Agenda and minutes
PDF 106 KBVenue: Town Hall, Moorgate Street, Rotherham.
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Matter Arising Minutes: Weekly Charges at Leisure Facilities
One member expressed disappointment that at the Cabinet Member, Education, Culture and Leisure Services meeting held on 8th February, 2004 the Pricing and Access Issues report had not been referred to this Scrutiny Panel prior to determination despite a request by this Scrutiny Panel to do so (see Minute No. 94 of the Lifelong Learning Opportunities Scrutiny Panel held on 31st January, 2005).
It was felt that this not only undermined the purpose of the scrutiny process but suggested a need for clarification on the role of Scrutiny Panel members.
Resolved:- (1) That the concerns of this Scrutiny Panel regarding the action of the Cabinet Member be noted.
(2) That the Scrutiny Adviser liaise with the Chair of the Performance and Scrutiny Overview Committee (PSOC) and the Head of Scrutiny Services with a view to this matter being discussed at PSOC. |
|
|
Declarations of Interest Minutes: There were no declarations of interest made at the meeting. |
|
|
Questions from members of the public and the press Minutes: There were no questions from members of the public or the press. |
|
|
Welcome and Introductions Minutes: The Chairman welcomed Mr. Lennighan to the meeting. |
|
|
PRESENTATION - Corporate Plan 2005-2010 Minutes: Colin Bulger, Head of Policy and Partnerships and Michael Walker, Performance and Quality Manager presented the first draft (20th January, 2005) of the Corporate Plan 2005/2010. The Corporate Plan sets out what the Council plans to do over the next five years, through to 2010, to achieve its vision and aspirations for Rotherham.
The Plan describes how the council itself will strive for excellence in all the services it provides, as an employer of approximately 15,000 staff across the borough, but also how it plans to work with all its partners to ensure a shared sense of vision and belonging for all communities and residents.
The Community Strategy and Corporate Plan in particular are designed to be coordinated, and so identify the Council’s specific contributions to overall community well-being. The revision of the Corporate Plan will set the training process by which the Community Strategy can be refreshed.
The plan demonstrates how the Council will continue to support:
The vision for the Borough, as agreed with its partners during 2004, is built around the following five priority themes:
- Rotherham Learning - Rotherham Achieving - Rotherham Alive - Rotherham Safe - Rotherham Proud
And the following two cross-cutting themes:
- Sustainable Development - Fairness
Details of the timetable for the consultation process, context and challenges and the current position were given.
The meeting was asked to comment on the objectives of the Corporate Plan in relation to the priority they had been given, whether they were achievable and did they seem appropriate.
Members raised and debated the following issues:-
- Too lengthy - need to summarise content - Whether Policy & Partnerships had sufficient capacity to undertake the public consultation on the Strategy - Current problem in communities of anti-social behaviour and policing thereof - Education – Rotherham cannot be considered in isolation – it must be looked at in the context of the region or sub-region – for example, Rotherham does not have a University but there are ones close by - Sport and leisure – need to travel to Don Valley for top-class sporting facilities - Numerous inspections throughout the Council take up a great deal of staff time; is the Plan to improve services to the people of Rotherham or to gain a good CPA rating? - The need for the views obtained through the consultation to be truly reflected in the final version of the Plan - Need for regular updates on whether aims are being achieved or on target
On the themes of the Corporate Plan, one Member felt the work to improve people’s health should be more ... view the full minutes text for item 106. |
|
|
Scrutiny Review Report: Raising Achievements at Key Stage 3 Additional documents:
Minutes: Consideration was given to the final report of the Scrutiny Review of Raising Achievements at Key Stage 3, undertaken by a review group from the Lifelong Learning Opportunities Scrutiny Panel, chaired by Steve Radford.
The Executive Summary of the report consisted of the following information:-
- Original Concerns – why Members wanted to look at this issue - Terms of Reference - Overview of Policy Framework - Background - Findings - Examples of Good Practice - Recommendations - Thanks - Information Sources/References - Appendices
The overarching recommendation from this review is to continue the focus on improving teaching and learning. In this way, Key Stage 3 will build on the foundations laid in the earlier key stages and prepare pupils for success at Key Stage 4. It is felt to be of importance for education to get back to basics (e.g. through workforce reform), allowing teachers to return to teaching and ensuring that every child with the potential to reach level 5 does so.
This review endorses the KS3 Strategy and the KS3 team as valuable resources that have already done a great deal to raise the achievement of 11-14 year olds in Rotherham and have the potential to continue this improvement.
The Scrutiny Review group had identified the following key areas of impact on teaching and learning:-
· Improvement in lesson structure · Improvement in pace and challenge in lessons · Increase in the variety of teaching strategies used in lessons · Increased focus on the learner · A widening of the debate about teaching and learning in secondary schools
Discussion ensued on the following issues and work of the review:-
- National Key Stage 3 Strategy/Funded through the Standards Fund How this Strategy is rolled out in Rotherham Schools and increases the pressure on teachers
- The National KS3 Strategy has raised the profile of Key Stage 3
- Attitudes of pupils – the view held by some students that qualifications were not necessary in order to gain employment
- Standard Assessment Tests (SATS) – criticism of marking of the English tests in the past
- Data management - Rotherham LEA has purchased Fischer Family Trust data management system
- Focus of teaching and learning is recognised as being at the centre of the curriculum
The Strategic Leader School Improvement welcomed the outcome of the Review and commented on how valuable it had been to Advisers. In terms of the ‘turbulence’ factor, it was felt this should be looked at in terms of how often some children change schools, certainly at the end of Key Stage 1 to 2. This had been a feature in the case of one school striving to meet DfES floor targets at GCSE. On the issue of good leadership and management, this was a strong focus of the work within the Programme Area, and certainly of the School Improvement Service and Schools.
It was clarified that the delivery of the Key Stage 3 Strategy is funded from the Standards Fund.
On the issue of OFSTED training of consultants, ... view the full minutes text for item 107. |
|
|
OFSTED Inspections of Rotherham Schools : Summer and Autumn Terms 2004 Parental summaries of OFSTED reports for:
Greasbrough J&I School 4-6th May 2004 St Bede’s RC Primary 17-19th May 2004 SitwellInfant School 26-28th April 2004 Woodsetts J&I School 14-16th June 2004 Thorpe Hesley Infant School 14-16th June 2004 Hospital Teaching and Home Tuition Service 7-8th July 2004 Brampton Cortonwood Infant School 13-15th September 2004 Newman Special School 13-16th September 2004 Brinsworth Howarth J & I School 27-29th September 2004 BramleySunnyside Infant School 27-29th September 2004 Aston Fence J & I School 4-6th October 2004 AtonComprehensive School 1-5th November 2004 BrinsworthManor Infant School 8-10th November 2004
Minutes: Consideration was given to a report of the Principal School Improvement Adviser, Quality and Performance, on the outcome of the Ofsted inspection of those schools inspected during the Summer and Autumn Terms 2004. The purpose of the report was to highlight effective schools and to inform of any school that was identified as having concerns.
Over the Summer and Autumn Terms 2004 thirteen schools (10%) were inspected by Ofsted. This included five primary schools, five infant schools, one special school, one secondary school and the Hospital Teaching and Home Tuition Service.
The parents’ summaries for each of the following schools are available on the Ofsted website (www.ofsted.gov.uk):-
Greasbrough J&I School 4-6th May 2004 St Bede’s RC Primary 17-19th May 2004 SitwellInfant School 26-28th April 2004 Woodsetts J&I School 14-16th June 2004 Thorpe Hesley Infant School 14-16th June 2004 Hospital Teaching and Home Tuition Service 7-8th July 2004 Brampton Cortonwood Infant School 13-15th September 2004 Newman Special School 13-16th September 2004 Brinsworth Howarth J & I School 27-29th September 2004 BramleySunnyside Infant School 27-29th September 2004 Aston Fence J & I School 4-6th October 2004 Aston Comprehensive School 1-5th November 2004 BrinsworthManor Infant School 8-10th November 2004
Since they were last inspected two of the schools have made very good improvement, four have made good improvement and in the other six improvement was satisfactory. The Hospital and Home Teaching Service had not been inspected before, therefore, no judgement in relation to improvement was made. The overall effectiveness of every school inspected was either satisfactory or better with nine being good overall and one very good.
Standards of pupil achievement and teaching and learning were judged as good in ten schools and satisfactory in three. In eight of the thirteen schools, the very good leadership of the head teacher was cited as a strength of the school. Value for money was good or better in ten schools and satisfactory in the other three. In all but one school, pupils’ attitudes and behaviour were good and in over half of these it was very good.
The report set out the particular strengths in many of the schools inspected, ICT provision, accommodation issues, recurring areas for development and the role and focus of the School Improvement Service.
Overall, the School Improvement Service was pleased with the results and continued to work on areas for improvement in an attempt to gain better results in the future.
It was noted that a separate report on the Hospital and Home Teaching Service would be considered by the Cabinet Member, Education, Culture and Leisure Services.
Resolved:- (1) That the report be received.
(2) That those schools with very good and good provision be congratulated on the outcome of their OFSTED inspection.
(3) That schools with identified weaknesses be encouraged to improve further the quality of their educational provision as rapidly as possible. |
|
|
Summer 2004 Foundation and Key Stage 1 and 2 Assessment Results Minutes: Consideration was given to a report of the Acting Principal School Improvement Adviser which set out attainment in Rotherham primary schools in 2004.
The report set out a 2004 Foundation Stage and Key Stages 1 & 2 Assessment Summary for the following:-
(a) Foundation Stage (b) Key Stage 1 (c) Key Stage 2 (d) 1998-2003 Key Stage 2 Comparisons (e) Floor Targets apply to English, mathematics and science
At the Foundation Stage, assessment outcomes showed the weakest areas of capability are within Communication, Language and Literacy with a particular weakness in writing with an average score of 5.2 compared to the highest level of capability in the mathematics scale of Numbers as Labels and for Counting with an average score of 6.9. The differences in performance between girls and boys are evident at this stage, as reflected in this initial formal assessment. Girls outperform boys in all assessment scales. This is most pronounced in writing and creative development, reporting a gap of 0.8.
At Key Stage 1, in reading and writing the difference in performance between girls and boys remains a significant issue both locally and nationally. At Level 2 or better in reading the difference between girls and boys attaining that level is almost 9% (8% nationally) and in writing 13% (11% nationally). The gap has reduced in reading on 2003 and writing reflects a similar profile. At Level 2B the gap has narrowed slightly in reading, 13% (11% nationally), but writing has widened to 18% (16% nationally). At Level 3, the gap in reading is 10% (9% nationally) and in writing it is 11% (10% nationally). These differences between the boys and girls are not a significant feature of performance in mathematics, though at Level 3 the boys do perform better than the girls.
At Key Stage 2 Level 4+, the results present a very positive profile of improvements for Rotherham compared to those reported nationally. The greatest majority of improvements at this level exceeded those nationally and prompted a letter of congratulations from David Milliband, the then Minister of State for School Standards. He praised the “excellent” Key Stage 2 results in 2004, and stated that children in Rotherham had some of the most improved results in the country for English and maths.
The report showed the improvement in Level 4 results from 1998-2004 and also the number of schools attaining 90% Level 4 or better, and the number of schools attaining below 50% Level 4.
In addition, the report indicates the number of schools with results below the DfES Floor Target of 65% Level 4+ attainment for primary schools. In 2004 the proportion of schools below this critical measure has been reduced from 2003 in English and mathematics. This reduction must continue and forms a specific focus for 2004/05 planned intervention in primary schools.
The meeting discussed the recent dip in Key Stage I results and it was reported that a review focussing on reading was to be ... view the full minutes text for item 109. |
|
|
Additional documents: Minutes: In accordance with Minute No. 89 of a meeting of this Scrutiny Panel held on 20th December, 2004, consideration was given to a report of the Commercial and Promotional Services Manager, Culture, Leisure and Lifelong Learning on the system for applying hire charges for entries for the Horticultural Show held on 11th and 12th September 2004 as part of the Rotherham Show event.
In view of a need to ensure the financial viability of the Horticultural Show, a letter had been sent to Organisations/Societies in December, 2003 pointing out that following a financial audit of this year’s Rotherham Show, it has been highlighted that the income received from entry fees only accounts for 3% of the prize money paid out. Furthermore the entry fee was the same for all classes despite the difference in prize monies.
The change in entry time/fees did result in the horticultural marquees being set up several hours earlier. In addition to this, no overtime costs were incurred for administrative staff who took entry fees, and revised measures had saved £4,634.48 of expenditure on the horticultural show.
The problem regarding double entry fees could have been avoided if Societies had telephoned their entry in prior to Friday, 10th September.
It is proposed that the same arrangements apply for 2005 Rotherham Show. Early meetings are to be arranged with allotment society secretaries and the Horticultural Society to explain why these changes have been made.
The fee increase was still considered to offer value for money and entrants were allowed to telephone late entries up until the Thursday at no extra cost.
The meeting agreed that Rotherham Show was an excellent event which was well attended by people from all over South Yorkshire and beyond.
The meeting discussed the use of CliftonPark for future events and the need for more up to date public conveniences.
The meeting was informed that a report on a proposed Heritage Lottery Bid for Clifton Park improvements was being prepared.
Resolved:- (1) That the report be received and noted.
(2) That a suitable press statement be issued to clarify the implications of changes in the Licensing Act on future Rotherham Shows. The strong feeling of this Scrutiny Panel is that the Show must continue to be resourced by the Council in view of its benefit to Rotherham. |
|
|
Waste Strategy Consultation - Item referred from the Recycling Group held on 4th January, 2005. Minutes: Waste Watch’s Schools Waste Action Clubs (SWAC) are a fully supported waste education package provided free of charge to primary, secondary and special needs schools in a project area. They aim to:-
- increase understanding and awareness of waste issues among school staff and pupils - encourage and support schools to reduce, reuse and recycle waste, leading to a real reduction in the waste produced by actively participating schools
All work is linked to the National Curriculum, as well as to Education for Sustainable Development, Citizenship and Healthy Schools and is delivered and fully supported by dedicated Education Officers who work directly with schools.
The four key partners involved in the project are:
- Waste Watch - RMBC Waste Management - Rotherham LEA - Waste Recycling Environmental Ltd (WREN)
Half of Rotherham schools had expressed an interest in becoming involved in the initiative but due to funding only thirty-eight were able to take part.
Initiatives to reduce waste were put forward in a number of schools, one of the main areas of waste being paper due to schools not being able to install paper cycling facilities. However, some schools have a composting policy which has reduced the waste. Work had also focussed on pupils taking the recycling message into their own homes.
Although the project was initially intended to run for 3 years, changes in eligibility criteria for Landfill Tax Credit Scheme funding meant that the project was only funded for 1½ years. However, this still enabled the project to work with 38 schools, involving approximately 6,800 students and their teachers.
There are, however, plans for future waste education work in Rotherham. A new project ‘Taking Home Action on Waste’ has been devised to work with schools with the aim of increasing the use made of RMBC’s kerbside recycling schemes. Funding applications have been made to the Community Recycling and Economic Development Fund and DEFRA’s Waste Partnership Fund, the results of which are expected in March 2005.
One member praised the initiative and highlighted the importance of pupils’ involvement in recycling.
Resolved:- That the report be received. |
|
|
Minutes of the previous meeting of this Scrutiny Panel held on 31st January, 2005 Minutes: Resolved:- That the minutes of the previous meeting of this Scrutiny Panel held on 31st January, 2005 be received and accepted as a true record. |
|
|
Matter Arising Minutes: Weekly Charges at Leisure Facilities
One member expressed disappointment that at the Cabinet Member, Education, Culture and Leisure Services meeting held on 8th February, 2004 the Pricing and Access Issues report had not been referred to this Scrutiny Panel prior to determination despite a request by this Scrutiny Panel to do so (see Minute No. 94 of the Lifelong Learning Opportunities Scrutiny Panel held on 31st January, 2005).
It is said that this not only undermined the purpose of the scrutiny process but suggested a need for clarification on the role of Scrutiny Panel members.
Resolved:- (1) That the concerns of this Scrutiny Panel regarding the action of the Cabinet Member be noted.
(2) That the Scrutiny Adviser liaise with the Chair of the Performance and Scrutiny Overview Committee (PSOC) and the Head of Scrutiny Services with a view to this matter being discussed at PSOC. |
|
|
Minutes of meetings of the Cabinet Member, Education, Culture and Leisure Services Additional documents:
Minutes: Resolved:- That the decisions made under delegated powers by the Cabinet Member for Education, Culture and Leisure Services held on 11th and 18th January and 1st February, 2005 be noted. |
|
|
Minutes of meetings of the Performance and Scrutiny Overview Committee Additional documents: Minutes: Resolved:- That the minutes of the meetings of the Performance and Scrutiny Overview Committee held on 14th and 28th January, 2005 be received. |
|
|
Children and Young People's Board Additional documents: Minutes: The Panel received the minutes of the meetings of the above Board held on the 2nd December, 2004 and 3rd February, 2005. |