This report provides an overview of the performance of primary and secondary schools in Shropshire in 2014. 

61.1    Members received the report of the Head of Education Improvement and Efficiency which provided an overview of the performance of primary and secondary schools in Shropshire in 2014.

61.2    The Head of Education Improvement and Efficiency reminded Members that outcomes for pupils in Shropshire over time had been above the national average and also in line with, or above, those of the statistical neighbour group, and this pattern had been repeated in 2014. She made the following points:

·         Over the last 3 years there had been an overall improvement in outcomes at Key Stage 1 and that results in reading, writing and mathematics were at Level 3 in 2014 which placed Shropshire first or second in the statistical neighbour group for all the indicators.

·         Shropshire was in the top 3 within the Statistical Neighbour Group for all subjects at Key Stage 2  and that there had been a marked improvement in the Grammar, Punctuation and Spelling assessment with Shropshire moving to 2^nd place in the Statistical Neighbour Group.

·         Levels of progress from Key Stage 1 to Key Stage 2 showed an improvement between 2013 and 2014.

·         Attainment of pupils entitled to free school meals continued to improve and in 2014 was within 1% of the national average and a sharp focus was maintained on “closing the gap” including through the effective use of pupil premium.

61.3    The Head of Education Improvement and Efficiency advised Members that School Improvement Advisers (SIAs) regularly reviewed school performance including an annual risk assessment. She added that a school performance monitoring process was undertaken twice a year which identified the level of support and challenge required and enabled the local authority to take pre-emptive action and target school support accordingly.

61.4    The Head of Education Improvement and Efficiency informed the meeting that good levels of achievement being reached were not reflected in Ofsted judgements. In 2013 these judgements showed a lower than national proportion of schools being judged good or outstanding, and that outcomes had improved significantly since then. In November 2014 one secondary school and three primary schools had been assessed as inadequate and in special measures; it was noted that these schools received a large amount of targeted support from the local authority.

61.5    A Member asked what progress was being made with the schools which were in special measures and how many schools “required improvement”.  The Head of Education Improvement and Efficiency advised that of the 4 schools currently in special measures, 3 would shortly become sponsored academies leaving 1 school in special measures and that, since the report was written, 1 additional school had been placed in special measures.  She informed Members that 3 secondary schools were currently graded as ‘requiring improvement’ and these would shortly be re-inspected and it was hoped that they would move to a ‘good’ rating.

61.6    A Member asked whether the difference in progress at Key Stage 2 and Key Stage 4 was due to problems with transition between primary and secondary school.  The Head of Education Improvement and Efficiency advised that schools tended to “start again” in Year 7 rather than take on board the pupil‘s learning at the end of Key Stage 2; work was currently underway to try to address this issue.

61.7    A Member welcomed the progress being made in “closing the gap” and asked whether sufficient steps were being taken in secondary schools to address the problem.  The Head of Education Improvement and Efficiency commented that there was often a dip in performance in Year 8 and that work was being done to address this whilst looking at the pupil experience “in the round”.

61.8    A Member asked whether there was a common reason why schools were placed in special measures.  The Head of Education Improvement and Efficiency commented that, whilst each case was different, a common theme was a lack of good leadership both from the Head Teacher and the Governors.

61.9    Resolved:

            That Members accept the position as set out in the report.