Excellence In Education for Stoke-on-Trent
An educationalists' viewpoint

Stoke-on-Trent Head Teachers' Proposals
supported by
Rob Flello, M.P., Mark Fisher, M.P., Joan Walley, M.P.

CONTENTS
1.    Aims and Principles                                        
2.    Education Issues                             
3.    Families of Schools
4.    A critique of SERCO's proposals
5.    Appendices

Appendix One - Pupil Numbers
Appendix Two - School size proposals
Appendix Three - Deprivation Factors
Appendix Four - Travel to school distances
Appendix Five - Secondary & Special School Reorganisation

1.    Aims and Principles

Stoke-on-Trent has been given the chance to dramatically improve the infrastructure of our schools through the provision of £200 million, under the Building Schools for the Future ("BSF") programme. This money can be used to rebuild and/or refurbish the secondary schools across the city.

This document is fundamentally about the needs of the people of Stoke-on-Trent. It is based on evolutionary learning of what works and what does not in our city. It is about building on successes already achieved. It is about keeping great staff and motivating them to achieve greater success for their pupils. It is about expanding community-based education to give our young people the best possible skills and knowledge for the future.

The question of closure and governance is not a prerequisite of this proposal. Serving the needs of communities is a priority and the document looks at locations for that purpose.

The Head Teachers of Stoke-on-Trent believe that the proposals for the reorganisation of secondary education should be based on a sound educational philosophy and a clear vision for the future.

The underlying principles are:
 Schools should be placed near to the communities they serve both in order to address deprivation and the unique transport needs of Stoke-on-Trent where there is both an absence of wide-spread travelling within the city and indeed a transport infrastructure that serves to hamper cross-city travelling with a non-centric geography. These proposals meet both national and indeed local authority recommendations for pupils travel distances to school, particularly when there are not safe routes to school (Appendix Four). Given concerns about the health of the nation, pupils should be able to walk or cycle easily to school and these proposals address this.

Our view is that schools should be located nearest to local communities showing greatest educational, health, and social deprivation (Appendix Three), or where neighbourhood schools are already well established and meeting local needs. Faith schools should be maintained.

Schools and colleges should operate in clusters, drawing on existing good practice, to provide mutual support and engender best practice. This collegiate working is already bearing fruit across the city with shared teaching and infrastructure as well as leadership practice and experience.

It recognises the need to tackle the issues facing the City from a 3-19 perspective. The cross phase composition of the established Clusters and the involvement of other partners (e.g. Health, Children's Centres, etc.) allows for this focus and address the ECM (Every Child Matters) agenda.

There are many examples of successful collaborative working with local schools and colleges and the two City Learning Centres hosted at Haywood (North) and Longton (South).

Where schools are rebuilt or substantially refurbished, this should be done in a way that ensures as near zero carbon rating with use of sustainable materials and local construction skills. Local apprentices should be at the heart of any building work.

It is vital to ensure that the process by which schools are rebuilt or refurbished is done in a manner which minimises disruption to pupils' education. Otherwise BSF will have a detrimental effect on achievement instead of raising standards, the main aim of the project.

These proposals do not require the closure of all schools. Consequently schools and colleges should be able to retain and recruit staff and will not lose valuable Specialist College status. Where closure is involved posts will be ring-fenced as far as possible and staff will be given certainty about their employment status, allowing current schools to function as at present.

Where schools wish to change their governance arrangements, individual needs for transition can be put in place in line with national practice. Individual schools will decide on their status in consultation with their communities, e.g. Academy or Trust. There is already one Foundation School, a planned Federation, and a planned Academy in Fenton.


2.    Education Issues

Our proposals are based on the needs of existing and future pupils. In line with the expectation that future employment opportunities will require increasingly complex skills, these proposals recognise that education must be based on 3-19 years provision with a clear pathway from SureStart to a place at a Sixth Form College or School. The education system must be flexible enough to meet the changing needs of education into the next hundred years but also supportive of young people from the most deprived communities in the UK.

These proposals match feeder primary schools to clusters of schools strengthening the links between communities and the clusters of schools that they are already a part of. At the same time, the specialist nature of some of the schools lends itself to enabling pupils to take advantage of other schools where appropriate but also enabling teachers of specialist subjects to work within school clusters, and indeed across the city in order to deliver specialist curriculum subjects into the diverse range of communities in the city.

The proposals build on good practice that has already developed and the far reaching achievements examples of which are as follows: -
•    Business Enterprise
•    Arts (Creativity is a Government priority);
•    Sports;
•    Extended Adult Learning & Family Learning;
•    Engineering (a Government priority);
•    Maths and Computing; and
•    Science.

The City's Special Schools provide for pupils ranging from moderate to extreme learning difficulties are recognised by OfSTED as being "Outstanding" and "Excellent". These proposals recognise the contribution these schools make. They envisage those Special Schools strengthening their already good working relationships with their cluster schools to provide opportunities to educate mainstream pupils  inclusively in a way that does not have the potential to harm vulnerable young people with disabilities or their families.

In terms of academic improvement, only 27% of pupils attained 5 A - C grades in their GCSEs in 1997. That number has dramatically improved and is now over 50% and rising. The Annual Performance Assessment for 2007 identifies that results at KS3 have improved overall as have GCSE results at KS4. The proportion of students achieving 5 A* - C grades including English and Mathematics is now in line with similar authorities, as are results at KS3. The number of looked after children leaving school with 5 GCSEs at A* - C grades has increased and is well above the national average.

3.    Families of Schools

These proposals envisage schools and colleges working together coilaboratively to build on the clusters that have become embedded over the last two years and will lead to a marked improvement in educational standards in the future.

Cluster 1
James Brindley High School and Science College is an 11-16 science college catering for the full range of students. A brand new college will be built on the site and adjacent land. It is proposed that there will be 900 places at the new college.

Haywood Engineering College is a Foundation School - it strives to create a secure and motivating environment in order to encourage positive and creative relationships between staff, students, parents and the wider community, and to stimulate the highest possible standards of academic and personal achievement. This popular school would be refurbished and remain the same size as currently, offering 900 to1,000 places. A joint sports village strategy encompassing Dimensions and land at the rear of Port Vale F.C. would be developed in parallel with the refurbishment.

Brownhills High Maths and Computing College has achieved above average key stage 2-4 CVA in 2007. This school would be refurbished. Talks will be arranged with Sport England to identify a sports strategy, and with the Football Foundation regarding development of separate football pitches at Trubshaw Cross for continued community use by Lads And Dads. The college would have 900 pupils on its roll.

St Margaret Ward Performing Arts College is an 11-18 Catholic School that draws from a wide catchment area. As an inclusive school, it caters for the full ability range and takes a holistic view of the child. The school is committed to serving those in need and striving to fulfil each person's potential. As an arts college it is actively involved in the communit; it serves and inspires its students through innovative approaches to teaching and learning. Exciting post-16 collaboration with the colleges ensure a broad sixth form curriculum. It is proposed to develop and refurbish this school to provide for approximately 900 pupils 11-16 and 180 in the sixth form.

The four schools already work well in collaboration and are seeking to formalise their partnership. There is already a Foundation school in the Cluster. They have radical plans for the development of 14-19 involving the local colleges.

Middlehurst Special School was rated by Ofsted as "Good" in 2006. The Special School accepts all pupils, regardless of their special educational needs providing primary SEBD. Ofsted say "...the school goes out of its way to support parents and carers and develop their confidence through courses...which ensures they are better able to support their children's learning." The Special School alternative proposals are set out here.

Heathfield Special School demonstrates good outreach work which is typical of the high quality, collaborative partnerships that the school has developed. It enables pupils to have good opportunities to work and play alongside their more able mainstream peers. The development of pupils' communication skills is an important element in the Schools' overall success and the development of the Personalised Learning Base provides effective additional support for pupils with ASD and Challenging Behaviour. The School has had great success in re-integrating pupils back into mainstream schools. The School has achieved Investors in People, Arts Mark Gold and Sports Mark. The Special School alternative proposals are set out here.

Cluster 2
New School Two - "ABC" (Bentilee/Eaton Park) this will involve the opening up of a new school on a new site to be identified close to the communities it serves. It is anticipated that there will be between 1,000 and 1,200 pupils on roll at the new school. This will mean a double closure of Mitchell High School and Berryhill High School. Both have improved over the last years and have a long history of collaboration and are centres for BTEC qualifications. They have both embraced the extended schools programme and are committed to inclusion. The governors of both schools support this plan.

Holden Lane Specialist Sports College would continue to provide improving education standards at its existing site. The college would provide places for between 1,000 and 1,100 pupils.

Birches Head High School has already been rebuilt and this exciting new school would continue to provide improving education at its new site for approximately 750 pupils.

Abbey Hill Special School is a 3-19 School for pupils with moderate learning difficulties, social and communication difficulties, and ASD. It has a record of being a high performing school, achieved in part by having a very stable senior leadership team. In 2000 it was awarded Beacon School status and was rated as "Excellent" by Ofsted 2002 and "Outstanding". The School was awarded Specialist status in Performing Arts 2003 and 2007. The School has a 40 place Special Unit for pupils with Autism. The Unit is specialist provision for the City and North Staffordshire (38% of the pupils are from outside the Local Authority area. The Special School alternative proposals are set out here.

Cluster 3
New School One - "Weston High" (Longton High & Edensor High). This will involve the opening up of a new school on a new site at the far-end of Longton's playing fields with new accesses being opened up to the site. It is anticipated that there will be between 1,100 and 1,200 pupils on roll at the new school. It will serve the communities of Meir, Park Hall, Weston Coyney, Normacot, and Longton. Governors of both schools support this plan. It would seek to retain the current specialisms of the two schools forming it. This will mean a double closure of two schools:
 Aynsley Special School and Centre is for pupils with moderate learning difficulties, with an additional 20-place specialist provision for pupils with learning difficulties and social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. The school has had many difficulties in the past but is now constantly and consistently improving, and provides a good education for its pupils. Aynsley School has established strong links with secondary and primary mainstream schools. In addition to its generic outreach role, the school has developed a specialist role in terms of providing advice on good working practice for SEN and inclusion in mainstream high schools, and advice and training for staff with challenging behaviours. Over £1 million has already been spent on refurbishing and adding to the buildings of Aynsley in the last 4 years.

This school would be retained on its current site in view of the refurbishments over the last four years amounting to around £1 million. The Special School alternative proposals are set out here.

Sandon Business & Enterprise College is an 11-16 co-educational school situated on the South Eastern outskirts of the City of Stoke-on-Trent. It serves the communities of part of Meir, Meir Park, Rough Close and Lightwood. Its primary aim is the maintenance of excellence through high academic standards and enriched opportunities for all youngsters, a fact recognised by OfSTED who described the college as "...thriving and vibrant...with many exciting and innovative curriculum initiatives".

This school will move to its brand new purpose-build enterprise college building later this year and is expected to provide around 900 places for pupils.

St Thomas More Catholic College is a popular, oversubscribed 11-18 mixed Catholic school serving mainly the south of the City of Stoke-on-Trent (one of only three such providers of Sixth Form education in the City). St Thomas More is a Catholic, Christian Community with a mission to promote the truths and moral values taught by the Roman Catholic Church. The school would only take pupils who wished to sign up to the Catholic Ethos of the school. This school will be allowed to grow organically in future in line with Government policies. Projected pupil numbers for the college are around 1,000.

Cluster 4
Blurton High School is an 11 -16 school on the edge of the City of Stoke-on-Trent serving a catchment area which is predominantly public built, post-war housing.

A brand new purpose-built business and enterprise college will be built adjacent to the existing school to provide first-class facilities for the local community. Projected pupil numbers are estimated at between 1,000 and 1,200.

Kemball Special School was rated as "Outstanding" by Ofsted in 2006. As well as providing education and specialist care for its pupils on site, the Special School provides outreach work to support individual pupils and families with very specific issues usually PMLD and, more recently, challenging behaviour.

Kemball Special School would be refurbished to a high standard and maintain its excellent links in the community. The Special School alternative proposals are set out here.

Thistley Hough High School will remain as an inclusive school in Penkhull. A brand new building will be constructed on the present site to provide places for approximately 1,000 pupils in the new building.

St Peter's High CE(A) High School and International Language College should reopen as an academy in new buildings on the Sixth Form College site in Fenton providing places for approx 1,200 pupils.

St. Joseph's College will continue on its existing site. This school will work collaboratively with Trentham High to share teaching and sports facilities. There are expected to be approximately 900 pupils places at the college which will remain a selective school.

Trentham High School will continue, undergo refurbishment and federate with St Joseph's College. This federation will enable pupils from Trentham and Hanford to attend a school well within walking distance which complies with the City's own Travel Plan and also the Government's National Framework for Sustainable Schools (Travel and Traffic). The school would have places for 750 pupils.

Alternative proposal for the Special Schools
The Special School Heads recognise the need for change in Stoke-on-Trent, and wish to support a quality education service that meets the needs of all pupils.

Special schools are not underperforming or underachieving. In fact, they have excellent examples of SEN provision as proved by Ofsted reports. Please see the schools below, each with a very brief description of some the many characteristics that make them the excellent provision they are.
  1. Secondary schools need to be smaller not bigger to give more parental choice and to provide a more appropriate environment for young people with SEN. Smaller Secondary Schools will be more "SEN friendly" The proposed very large high schools will need to be designed so that there are small operational units that have a high degree of autonomy. Research suggests that this is more "pupil friendly", not just "SEN friendly".
  2. Once Secondary Schools have established themselves and are able to integrate special school pupils then it will be more effective to establish enhanced provision. Special school outreach role will help to ensure this.
  3. Special schools to continue to work with secondary & primary schools to provide support in inclusive practice. Special schools to play a major role in the leadership and management of SEN resourced provision in both primary and secondary mainstream schools across the city.
  4. Special Schools will have an enhanced relationship with Secondary, Primary & Pre School provision. This could be financed from the Special School sites vacated in the co-location process.
  5. Under primary BSF build co-located provision for existing special schools because primaries have a proven, better culture of inclusion. Ensure that primaries with co-located special schools are at least within easy walking distance of secondary schools and Children's Centres and are federated. This may mean the co-located Special School(s) being single phase
  6. A BESD School will be established.
These proposals would result in the excellent values and ethos prevalent in special schools contributing to raising standards.

