Agenda item

Purpose:

To consider a new strategy that has been developed to improve the educational performance of pupils who are in receipt of free school meals (FSM).

Key Issues:

A presentation was provided by the Education Achievement Service (EAS)

Challenge Adviser (Interim Service Strategic and Policy Lead) and Assistant Director, Professional Learning (Excellence, Equity and Wellbeing).

Data showing the performance of FSM learners compared to non-FSM pupils at each of the phases from Foundation Phase to Key Stage 4, in Monmouthshire compared with all Wales was explained.  Information was also provided about attendance of FSM learners compared to non- FSM. 

EAS is supporting schools to improve and accelerate the performance and attendance of all learners but particularly more vulnerable FSM learners. 

Information was provided on the regional Wellbeing and Equity Strategy which will have specific focus on FSM learners.

Schools and Governing Bodies have been provided with support on how best to write effective Pupil Development bids to benefit FSM and Looked After Children (LAC) learners, and to fit within School Development Plans.

Member Scrutiny:

Following the presentation, Members of the Select Committee were invited to ask questions:

·         A Select Committee Member asked how real the gap is in Monmouthshire in comparison with other authorities questioning if better performing authorities have more vocational courses or a better suited curriculum for FSM pupils, if it was to do with lower grant levels or demographic reasons.  It was responded that the gap over time would be expected to widen from Foundation Phase (FP) to Key Stage 4 but not to the extent seen in Monmouthshire. Similar profile counties have smaller gaps suggesting that some adjustment is required.  Regarding vocational subjects, at the Level 2 threshold (English, Welsh and Mathematics), it is English (particularly the Literacy element) and Maths where there is underperformance and not necessarily connected to vocational subjects.  Earlier on in FP and KS2 those elements are overcome but the improvement is not being sustained into secondary phase.  It is clear that where secondary schools get it right for FSM learners, it is right for all learners not just FSM. 

·         Considering vocational qualifications, it was queried if schools that provide an effective learning package improve Maths and English skills better.  It was responded that there is evidence that learner engagement is an important factor.  Select Committee were advised that there is a move to a broader measure with the use of the Capped 9 points score that will include Literacy, Numeracy, Science and Welsh Baccalaureate.  

·         A Member was disappointed that there was no representative from the Children and Young People Directorate at the meeting as the authority has a statutory duty for standards and works in partnership with schools and the EAS.  The Member also emphasised the need to hold schools to account and expressed disappointment that the majority of reports reviewed by the professional grant panel needed additional work. 

·         Referring to the research of Professor D. Egan, it was queried if teachers’ language used at KS4 is more complex and consequently too much of a challenge for disadvantaged children.  It was suggested there is need for input from EAS on this.  It was responded that there are multiple factors affecting disadvantaged learners.  EAS can provide links to schools that are successful in providing for disadvantaged learners.  It was added that there is a need to provide the scaffolding to enable FSM learners to perform well against their peers e.g. using the PDG to ensure that Y7 children have the equipment to start their secondary school life and provide access to enrichment activities.

·         Referring to distinguishing disadvantaged from low ability learners, a Member suggested that a more positive message could be used to encapsulate the expectation for every child to attain highly.  This point was agreed.

·         It was noted that data on the performance of Faith schools is available.

·         Noting that 60% of the grants are in respect of Key Stage 3, it was queried if there is some discretion to allow schools to allocate funds where needed.  It was confirmed that grants are awarded in accordance with the terms and conditions set by Welsh Government.

·         Regarding areas of double deprivation, it was queried if Welsh Government could be contacted to better support these areas.  It was noted that areas of deprivation are determined by a Welsh Government formula.

·         In response to a question, Members were informed that the EAS is working with schools to provide earlier career advice for learners to provide pathways information.  Secondary schools are also working with cluster primary schools to encourage better parental attendance at school events.

·         A Select Committee Member commented on the very low FSM learner numbers and lower funding.  It was questioned how the EAS is operating differently in areas of higher funding.  It was confirmed that the EAS supports all schools in the same way regardless of FSM numbers.

·         A Member asked about the Wellbeing and Equity programme and asked about the link with improved outcomes.  It was explained that the learning environment is key, that the teaching and learning is accessible and that schools address any barriers to learning.  Further information was provided about Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) and the variety of nurture and wellbeing programmes made available by schools to provide support for vulnerable learners and those in need of emotional support.  The EAS can provide support in finding peer schools to link with.

·         A Member enquired if the LAC cluster grant includes adopted children.  It was confirmed that the grant supports looked after children and known adopted children. 

·         A Member commented that FSM learners are likely to be in mixed ability classes in primary school but may be placed in bottom sets in secondary school disproportionally leading to lower expectations. 

·         It was confirmed that better performing secondary schools work with less well achieving schools and that this is built into the leadership programme.