Decision:
RESOLVED
That the report be noted.
Minutes:
Witnesses
Pinaki Ghoshal, Director for
Children and Young People
Ruth Griffiths, Head of Access, Inclusion and Participation
Anthony Doudle, Head of Lewisham Learning
Susan Rowe, Lewisham Education Group and Lewisham Black Parent Forum
Key points from discussion
The Children and Young People Directorate Officers introduced the item. Key points included:
3.1. Lewisham pupils exhibited good behaviours for learning, were receiving a quality, well-taught curriculum, and demonstrated respect for one another and school staff.
3.2. Assessment against the Good Level of Development Framework needed to be more consistent.
3.4. Phonics in Year 1 needed to improve.
3.5. Key Stage 4 outcomes had largely returned to 2019 levels.
3.6. Since the report had been drafted, CTK Acquinas had received an Ofsted grading of Good.
3.7. The proportion of schools rated Good or better given in the report was inaccurate: the actual figure was 97.1 per cent.
3.8. The Council played an important role in careers guidance (the statutory responsibility of schools), particularly in relation to the work experience programme, in which all schools still engaged.
3.9. Lewisham had consistent safeguarding practice, and structures which enabled collaboration.
3.10. An audit of schools’ behaviour policies had been undertaken in connection with the Tackling Race Inequality in Education Programme. Next steps were being considered.
The Committee then put questions to the witnesses. Key points from the discussion included:
3.11. Initial Key Stage 5 results for vocational courses were positive.
3.12. The proportion of Key Stage 1 pupils achieving the expected standard in reading, writing and maths had been revised up to 60 per cent due to continuing validation. Final validated results would be provided to the Committee in March.
3.13. SATs papers had assessed knowledge pupils were expected to acquire in Years 3 and 4, when there were Covid-19 lockdowns. There was an expectation that outcomes would return to pre-2019 levels.
3.14. Phonics had also been impacted by Covid-19 lockdowns, when it had been taught online to Reception pupils. The rate of subsequent improvement was quick and outcomes were approaching the pre-2019 level of 84 per cent. Year on year improvement was expected, Lewisham had well-taught, high quality programmes which began when pupils were in Reception and were underpinned by robust professional development.
3.15. Safeguarding training for Governors was provided throughout the year by the Access, Inclusion and Participation (AIP) Service, but take-up could be better. The Service promoted training opportunities through governor and designated safeguarding lead networks and during visits to schools.
3.16. The audit of behaviour policies was triangulated with AIP’s understanding of their application in schools. In some cases, where policies seemed lacking, good and inclusive practice had been found in reality.
3.17. The process for the planned consultation regarding behaviour policies needed to be developed and discussed with the Tackling Race Inequality in Education Steering Group, which had commissioned the review. The review needed to be conducted in collaboration with schools, parents and pupils. Potential outputs might be a pledge for schools to sign up to or an exemplar policy.
3.18. Behaviour policies were largely legacy documents developed over a number of years, and predated the Education Strategy. As part of the wider Tackling Race Inequality in Education programme, the Council wanted to engage schools in a conversation regarding what it is like to be a child in Lewisham and the system’s collective responsibilities towards children are. The Council could not direct schools but could provide coordination and leadership.
3.19. The Young Advisors reported that behaviour management in schools was inconsistent – both within and between schools; and that teachers sometimes wanted to deter poor behaviour by punitively responding to instances of poor behaviour, which sometimes didn’t take into consideration that pupils were children.
3.20. There was sometimes a disparity between behavioural expectations at school and home.
3.21. Historically, Newly Qualified Teachers had received one year of training after qualifying. Now, Early Career Teachers received two years of post-qualification training, which usually incorporated the impacts of trauma on behaviour. This better prepared new teachers and encouraged more consistent behaviour management. Poor behaviour contributed to by trauma should not be excused and consequences and boundaries remained necessary, but it was important understand what trauma has done to a young person and how that might manifest as poor behaviour.
3.22. The sharing of information about vulnerable pupils at transition from Primary to Secondary Phase was improved. However, some other practices remained inconsistent.
3.23. Nationally, young carers had lower attainment at GCSE, reported high levels of stress and received insufficient support from schools and colleges. Identifying young carers was a challenge. The Head of Lewisham Learning undertook to consider the issue. The new provider of support for young carers had recently met with headteachers.
3.24. A Young Advisor reported that the safeguarding training provided to pupils could be inadequate. The importance of contextual safeguarding was promoted to schools by the Council. There was a self-audit process for schools; and AIP conducted audits which engaged pupils, teachers and governors. The Safeguarding Children Partnership ensured that there was a minimum standard of education provided to all children and young people in Lewisham on safeguarding and keeping themselves safe.
3.25. It was difficult to capture the extracurricular offer in schools and how it impacted pupil experience and attainment. Ofsted comments from full inspections were insightful. It was clear from visits to schools that there was a high-quality music and art offer.
3.26. It was noted that a case study in the report showed a school had visited a church and a synagogue but not a mosque.
3.27. The Chair noted that he and the Vice-Chair would consider site visits and witnesses re holistic school improvement subsequent to the meeting.
ACTION
The Head of Access, Inclusion and Participation to share Key Stage 5 vocational results.
RESOLVED
That the report be noted.
Supporting documents: