their colleagues as part of the ERW ‘menu of support’ content. He added that unfortunately, due to vacancies in the core team, a reallocation of some Challenge Advisors has had to be implemented in support of our schools. 

Clarification was sought as to how a school’s category was decided and agreed upon. The Head of School Effectiveness reminded the Committee that a school’s category was decided upon following the first Core Visit of the academic year and discussions between the challenge advisor, head teacher, the governing body and the senior management team. Schools were encouraged to suggest which support category they felt was appropriate for their situation and this was discussed and challenged further by Challenge Advisors in consultation with the relevant parties. The final category was agreed by all involved within the process and where there was disagreement, this was recorded officially in a report. He also reminded the Committee that national external factors (e.g. performance of e-FSM learners) could impacted on the final support category in which a school was placed. 

In response to a suggestion that there were in fact two education departments operating within Carmarthenshire, one being the ERW School Improvement Service and the other being the Authority’s Education Department, the Interim Director of Education & Children’s Services stated that the school improvement function was commissioned from ERW and therefore there was no duplication. The Authority did not have separate school improvement officers. He added that the arrangements within ERW allowed for much closer working relationships between officers of both organisations. 

Concern was expressed that the pressure experienced by secondary schools to achieve the higher support categories (heavily linked to examination results), was leading to some schools presenting pupils for GCSE examinations, a year beforehand and that this was placing undue and unfair pressure on pupils. It was suggested that pupils might achieve far better results having studied for two whole years than being forced to study the whole curriculum in one year. The Head of School Effectiveness acknowledged the Committee’s concern and noted that this very issue had been discussed by ERW. He agreed that the process should be about ensuring that pupils were able to do their best and that their achievement was the most important factor and not the school’s category ranking. He stated that effective schools tracked individual pupils’ progress regularly over the two years of the course provision and that early-entry practice should be used as a diagnostic tool in support of learners. He added that the Welsh Government Cabinet Secretary for Education had recently raised concerns about early-entry practice on a national level. The Interim Director of Education & Children’s Services also acknowledged the Committee’s concerns and reassured members that he had been discussing this matter with individual secondary schools in recent months. The Executive Board Member for Education & Children noted that the Welsh Government had previously included numeracy and mathematics within the L2i performance data and this had led to schools feeling pressured into presenting pupils for examinations earlier than normal. This had now been changed to either numeracy or mathematics so the practice was expected to reduce.

It was asked whether the performance of pupils based in special educational needs units was considered when deciding on the support categories of secondary schools. The Head of School Effectiveness confirmed that this was the case within the defining of the national ‘Standards Group’. He also advised the Committee that whilst four of the secondary schools’ categories had been influenced by its Key Stage 4 e-FSM learners’ performance, it was important to remember that the categories were about the support that schools required to achieve better standards.

It was noted that there appeared to be a marked difference between the graphs showing improvements made by primary schools and those in the secondary sector. The Head of School Effectiveness stated that whilst it might appear that way, this was due to comparing 12 secondary schools with over a 100 primary schools. He again reminded the Committee that the important issue was the support that came with the different categories and that locally, schools could move up or down a category dependent on the measures a school might have put in place during the year. Whilst this might not be reflected nationally, on a local level, officers were working closely with schools to support the improvement agenda.

UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED that the report be received.