Cabinet Member: Cllr. Gareth Thomas
To receive
a report by GwE in response to specific enquiries by the Scrutiny Committee.
(Copy
enclosed)
Minutes:
A report was submitted by the Senior GwE Challenge and Support Adviser
in response to specific enquiries from members of the Services Scrutiny
Committee.
The Cabinet Member for Education noted that the relationship between GwE
and the authority was very important and he took pride in the work throughout
the County and in the fact that there were no schools in Gwynedd within the
Significant Improvement / Special Measures statutory category. An increase of 5% had been seen in the performance
of pupils within the TL2+ threshold and since 2012 the performance had improved
by 13.5% since the commencement of this Council term. It was explained that GwE had a business
plan across the north Wales region and that the six authorities had their own
specifications. The County Quality Board
had been established where GwE officers and the education authorities discussed
individual schools.
The following points were highlighted by individual Members and they
were responded to as follows:
(a) How many Gwynedd schools staff members were on secondment with GwE at
the moment?
It was noted that
there was one head teacher and one deputy on secondment with GwE and working in
Gwynedd/Anglesey. The Head of Education
explained that advertising jobs at GwE was an open process and due to the
language element and the requirement to be bilingual, the jobs were attractive
to the staff of Gwynedd's schools. It
was not possible to prohibit staff from applying for jobs, however the balance
was currently quite equal. The
education authority was not eager to see head teachers moving to work for GwE
but at the moment it was a way of being able to share expertise and this in
turn could be valuable. The problem
faced by the County was attracting school leaders and it was a must to nurture
leaders and secure strong standards for the future.
Reference was made to a historical example of losing a Head of
Mathematics Department post and that the pupils had suffered because of this,
the Head of Education explained that the lack of teachers in the core subjects
was a concern and following a recent meeting with the Secondary Sector Group it
had been decided:
·
To joint-appoint
teachers centrally above what was needed in order to fill posts in cases of
sickness absence, maternity leave etc.
·
That a Group of
Secondary Head teachers would hold discussions with Bangor University on the
type of programme they wished to see in future.
Through joint discussions and nurturing the expertise of sixth form
pupils it could be possible to respond to the lack of subject teachers in the
long term.
(b) Was there representation of the schools on
the County Quality Board?
The Committee was reminded that the national model was based on regions
and set on a specific framework and governance arrangement. It was explained that six Education Cabinet
Members across the north served on the GwE joint committee and set a strategic
direction for GwE and that the business plan was now fairly well balanced and
this had been reflected in recent results.
It was noted that the County Quality Board convened every fortnight to
discuss and identify the schools that needed support.
In response to claims that GwE's capacity would be reduced, the Head of
Education Department was not aware of this, he was of the opinion that the
staffing was secure. However, it was
noted that grants were being cut constantly by Welsh Government and it was not
clear what the settlement would be in terms of grants.
(c)
The Committee welcomed the fact
that it had been agreed that secondments would not be considered before
discussing first with the authority to ascertain the implications and the
impact of appointments on individual schools.
However, a member felt that this should be already taking place and he
referred in particular to four gifted head teachers who had been lost to GwE
over recent months within his Ward. It
was felt that there was a need to undertake very close scrutiny of GwE's work
and to ask whether or not it offered value for money.
In terms of accountability, the Head of Education Department noted that
GwE was accountable to the Cabinet Member for Education and that it was the
Scrutiny Committee's work to ensure that the children of Gwynedd received the
best service. It had to be borne in mind
that the model was maturing and that it took time to trust any new entity. It was ensured that Gwynedd received value
for money from the service provided by GwE.
It was further suggested by the Head of Education Department that it
would be useful for the Scrutiny Committee if he were to hold a separate
session for members on GwE as an organisation.
(d) How many people worked at GwE?
The Senior GwE Challenge Advisor noted that the core team from the
business plan funded approximately 30 Challenge Advisers across the region who
worked with 465 primary and secondary schools. It was noted that additional
individuals who contributed to aspects of the work were funded by Welsh
Government grants and these were often short term grants which led on specific priorities.
(ch) In response to a question regarding a financial contribution to
GwE, the Senior GwE Challenge Advisor noted that the formula was based on the
IBA i.e. the number of primary, secondary pupils and learners who were entitled
to free school meals and there was a special weighting for the above mentioned
groups in the different ages.
(e) What
was the value of the school to school model?
The Head of Education explained that the above mentioned model was a
national concept for schools to recognise their own strengths.
The Senior GwE Advisor Officer elaborated on the arrangements for the
school to school model noting that the programme was based on three models:
(i)
A Group of Schools in
the amber/red category where the most intensive action was undertaken with a
support scheme for every school with the GwE Senior Advisor at the centre of
the journey of improving school education standards. The model had led to significant
improvements.
(ii)
A Group of Schools in
the yellow category - where schools
continued on the journey of improvement with a focus to develop better
resilience to the quality of the school's leadership. The Challenge Advisor was not as present in
terms of action but up to an additional 10 days of support was provided. In this category schools with common needs
worked together.
(iii)
A Group of Schools in
the Green Category (or strong yellow) - where schools had the freedom and
independence to lead their own agenda.
When the model was established originally the role of head teachers was
defined in the context of the role of the Challenge Advisors and head teachers
were asked to challenge character and take responsibility for the work of
categorising individual schools, a process they would undertake for each other. However, head teachers felt uncomfortable
with the arrangement and following a process of consultation this requirement
was withdrawn, and now the model had the Challenge Advisor at the heart of
it. During the year, it was seen that
the schools had been set in families and a series of activities, training and
joint development sessions had been held within the families which had been
pioneering on many aspects and had created a self-improvement system. A higher level of maturity was seen in
schools and an increase in the number of schools in this tier which was
testament to the mode's effectiveness.
However the model was continually being evolved.
The Senior Advisor extended an invitation to the members of this Scrutiny
Committee to shadow the GwE Challenge Advisors in order for members to deepen
their understanding of their work and procedures.
(f)
In terms of pupils who
did not receive education in school due to a number of reasons such as
emotional difficulties, sickness etc. the Head of Education Department
explained that a specific Board had been set up locally to concentrate on these
children to ensure that they received their right and entitlement to full
education that led to a qualification.
It must be remembered that the safety of children was crucial and the
results would be monitored.
(ff) In terms of one school that had been deemed "Excellent"
following an ESTYN inspection but was within the authority's monitoring
category, it was explained that the school had been set in the lower half due
to ESTYN's inspection procedures and framework regarding pupil attendance, and
this was the reason for the monitoring.
(g) What was the nature and status of the
programme of support that would identify future leaders?
The Senior GwE Challenge Advisor explained that work had begun to
identify current middle tier leaders who had the potential to be effective head
teachers and there was now a full development programme in place and being
implemented. When opportunities arose for those individuals to take on the role
of acting headteacher or head teacher in
charge, it was noted that there was a programme to support them to undertake
the task in the short term and that the programme could be tailored according
to the needs of the individual head teacher.
(h) In response to a question whether or not schools were fully prepared for
inspections, the Head of Education explained that headteachers had attended
training around a year ago and they knew about school development plans,
self-evaluations, pupil tracking and that the GwE Challenge Advisers had
followed them up and seen that this had borne fruit.
The Head of Education Department ensured that he challenged the agenda
regularly and was of the opinion that nearly every school was close to being
ready for inspection.
(e) In response to a question regarding dividing his duties between the
County and GwE, the Head of Education Department told the Committee that his
main duty was to keep an eye on the standard of education in Gwynedd schools
and in terms of the secondment to GwE he had work to do in terms of what was
effective and what needed to change within the region.
Resolved: (a) To accept, note and express gratitude
for the responses to the Committee's questions.
(b) To approve the suggestions
made, namely:
(i) To invite the Head of
Education Department to explain the GwE governance arrangements to the Scrutiny
Committee in a separate session. (ii) That the GwE Senior Challenge Advisor, in
consultation with the Senior Corporate Support Manager, invites members to
shadow the GwE Challenge Advisers in order to broaden their understanding of
GwE's work.
(c) That the Head of Education
Department, following his secondment to GwE, submit an assessment of his
findings on the strengths and weaknesses of GwE's current arrangements to
ensure viable and sustainable arrangements for the future.
Supporting documents: