New Relationship with Schools LGA Presentation Peter Wanless 17 th November 2004

Why? Secondary System improving steadily but not fast enough

Main study aim of 16 year olds by year 11 attainment 2002

Problems to solve – what schools told us Schools confused about multiple priorities and can lack confidence and enterprise Schools resource management and focus on productivity often weak Schools overburdened with guidance and information requirements Inspection every six years with a broad focus – can lack a cutting edge Schools improvement programmes typically individually effective, but is the whole more than the sum of the parts? Host of fragmented external contacts but typically unaligned variable in quality and ignored or “seen off”

Inspection CHALLENGE CHALLENGE SUPPORTSUPPORT TRUST Profile Single Conversation SIP Communication Data Self- evaluation NETWORKING & COLLABORATION

Inspection Trials of short notice, two day inspections are working successfully. Over 80 such completed inspections published. New guidance to inspectors  “start from school’s self evaluation”  “involve the school’s leadership team in the gathering of data, including lesson observation”  “be flexible in light of emerging evidence”  “school’s capacity to improve and central nervous system at heart of inspection”  “make judgements on the 5 outcomes from Every Child Matters” New style of report  “acknowledge how well school knows itself”  “what the school should do to improve further”

Data for School Improvement “exceptions report” to inform SIP and school; uses Fischer Family Trust to identify key variations  These reports outline progress made by different cohorts of children within the school including vulnerable children  Includes headline measures as well as value added measures Decisions shortly on contextualised value added Aim is one set of analysis for use by inspectors and SIPs Integration of PAT and PANDA into single electronic system Some rough edges for trials

Single Conversation Guaranteed 3-year base budgets Budgets aligned to academic year Simplified funding streams Freedom to spend all resources as best meets school’s needs Inputs Outputs School self-evaluation Data National & local priorities Improvement Grant 1. Moderate the school’s self Evaluation 2. Agree priorities for future improvement 3. Agree targets 4. Identify external support needed 5. Advise GB on headteacher’s performance appraisal School’s plan Targets Networks Challenge and Support

School Improvement Partners (Secondary) Trials in 62 secondary schools in 6 LEAs 29 SIPs  14 serving heads in their own or other LEAs  6 former or seconded heads  8 LEA school improvement staff  1 Member of the PMDU team (minimal teaching experience) All high quality people who will make excellent SIPs and will help to shape and develop the policies. Many questions to be resolved during the trials

SIP Accreditation, Training and Development (Secondary) National programme of initial development and assessment delivered by NCSL 47 people have gone through the three day accreditation programme. One in four have not met the standards. Of those who have been successful some have been given “development points”. No SIPs will work in the trials who did not meet the standard. Some excellent heads do not have the skills to be excellent SIPs – required skills different skills from those for headship. Not all heads met the standard. Not all school improvement professionals met the standard. There needs to be a pre-selection and training programme prior to accreditation course. Professional Development, briefing, networking and brokerage all being designed – to use an online community as well as face-to-face development programme. To be linked to monitoring, quality control / assurance.

Appointing Primary SIPs Personal specification for SIPs (headship experience, strong communication skills) LEA selects SIPs from: existing link personnel, Consultant Leaders, serving heads, retired heads Train SIP candidates to meet high standards (data analysis, offering advice) Proposal to accredit through National Standard for School Improvement Professionals

Accountabilities Head teacher → GB→ Public profile ↕ SIP ↕ National Strategy Regional Directors Director of Children’s Services DfES

Evaluation of the Trials Four separate but complementary evaluation tools: Formal external and independent evaluation project undertaken by NFER  “Action Research” type evaluation made by the trial team making judgements in partnership with trial school staff and officers from the trial areas  PMDU “priority review” of the SIP function during the trial year  OPSR evaluation of the role of parents as stakeholders in the NRWS

SIPs in place in 93 Trial Schools 1st tranche of LEAs go-live 2nd tranche of LEAs go live 3rd tranche of LEAs go live “Dedicated Schools Budget” - Live Ofsted - new Inspection Framework Live Inspections commence under new arrangements School Profile live in all schools autumnspringsummerautumnspringsummer TRIALS YEAR (2004/05)ROLLOUT YEAR (2005/06) NEW RELATIONSHIP WITH SCHOOLS – DRAFT TIMETABLE

Early issues Coverage and depth of single conversation Supply of SIPs – ensuring task is a manageable one Costs and benefits of cross-Authority working Powers of the SIP