Hartlepool Education Commission
Report from Meeting held on 17 July 2014
1.
Attendance
Present:
Professor Steve Higgins, Durham University
Gill Alexander, Director, Child & Adult Services
Rachel Smith, Strategy Manager, Child & Adult Services
Dean Jackson, Assistant Director, Child and Adult Services
Denise Ogden, Director, Regeneration & Neighbourhoods
Mark Patton, Senior School Improvement Advisor, Child & Adult Services
Darren Hankey, Principal, Hartlepool College of Further Education
Judy Thompson, Governor, Owton Manor Primary School
Michael Lee, Headteacher, English Martyrs School and Sixth Form College
Anne Malcolm, Headteacher, Manor College of Technology
Julie Thomas, Headteacher, Brougham Primary School
Councillor Chris Simmons, Chair, Children’s Service Committee
Alby Pattison, Governor, Manor College of Technology/High Tunstall of Science
John Hardy, Headteacher, St John Vianney RC Primary School
Pauline Wonders, Director, Tyne Gateway
Sally Booth, Operations Manager, Tyne Gateway
Vanessa Binks, Community Entrepreneur, Tyne Gateway
Joanne Thompson, Community Entrepreneur, Tyne Gateway
Michelle Jones, Family Entrepreneur, Tyne Gateway
Julie Croft, Family Entrepreneur, Tyne Gateway
Brian Cartwright, HMI, Ofsted National Lead for Science
Apologies:
Councillor Marjorie James, representing Children’s Service Committee
Karl Telfer, Headteacher, Springwell School
Sue Hannan, Employment and Skills Manager, Tees Valley Unlimited
Louise Wallace, Director, Public Health
Neil Nottingham, Headteacher, Stranton Academy
1.
Report of Meeting Held on 23 June 2014
The report of the previous meeting was accepted by the Commission.
2.
Presentations
2.1
Brian Cartwright - Maintaining Curiosity
Brian gave an overview of his role as lead for the team of HMIs doing subject specific
inspections. It was highlighted that subject leaders in schools should be taking note
of what Ofsted says is good practice and ensuring this is fed back to departments.
Key issues:
Why Teach Science
 Brian emphasised the need for teachers to maintain ‘curiosity’ mindset which
supports maintaining the interest of young people.
1
Document1
Schools should look for
 Science Leaders know that scientific enquiry is at the heart of science
teaching. This takes time and resources;
 Young people also need to learn content as well as developing the necessary
investigative skills;
 Accurate and timely assessment – teachers should not be asking short,
closed questions but rather open ended questions to explore what students
understand;
 Lessons that recognise and respond to pupils’ prior learning – Ofsted often
review lesson plans, with pupils achieving different levels of learning, with the
following lesson plan not starting where the last lesson ended;
 Activities that challenge students – pupils may get stuck but that’s okay.
Schools should encourage experiments to do not recipes to follow.
Find out
 Heads of Science need to understand the ‘big ideas’ of science
 Schools must do practical work – Triple science should take the time of 3
GCSE slots, if not the practical work will be left out and schools will lose the
interest of students. The best schools give time to enquiry work, which
ensures good results and encourages pupils to take the science subjects at
Post 16;
 Post 16 subject routes not known – schools need to ask questions, why do
only 1 in 20 girls take Physics after A Level compared with 1 in 5 boys? One
of the big issues is that studying medicine doesn’t require Physics.
 Anecdotal careers advice given from everyone, not sure what careers Physics
can lead to;
 There is the notion that Physics is a very difficult subject;
Check that
 Literacy is critical – use to enhance science with interesting and imaginative
science contexts;
 The best schools ensure staff have access to scientific professional
development based on science specific self-evaluation.
Recommendations
 Schools should give sufficient time in the curriculum for the teaching of
science to include laboratory space so that pupils develop good scientific
enquiry skills;
 Schools should provide subject specific CPD. Science Learning Centres are
listed on the STEM website;
 Monitor science progress in primary schools as we do for English and
mathematics.
 In secondary schools, monitor and evaluate progression of different groups of
students and their continuation to science-related pathways in education,
employment or training
 Develop literacy though using science as a motivating context for students.
Following discussions, points highlighted are summarised below;
There is a risk that students picking two sciences may affect future choices.
Hartlepool should consider running a science enquiry competition to push the
practical skills element. It was noted that this isn’t well addressed in the National
Assessment Framework.
2
Document1
It was highlighted that in England the education system educates for choice rather
than for need. Medicine is a popular career choice for girls and Physics isn’t included
in the requirements, which means fewer girls opt to continue with the subject.
It was suggested that encouraging students to study better, fewer, higher courses at
GCSE may improve the situation. Dual science may be a better option than triple
science.
2.2
Pauline Wonders – Tyne Gateway Trust
A whole family approach to child poverty
Pauline and colleagues gave an overview of the work undertaken by Tyne Gateway
Trust and provided real life examples of the impact of its work.
About Tyne Gateway
 Tyne Gateway Trust was established in 2009, a local charity focused on the
reduction of family and child poverty. It was a combined approach with North
Tyneside and South Tyneside Councils, using local people to find local solutions
to local problems.
 In North Tyneside the Trust commissioned lead workers on the Troubled Families
project, bridging the gap with professionals and enabled the Council to claim 45
outcomes on the Troubled Families list.
 Support was also focused on families of children not performing in primary school
as expected, and the work with communities brought in volunteers to service the
gaps in the practical approach.
 Evidence was collated affirming that what the Trust does works.
How the model works ‘Barefoot’
 These are individuals from disadvantaged communities working in their own
communities, people who have experienced issues of poverty, violence etc.
 Staff are nominated by professionals actively involved in the communities. The
individuals use their own experiences to empower families to help themselves.
This involves breaking down barriers and mindsets, providing practical support
and encouraging families to learn new skills. The focus is on the family situation
and the positives.
 It’s the simple things, practical changes that can make a huge difference.
How the model works ‘Barefoot’
 All policies have been approved by North Tyneside and the Trust uses a
buddying system to ensure safety for staff members.
 All staff attend safeguarding courses and development days as part of their
training. Some staff have also attended Sunderland University and completed
Foundation degrees.
 Staff have received welfare reform training, emotional intelligence training and
coaching sessions as part of their professional development.
 Peer supervision is encouraged to support the development of new ideas and
solutions.
 Feedback received from the professionals clearly shows that the staff are seen
as part of the school team.
Case Studies
Three case studies were shared with the Commission about the support provided to
families and the impact that this has had. It is clear that the support provided by
people who speak the same language and who are part of the same community
3
Document1
makes an enormous difference. The team are regularly asked to speak at regional
and national events which highlights that the model is working.
Evaluation and Outcomes
 The Improving Futures project works with primary schools, the criteria for support
is that the eldest child in the family is in primary school.
 The project is evidence based and evaluated at the beginning and end of the
intervention with questions around the families’ ability to cope, health and
wellbeing and aspirations/goals etc.
 There is also a questionnaire for the children to complete.
Improving Futures Project – Outcomes and Indicators
 At the end of year 2, 82% of children and 92% of parents reported positive
improvements in their circumstances.
 At the end of year 2, 84% of all children referred had improved attendance and
attainment and 70% improved achievement.
 At the end of year 2, 43% of children referred who were on the ‘at risk’ register
had been removed from it due to the interventions.
 To date, 217 families identified as not working securely have accepted a bespoke
package of support.
Summary
 The programme is based on a whole family approach to ensure sustainable
change.
 The ‘Barefoot’ professional staff work hand in hand with other professionals but
still retain their independence.
 Internal referrals occur between Community Entrepreneurs and Family
Entrepreneurs.
 It is a transferable model – focus is how to develop a franchise model to stretch
to other locations but not dilute the delivery.
 Ofsted is visiting the team on 26th August to review the evidence with a view to
identifying the work as a best practice model.
Following the presentation it was noted that the Pupil Premium was spent on those
pupils who needed the support. It was highlighted that not all outcomes had
successful endings and that the work with the professionals was crucial.
2.3
Sally Robinson & Danielle Swainston – Child & Adult Services, Hartlepool
Borough Council
Impact of neglect on children in their early years
Brain Development
 It was noted that in the formative years, experiences shape a child’s brain,
stimulation is the foundation for learning and is critical to development. By the
age of 3, a child’s brain has reached almost 90% of its adult size and has
accomplished 80% of its total development.
Experience affects the structure of the brain
 The stimulation of all senses creates neural activity. If synapses don’t get
opportunities to connect they die away and therefore neglect alters the way that
babies and children function. This can lead to dissociative disorders, post
traumatic distress disorders.
4
Document1

The damage in the early years can’t be undone.
Pattern of neglect
 Graphs were discussed highlighting the pattern of neglect with periods of
intervention. Four key elements;
o Rule of optimism – disregard the pattern as the situation will improve,
o Start again syndrome – each time intervention is implemented and then
the case is closed, but no one looks at what went before,
o Cultural relativism – ‘that’s normal for children in that community’,
o Enmeshment – the professional is so involved in working with the family
that they can’t see the wood for the trees – they have lost the professional
boundary.
 It was noted that neglect needs to be considered cumulatively – this is what is
most damaging for children.
Early Intervention
 It was highlighted that there has been lots of research over the last 4 years
around early intervention, with the underpinning theme that prevention is better
than cure.
How has the Council utilised early intervention research in delivering
solutions?
 Universal Plus Pathway – developed in partnership with Health. Identified hot
spots for children 0-2 years. Every pregnant mother in these areas are allocated
a worker to provide support. The worker is allocated to the family for up to 2
years and works alongside the midwife and health visitor. This has been in place
for 6 months and the team is starting to engage with the difficult to reach families.
If significant issues emerge then the family is allocated a Family Support Worker.
Children’s Centre activities are focussed on stimulating child development. The
rate of engagement of families in the ‘hot spots’ is currently around 75%.
 2 year old childcare – 97% of eligible 2 year olds are accessing a place. The
team supports parents in finding places. The majority of settings are good or
outstanding.
 Think Family, Think Communities – This model is proving very effective, with
workers taking on the practicalities for families , similar to the Tyne Gateway
examples. This is fundamental, considering the family as a whole, with support
from other agencies e.g. Housing Worker, Probation officer, Attendance officer
etc. These are families with complex issues. The assigned support works to
assist the family in developing their plan, it is invaluable engagement with
families.
 Effective Interventions – Work is undertaken across departments around the
intervention strategy, with a solution focused approach which is family led. A
Toolkit is being developed to support workers to effectively support families to
make positive change.
The following discussion points were raised;
 Concern was expressed regarding children not being ready to learn at school
age, with target setting for these youngsters being lower than for the rest of
the year group. It is critical that this issue is tackled in the early years, as it
follows the child through education to secondary school performance.
 Have we thought enough about what the interventions are? Are we good
enough at understanding the language developments required for 0-3 year
olds and what are the right developments to support this?
5
Document1








3.
What should workers be doing when working with these families? Previously
generic family support workers were employed, now it has been identified that
we require highly trained early years workers. However, it is difficult to
understand the development journeys and how to track development.
We need a simple mapping tool for children in their early years.
It was noted that the health milestones for young children are well known,
however, we are not familiar enough with the milestones for social and
emotional developments.
An issue was identified regarding the role of schools in the wider world.
It was acknowledged that the 2 year old provision is still in its early stages,
however, there are significantly more children in school settings than private
nursery settings. It was noted that it is the quality of the provision. Challenge
is how to track the work with 2 year olds in schools against other areas in the
sector.
It was highlighted that the 0-7 development phase needs joined up thinking,
and needs to integrate with school provision. How do we know that what is
being developed in schools is comparable?
2 yr old childcare in schools is not tested. If we don’t have a framework the
data is unusable. To progress with this agenda more valuable, reliable data
is needed.
Health visitors are the largest universal workforce reaching families – it is
critical how we work with Health Visitors to address these issues.
What has the Commission learnt so far?
Transitions – this is a common problem and we need to encourage collaboration
and cohesion between providers. It was suggested that Hartlepool is good at
transitioning children but not the learning momentum. The importance of building
learning relationships was identified, and it was agreed that schools are beginning to
make this shift.
The issue of how to maintain the continuity from primary school to secondary school
was discussed, and how could the assessment at the end of Key Stage 2 be carried
forward to Key Stage 3?
Transition of parents was highlighted as a focus area. Primary schools have lots of
contact with parents from nursery through to Year 6. Primary schools hold invaluable
information on parents which isn’t passed on to secondary schools. Parental
engagement with children 0-3 years is essential, and schools need to link in with
community based services. The possibility of some form of accreditation for parents
was discussed, with the suggestion of possibly using Regeneration and
Neighbourhoods resources more effectively to build community capacity.
STEM recruitment of teachers – recruitment of good quality teachers was
discussed. It was acknowledged that a strategy is required to attract the best
teachers to the region and retain them. Suggestions of building stronger links with
university departments were put forward.
It was noted that the Education
Endowment Foundation is keen to look at ways it could work within the Tees Valley
to consider enquiry based learning and develop assessment based learning.
It was agreed that the Commission needs to identify excellent partners to work with
to progress and support this area.
The Commission identified the following key areas;
6
Document1




Co-operation between schools is evident. It was noted that a number of
schools have converted to academy status but schools are still working
together. It was highlighted that Headteachers are community leaders, not
just leaders of schools.
How can the Commission successfully join education, health and social care?
It was noted that the Council is actively supporting education in the town both
morally and financially.
One of the major elements emerging from the feedback from the young
people is the PSHE curriculum.
Steve Higgins reported that a colleague from the Education Endowment Foundation
had raised the question of whether Hartlepool could be the best performing Council
in the North East in relation to education targets. It was noted that this was a
challenging prospect but a realistic target to aim for. It was acknowledged that the
target would need to be wider than performance targets i.e. 5* A-C (inc. English and
maths) at GCSE.
It was agreed that evidence should be presented regarding career pathways.
The meeting closed with the question ‘What would the Hartlepool entitlement
curriculum be?’.
4.
Preparation for the Consultative Conference
Further work is to be undertaken on the schedule for the conference.
5.
Future Meetings
Wednesday 17 September 2014 – 9am – 3pm Education Commission Conference
EDC (Brierton Site)
Thursday 16 October 2014 – 9am – 4pm - Conference Suite, EDC (Brierton Site)
7
Document1