Public Document Pack
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Public Document Pack Meeting Education Scrutiny Committee Date/Time Wednesday, 20 August 2003 at 2:00 pm Location Guthlaxton Committee Room, County Hall, Glenfield Officer to contact Mr. S. Martin (Tel: 0116 265 6224) E-Mail [email protected] Membership Mrs. V. P. Bill CC (Chairman) Mr. S. J. Galton CC Mr. M. J. Hunt CC Mr. R. Mason CC Dr. M. O'Callaghan CC Mr. P. C. Osborne CC Prof. M. E. Preston CC Mr. M. Prior Mr. J. W. Royce CC Mr. S. Sargent Mrs. M. L. Sherwin CC Mr. C. A. Stanley CC Rev P. D. Taylor Mr. P. G. Winkless CC AGENDA Item Report by Marked 1. Minutes of the meeting of the Education Scrutiny A Committee held on 16 July, 2003. 2. Question Time. 3. Questions asked by members under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5). 4. Any other items which the Chairman has decided to take as urgent elsewhere on this agenda. 5. Declarations of interest in respect of items on this agenda. 6. Declarations of Party Whip in accordance with Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 16. 7. Presentation of Petitions under Standing Order 36. 8. Outturn 2002/03 Directors of B Education and Resources Chief Executive’s Department Leicestershire County Council, County Hall, Glenfield, Leicestershire LE3 8RA Telephone 0116 232 3232 Fax: 0116 265 6260 Minicom: 0116 265 6160 2 9. School Balances 2001/02-2002/03. Director of C Education 10. School Organisation Plan 2003/2008. Director of D Education 11. Date of Next Meeting. The date of the Committee’s next meeting is Monday 15 September 2003 at 3.30 p.m. 12. Any other business the Chairman decides is urgent. Page 1 Agenda Item 1 Minutes of a meeting of the Education Scrutiny Committee held at County Hall, Glenfield on Wednesday, 16 July 2003. PRESENT Mrs. V. P. Bill CC (in the Chair) Mr. D. R. Bown CC Mr. S. J. Galton CC Mr. R. Mason CC Dr. M. O'Callaghan CC Mr. P. C. Osborne CC Prof. M. E. Preston CC Mr. J. W. Royce CC Mrs. M. L. Sherwin CC Mr. C. A. Stanley CC Mr. P. G. Winkless CC In Attendance Mr. I.D. Ould – Cabinet Lead Member for Education. Apologies for Absence. Mr. M. Prior Mr. S. Sargent. 18. Minutes. The minutes of the meeting of the Education Scrutiny Committee held on 11 June 2003, were taken as read, confirmed and signed as a correct record. 19. Questions Time. The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been asked under Standing Order 35. 20. Questions asked by members under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5). The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been asked under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5). 21. Any other items which the Chairman has decided to take as urgent. There were no other items of urgent business. 22. Declarations of interest. All members serving on governing bodies of schools and other institutions declared non-prejudicial personal interests in all matters relating to those institutions. There were no other declarations. Page 2 23. Declarations of Party Whip in accordance with Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 16. There were no declarations made under Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 16. 24. Presentation of Petitions under Standing Order 36. The Chief Executive reported that no petitions had been received under Standing Order 36. 25. Action Plan in response to the Ofsted Inspection of the LEA. Further to Minute 11 of the previous meeting, the Committee considered a report of the Director of Education on the key issues that had to be addressed in the Action Plan following the recent inspection of Leicestershire LEA by Ofsted. A copy of the report, marked ‘B’, is filed with these minutes. The Committee was reminded that the LEA’s overall performance had been rated satisfactory by Ofsted and that the Director of Education had received a letter from David Miliband, Minister of State for School Standards congratulating her on the significant improvements in the LEA’s performance particularly in School Improvement after the first inspection in 1998. Ofsted had, however, identified a number of areas for action and an Action Plan for addressing these had to be prepared. The letter from David Miliband had indicated that the post Inspection Action Plan should be submitted to the Department for Education and Skills by 29 September 2003. In response to questions, the Cabinet Lead Member indicated that the recommendations of the Ofsted Inspection Report had been taken into account in the Council’s updated Medium Term Corporate Strategy. He said that Ofsted’s comments about leadership from the LEA might, in part, be explained by concerns expressed by some Community Vice-Principals who had been unhappy about the outcome of the Best Value Review of Youth and Community Education. During the discussion on the draft Ofsted Action Plan, the following comments were made: General Comments The suggestion put forward by the Education Forum that the draft Action Plan should include a general risk assessment together with specific risk assessments for each individual recommendation was supported. Specific Recommendations Recommendation 1 – In order to improve the effectiveness of provision for Special Educational Needs. Recommendation 2 – To improve the Strategy for Special Educational Needs The Committee indicated that it wished to receive a progress report on these Page 3 actions in 3 month’s time. The suggestion of the Education Forum that the wording of the third bullet point under ‘Expected Outcomes’ on Recommendation 2 should read ‘ A reduction in the need for statements of special educational needs.’ was supported. With regard to the expected outcome of ‘a reduction in numbers of pupils with Emotional and Behavioural and Social Difficulties (EBD) educated out of County (excluding those in schools in neighbouring authorities) to less than 50 by 2005/06.’under Recommendation 1, the Committee noted that although the proposed area special schools were aimed at children with general learning difficulties, there would be provision for children with autism at the new Melton area special school. Discussions were also taking place with stakeholders to identify how the needs of children with EBD and other severe special educational needs could be met within the County. It was recognised that some children would continue to be educated out of County particularly where such out of County schools were closer to their home than the schools in the County. The issue of the role and purpose of area based special schools had been picked up by Ofsted as needing more clarity and this was being discussed with stakeholders. The Committee noted that this issue would be the subject of a further report to its meeting on 29 October. With regard to the comment under Recommendation 1 that ‘Headteachers perceive a lack of willingness on the part of the officers and members to re- open the debate on how best to meet the needs of pupils with behavioural difficulties’, the Cabinet Lead Member was of the view that this comment had arisen because of the decision to re-allocate resources from primary to secondary to enable the Council to provide 25 hours teaching per week for excluded pupils. Discussions were taking place with schools as to the resources required to address primary pupil exclusions. Recommendation 3 – To improve the strategy to promote Social Inclusion The suggestion of the Education Forum that this part of the Action Plan should contain some mention that social inclusion was a key issue taken into consideration in curriculum design and that it should include details of partnerships involved in the Strategy to promote Social Inclusion was supported. It was considered that the first of the expected outcomes should also be amended to read ‘Improved attainment for underachieving minority ethnic groups, travellers and other under achieving groups.’ Recommendation 4 – To enable stakeholders to reach an informed and agreed position on the most appropriate level of delegation and funding for Leicestershire • All items of central expenditure should be subject to consultation to establish their priority and their level of funding Recommendation 5 – To establish a regular and systematic review of all elements of the funding formula for schools to improve clarity and transparency Page 4 The Committee was concerned that there was no mechanism for linking the work of the Schools Forum and the Education Scrutiny Committee in considering and commenting on the Education Budget as the Cabinet had not accepted its recommendation that a member of the Education Scrutiny Committee should be one of the two Elected Member representatives on the Forum. The Committee was of the view that, subject to the advice of the County Solicitor, the Schools Forum should be requested to agree to permit a member of the Committee to attend meetings of the Schools Forum as an observer and/or receive copies of the agendas and minutes of the Forum’s meetings. Recommendation 7 – In order to improve behaviour The Committee was of the view that this issue, particularly the prevention of exclusion and support for schools and for pupils returning to school after exclusion would merit detailed investigation. The Cabinet Lead Member shared this view. Recommendation 13 – In order to improve consistency in the amount and quality of advice and support provided by the Educational Psychology Service It was noted that most of the actions proposed to respond to this recommendation would be condensed into a Recruitment and Retention Strategy for the Education Psychology Service. Acknowledging that there was a national shortage of Educational Psychologists, it was suggested that it might be better in Activity 2 to refer to recruiting a team of psychologists with different specialisms (clinical and behavioural) rather than educational psychologists.