4.    Rebuttal of SERCO's proposals

We believe that SERCO's proposals are fundamentally flawed. This is because there was a failure to make use of the informal discussion and information-gathering period during the summer and early autumn months of 2007. The event on 12 October 2007 did not include a wide-range of stakeholders with an interest in education-related issues and no real opportunity was provided to canvass the ideas and knowledge from those who did attend.

SERCO's document suggests that the proposals are to place schools at the heart of communities but this is not the case with schools being actively removed from communities. Moreover, the five principles of Every Child Matters are not adhered to with pupils being required to travel either along unsafe routes to schools or being required to be transported to schools.

The proposals also suggest the promotion of Specialist School status and yet SERCO's objective of closing all schools will lead to a loss of Specialist School Status with a corresponding loss of special funding. As well as costing schools money, loss of specialist status would also see a loss of the specialist staff who deliver that part of the curriculum. It would also jeopardise many aspects of community working delivered as part of the Specialist Schools Community Plans and those of extended schools.

The SERCO proposals talk of building on good practice and schools working together collegiately. However, closure of all schools would see governing bodies disbanded leading to a loss of dedicated governors who give up their time voluntarily for the good of their local schools and the communities they serve. A loss of staff has already started, with a number of teachers advising Heads that they are seeking employment elsewhere. With schools being in competition for pupils, it is hard to see how a Local Authority without any direct control over the Trust Schools and Academies in its area could enforce any collegiate working. The good collaborative working promoted by Clusters, including the sharing of good practice, will be lost.

Co-locating Special Schools may sound like a good idea but again SERCO's lack of understanding of Stoke-on-Trent's Special Schools and the absence of meaningful discussions shows in their proposals. Special School provision is already rated as "outstanding" by OfSTED and bringing pupils with severe physical disabilities and severe learning disabilities onto a site shared by perhaps 1,200 other pupils shows a total disregard for the needs of some of the most vulnerable members of our communities. Perhaps this arrogant disregard is best illustrated by the "stock" pictures on Page 5 of SERCO's booklet.

SERCO has made much about the Local Authority's position as third bottom LA, but doesn't explain why. The recent APA describes improving KS3 & KS4 results and identifies that results for 5 A* - C grades including English and Maths, are now in line with similar authorities, as are KS3 results.

All Head Teachers recognise the need to raise attainment but that also requires tackling the underlining causes of underachievement - i.e. literacy and numeracy and from 3-19 not just at secondary level. This is incorporated into the priorities of at least two of the Clusters.

The figures used by SERCO in their proposals do not reflect Office of National Statistics ("ONS") projections of pupil numbers based on above-average birth rates in the city (see Appendix One). Consequently instead of the number of pupils going into secondary education according to SERCO being 12,000, ONS estimate that there will be around 13,000 pupils in 2015. As this is an estimate, it would be prudent to assume a 10% margin of error and therefore the schools should look to accommodate 14,300 pupils.

SERCO has formulated its proposals based on an overall number of places for the entire city. The proposals do not reflect the geographical reality of a linear City; the assumption that extra school places within Stoke-on-Trent will be filled by pupils on a City wide basis is flawed. For example in the North constituency, live births over a 5 year period on a ward basis, of aged 0-4, total 4408. Given that 25% of St Margaret Ward School places come from postcodes outside the City, the figure rises to 4608. Clearly other pressures of movement will influence this figure, but in any case there is no evidence to support a cut in current secondary school places

SERCO has then assumed that a school should take around 1,000 pupils as being at the lower end of the optimum scale for school size. Again this is disputed based on evidence (see Appendix Two) that shows there is no "one-size-fits-all" optimum size.

SERCO have said that more new schools may need to be built in a few years to accommodate increased pupil numbers. This underlines office of National Statistics figures upon which our assumptions are based and serves to reinforce our conclusions.

These proposals, unlike SERCO's, do not require predetermined numbers of Academies or Trust schools. We believe it is up to individual schools in consultation with their communities to decide on their status, not based on a top-down directive.
Appendix One - Pupil Numbers
The number of live births recorded to women resident in Stoke-on-Trent increased from a relatively stable 2,900 births per year between 1998 and 2002, to 3,300 in 2005. This increase has mirrored rises experienced both regionally and nationally over the 2002 to 2005 period.

The following section demonstrates how, on all measures of births and fertility, Stoke-on-Trent has significantly higher rates than both regional and national averages.

Crude Birth rates
Crude Fertility Rate 1982-2005
Crude Fertility Rate 1982-2005
Definition - The Crude Fertility Rate is expressed as the number of live births per 1,000 resident population.
Source: Office for National Statistics

The table below shows the number of live births in Stoke-on-Trent Unitary Authority from 1998 to 2005. The number of births in the area were on the decrease in the late 1990s but picked up from 2002, as reflected in the total fertility rate (average number of children per woman).
Live births (numbers/rates) in Stoke-on-Trent Unitary Authority 1998-2005


Live births
 TFR



1998 2,894 1.61
1999 2,883 1.66
2000 2,810 1.65
2001 2,741 1.63
2002 2,873 1.75
2003 2,963 1.83
2004 3,244 2.02
2005 3,312 2.05



Source: ONS, Key population and vital statistics 2005, VS32 PP1 28
Note: Average number of children per woman if current age-specific fertility rates persist throughout her childbearing life

Subnational population projections provide future estimates of the population aged 0-4 and 5-9 for Stoke-on-Trent UA (see table below). Note the projections are trend-based.

Assumptions for future demographic behaviour are based on observed levels of births, deaths and migration over the previous five years (2000-2004). They show what the population will be if recent trends continue.

The underlying assumptions therefore do not reflect the impact of future housing and other development policies (such as child care) or of future changes in the components of demographic change at local level.
Projected number of children aged 0-4 and 5-9
Stoke-on-Trent, 2004-2029


0-4
 5-9



2004 13,700 13,800
2005 13,800 13,600
2006 14,000 13,400
2007 14,100 13,000
2008 14,100 12,900
2009 13,800 13,100
2010 13,600 13,200
2011 13,500 13,300
2012
 13,400
 13,500
2013
 13,300
 13,500
2014
 13,200
 13,200
2015
 13,200
 13,000
2016
 13,100
 12,900
2017
 13,100
 12,800
2018
 13,100
 12,800
2019
 13,000
 12,700
2020
 13,000
 12,700
2021
 12,900
 12,700
2022
 12,900
 12,600
2023
 12,800
 12,600
2024
 12,700
 12,600
2025
 12,700
 12,600
2026
 12,600
 12,500
2027
 12,600
 12,500
2028
 12,500
 12,400
2029
 12,400
 12,400



Source: ONS, 2004-based subnational projections


Appendix Two - School size proposals

It is suggested that there will be only around 12,000 pupils in the city's secondary schools by 2010. While these figures are conjecture based on projections of existing primary pupil numbers, for the purposes of this proposal these pupil numbers are, without prejudice, used.

Based on the findings of the Lancaster University Management School systematic review of secondary school size, the following conclusions have been drawn about school size:
  • There is a scarcity of relevant studies looking at the impact of school size on attainment;
  • There is no statistically significant association between school size and achievement;
  • There is a negative association between students' feelings of engagement, connectedness and participation, and increased school size;
  • Teachers in smaller schools tend to have more positive perceptions of their abilities to control their classrooms; and
  • Overall the relationships in determining positive attainment are far more complex than simply school size.
SERCO proposals suggest schools around 1,000 pupils based on maximising the ratio between cost and benefit, but the alternative view put forward in this document builds on existing good practice around cooperative working.

Evidence taken from Head Teachers indicates that SERCO has not properly taken into account existing pupil numbers. Also, its assumptions around optimum school size are contested.

Attached is a table that shows the headline 5+ grades A*-C measure for GCSE performance. The final two tables give the top and bottom 50 secondary schools for CVA scores.

The results are given as a central score alongside a confidence interval. This reflects the uncertainty in estimates that adjust for a wide range of factors. Our statistical literacy guide on confidence intervals and significance gives some guidance on how to interpret these figures:

School size and performance
I have plotted the two indicators used above against the number of pupils on roll for all maintained schools. The visual results are given in the charts below. On their own they are very limited at judging degrees of correlation. Regression statistics tell us much more. The chart on headline performance suggest a general positive relationship (better scores for larger schools) but with a great deal of variation. The regression results confirm this; there is a positive relationship (on average a school with 100 more pupils has a better score by 1.1 percentage points). However, differences in school size explain a very small amount of the variation in GCSE scores (5%). This is illustrated by the wide range of results. School size is thus a very poor predictor of GCSE score. Any relationship between the variables is an association, most likely due to links between school size and other variables, and should not be viewed as causal (either size to score or score to size).

This is supported by the results for CVA score and size. There is no association, positive or negative and school size explains less than 1% of the variation in CVA score. There is no association. The most likely explanation is that any (weak) association between size and headline GSCE results was related to other factors that vary with school size (such as deprivation). As such factors are adjusted for in CVA scores this weak association vanishes. Thus school size is an indicator (a rather poor one) rather than a causal factor in headline GCSE scores and has no connection with pupil progress as measured in CVA.

Scatter graph 1

Scatter graph 2


Maintained schools in England with 100% of Key Stage 4 pupils achieving 5+ GCSEs or equivalent at A*-C 2005/06
School Pupils on roll
Queen Elizabeth's School, Barnet
Bexley Grammar School
Townley Grammar School for Girls
Newstead Wood School for Girls
St Olave's and St Saviour's Grammar School
The Tiffin Girls' School
Tiffin School
Button Grammar School for Boys
Wilson's School 
King Edward VI Camp Hill School for Boys
King Edward VI Camp Hill School for Girls
Sutton Coldfield Grammar School for Girls
Wolverhampton Girls' High School
Altrincham Grammar School for Girls
Loreto Grammar School
Heckmondwike Grammar School
St Thomas More Catholic School
Ermysted's Grammar School  
Skipton Girls' High School 
Aylesbury High School
Beaconsfield High School 
Dr Challoner's High School
Royal Latin School
Wycombe High School
Bournemouth School
Bournemouth School for Girls
South Wilts Grammar School for Girls
Kendrick Girls' Grammar School
Reading School   
Colyton Grammar School
Chelmsford County High School for Girls
Colchester County High School for Girls
Southend High School for Girls
Dartford Grammar School
Highsted Grammar School
The Judd School
Bacup and Rawtenstall Grammar School
Clitheroe Royal Grammar School
Lancaster Girls' Grammar School  
Lancaster Royal Grammar School 
Adams' Grammar School  
Newport Girls' High School
Thomas Telford School
Queen Elizabeth Grammar School
Pate's Grammar School
Ribston Hall High School
Sir Thomas Rich's School  
Stroud High School
Caistor Grammar School
Carre's Grammar School   
Kesteven and Sleaford High School
The Priory LSST
Queen Elizabeth's Grammar School 
Brooke Weston CTC
King Edward VI School
Rugby High School
Stratford-upon-Avon Grammar School for Girls A Specialist Language College
Source: DfES
 1,141
1,484
1,395
971
913
884
1,060
821
967
699
864
1,013
739
1,166
966
1,154
1,466
673
723
1,260
1,068
1,077
1,221
1,391
1,049
1,124
932
690
866
784
862
757
995
1,222
832
917
1,281
1,247
890
784
1,003
323
1,165
803
949
733
828
895
627
735
809
1,654
538
1,155
487
733
574
   

Maintained schools in England with the lowest % of Key Stage 4 pupils achieving 5+ GCSEs or equivalent at A*-C 2005/06
School Score Pupils on roll
Bishops Park College
Oldborough Manor Community School
Oak Farm Community School
City of Leeds School
Kings Grove School
Temple School
Weavers School
Cheltenham Kingsmead
The Mablethorpe Tennyson High School
The Ridings School
Sir Frank Markham Community School
Eastbourne Comprehensive School
Chaucer School
Birkdale High School
Risedale Sports and Community College
The Queen's School
Hadden Park High School
Belle Vue Girls' School
Rising Brook High Specialist Sports College
The Alfred Barrow School
Ehenside Community School
Hinde House 3-16 School
The Norton School
Headlands
St Thomas Aquinas RC High School
Littlemoss High School for Boys
Speedwell Technology College
South Luton High School
Sinfin Community School
Rossmore Community College
The River Leen School
William Sharp School
Jubilee High School
Darlaston Community Science College
Parklands High School
Bradford Cathedral Community College
The Bishop of Winchester Comprehensive School
St James School
King Harold School
St Peters College
New Brompton College
City of Preston High School
Charles Burrell High School
Pensnett School of Technology
Tividale Community Arts College
Buile Hill High School 
Two Trees Sports College
Park Lane High
The Northfields Technology College
Leon School and Sports College 
da Vinci Community College
Carter Community School
Sunnydale Community College for Maths and Computing
Hillcrest School 
St Joseph's Catholic School
Blacon High School, A Specialist Sports College
The Thorpe Bay School 
Minster College 
Skerton Community High School 
Portland School 
Corby Community College 
Peers School
Bishop Wulstan Catholic School
Source: DfES
   0%
  9%
11%
16%
16%
17%
17%
18%
18%
19%
19%
19%
20%
20%
20%
20%
20%
21%
21%
21%
21%
22%
22%
22%
23%
23%
23%
23%
23%
23%
23%
23%
23%
24%
24%
24%
24%
24%
24%
24%
24%
24%
24%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
468
403
358
591
677
625
1,060
475
415
 659
1,435
 743
989
591
550
1,356
855
1,067
509
429
341
1,253
520
828
550
 522
1,010
827
1,046
830
642
674
608
1,118
784
754
586
698
740
698
1,073
459
689
592
1,072
944
 708
413
901
795
532
379
579
900
 343
576
566
1,591
256
1,654
913
975
324

Maintained schools in England scoring the highest KS2-4 CVA scores 2005/06
School Score Lower confidence interval Upper confidence interval Pupils
on roll

The Academy of St Francis of Assisi

1,078.7

1,066.9

1,090.6

567

Phoenix High School

1,077.5

1,064.8

1,090.1

707

Moreton Community School

1,071.1

1,057.8

1,084.4

689
Salisbury High School 1,063.3 1,053.6 1,073.0 880
Bartley Green School A Specialist Technology and Sports College 1,062.9 1,053.0 1,072.8 857
Greenwood Dale School 1,061.1 1,051.9 1,070.3 1,209
Madeley Court School

1,059.6

 1,046.8 1,072.3 624
Newall Green High School 1,058.7 1,049.4 1,068.1 908
Park Community School 1,057.7 1,047.8 1,067.6 860
All Saints Catholic School and Technology College 1,056.9 1,047.3 1,066.5 1,118
The Ockendon School 1,056.1 1,045.2 1,066.9 780
Bishop Challoner Catholic Collegiate Boys School 1,055.8 1,042.2 1,069.5 487
Hillside High School
1,052.9 1,043.2 1,062.7 832
Notre Dame Catholic College 1,052.3 1,043.4 1,061.3 1,045
Castle Community College 1,052.2 1,037.5

1,066.9

 600
BRIT School for Performing Arts and Technology 1,051.2 1,039.7 1,062.7 826
Sir John Cass Foundation and Redcoat Church of England Secondary School 1,051.1 1,040.6 1,061.5 1192

Dyke House Comprehensive School

 1,050.7 1,040.7 1,060.7 994
Heath Park Business & Enterprise College 1,050.3 1,041.3 1,059.3 1,137
Willowgarth High School 1,049.2 1,038.5 1,060.0 815
Loxford School of Science and Technology 1,048.0 1,039.3 1,056.7 1,499
JFS 1,047.3 1,038.6 1,056.0 1,864
Feversham College 1,046.5 1,033.8 1,059.2 570
Wigmore High School 1,046.2 1,034.2 1,058.1 477
George Dixon International School and Sixth Form Centre 1,046.0 1,033.6 1,058.4 1,106
Blakewater College 1,045.8 1,034.1 1,057.5 530
Cheltenham Kingsmead 1,045.2 1,034.2 1,056.2 475
Morpeth School 1,045.2 1,036.7 1,053.6 1,161
Royal Alexandra and Albert School 1,045.2 1,030.8 1,059.6 642
Bishopsgarth School 1,044.5 1,032.9 1,056.1 543

Middleton Technology School

 1,044.2 1,035.5 1,053.0 1053
Greenacre School 1,044.1 1,033.8 1,054.4 910
Frankley Community High School 1,044.1 1,030.4 1,057.9 440
Kenton School 1,043.9 1,036.8 1,050.9 2,010
Fairfield High School 1,043.5 1,034.5 1,052.6 983
Trinity Academy 1,042.9 1,034.4 1,051.4 1,232
Macmillan Academy 1,042.5 1,034.1 1,050.9 1,461
The Ravensbourne School 1,042.3 1,033.6 1,050.9 1,399
Yesodey Hatorah Senior Girls School 1,042.3 1,024.7 1,059.9 231
Wood Green High School College of Sport, Maths and Computing 1,042.0 1,033.8 1,050.1 1,449
Waddesdon Church of England School 1,041.9 1,031.6 1,052.2 964
Hyde Technology School and Hearing Impaired Resource Base 1,041.7 1,032.3 1,051.2 913
Northumberland Park Community School 1,041.5 1,032.0 1,051.0 1,015
St Mary and St Joseph's Catholic School 1,041.3 1,030.7 1,051.8 418
Aston Manor School 1,040.9 1,029.7 1,052.2 738
Dixons City Academy 1,040.9 1,030.9 1,050.9 1,082
Wymondham College 1,040.7 1,029.6 1,051.7 1,026
Ridgeway High School

1,040.5

 1,031.0 1,049.9 824
The Leigh City Technology College 1,040.5 1,032.0 1,048.9 1,366
Beechwood School
Source: DfES
 1,040.2 1,025.5 1,054.9 577


Maintained schools in England scoring the lowest KS2-4 CVA scores 2005/06
School
 Score Lower confidence interval Upper confidence interval Pupils
on roll
St Damian's RC Science College 963.5 953.3 973.6 789
Oak Farm Community School 963.4 950.3 976.6 358
David Lister School 963.4 955.8 971.1 1,221
Thorncliffe School - A Specialist Sports College 963.3 953.6 973.0 817
Minster College 963.2 957.2 969.2 1,591
Millfield Science and Performing Arts College 963.0 953.7 972.4 819
Maltby Comprehensive School 962.9 955.3 970.4 1,392
City of Leeds School 962.8 949.8 975.8 591
Henry Mellish Comprehensive School 962.7 951.0 974.4 539
St Peters College 962.4 951.4 973.5 698
Pendeford Business and Enterprise College 962.3 950.9 973.7 613
Elgar Technology College 961.8 952.8 970.9 966
Abraham Darby Specialist School for Performing Arts   961.6 953.3 969.9 1,056
Moorside High School 961.1 953.0 969.2 1,153
Fullhurst Community College 961.0 951.5 970.4 922
Perry Beeches School 960.7 950.9 970.5 881
The Ramsey School 960.5 950.5 970.5 771
Newman Catholic School 960.1 948.4 971.8 568
Sherwood Hall School and Sixth Form College 959.9 950.9 968.9 995
South Luton High School 959.8 949.8 969.8 827
Park Hall School 959.5 951.8 967.2 1,427
Bishopsford Community School 959.4 949.0 969.8 1,064
The Rushden Community College Specialising in Mathematics and Computing 959.4 950.0 968.7 1,030
St Peter's High School 959.3 950.1 968.6 934
Sawyers Hall College of Science and Technology 958.9 950.6 967.2 1,277
Brookway High School and Sports College 958.6 948.9 968.3 680
Portway Community School 958.5 948.3 968.6 736
Winifred Holtby School Technology College 958.4 951.4 965.5 1,600
Harlington Community School 958.1 949.5 966.7 1,282
Wyke Manor School 957.8 948.2 967.5 792
North Cumbria Technology College 957.8 945.6 970.0 498
Intake High School Arts College 957.6 949.6 965.5 1,231
Thornaby Community School 957.2 948.3 966.2 805
Kings Grove School 957.1 944.3 970.0 677
Brierton Community School (A Specialist Sports College) 957.1 948.1 966.1 938
Newton-le-Willows Community High School 955.9 945.8 965.9 771
Freebrough Specialist Engineering College 955.4 946.4 964.4 912
Brownhills Community Technology College 954.7 945.7 963.6 1,000
South Leeds High School 954.4 946.3 962.5 1,382
The Morton School 952.4 941.8 963.0 599
Cockshut Hill Technology College 952.4 944.8 959.9 1,478
Quarrendon School 951.9 941.6 962.1 805
Oldborough Manor Community School 951.5 939.4 963.6 403
The Warren Comprehensive School 949.0 940.7 957.4 1,355
Featherstone Technology College 948.9 939.3 958.4 796
Washwood Heath Technology College 943.7 935.3 952.1 1,425
New College Leicester 941.6 933.5 949.7 1,149
St George RC School 934.5 920.6 948.4 595
Birkdale High School 934.0 921.9 946.1 591
Eastbourne Comprehensive School 919.2 908.8 929.5 743

   This proposal recommends schools based on less than 1,000 pupils per site.
Appendix Three - Deprivation Factors

Links between Deprivation and Education
In terms of health and disability deprivation Stoke-on-Trent was ranked as the 12th most deprived local authority district in England (out of 354) and the most deprived in the West Midlands.

43% of the City's population (103,316 persons) lived in areas classified in the 10% most health deprived in England.

27% of the City's population (64,222 persons) lived in areas classified in the 5% most health deprived in England.

Education, Skills and Training Deprivation
In terms of education, skills and training deprivation Stoke-on-Trent was ranked as the 7th most deprived local authority district in England (out of 354) and the second most deprived in the West Midlands behind Sandwell.

34% of the City's population (82,407 persons) lived in areas classified in the 10% most educationally deprived in England.

19% of the City's population (46,606 persons) lived in areas classified in the 5% most deprived in England.

Free School Meals
Pupils not eligible for free school meals perform better than those who are eligible for free school meals in each Key Stage, at GCSE and equivalent and at Post-16 (Source: www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000708/SFR04_2007v1.pdf).

27.4% of primary school children in the city were eligible for FSM compared with 18.8% across the West Midlands region and 16.9% across England.

20.1% of secondary school children in the city were eligible for FSM compared with 14.4% across the West Midlands region and 14.3% across England.

Special Educational Needs
Pupils with SEN perform less well than pupils with no identified SEN in each stage of education
(Source: www.dfes.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s000708/SFR04_2007v1.pdf).

While secondary school students educated in the city are more likely to have a statement of special educational needs than the regional and national averages, primary school children are less likely to have one.

Both primary and secondary school pupils educated in the city are between 20 and 25% more likely to have some SEN status than both the regional and national averages.

People living in deprived areas are less likely to work, more likely to be poor and have lower life expectancy, more likely to live in poorer housing in unattractive local environments with high levels of antisocial behaviour and lawlessness and more likely to receive poorer education and health services. Living in a deprived area adversely affects individuals' life chances over and above what would be predicted by their personal circumstances and characteristics.

This report makes recommendations to ensure that health, education and transport services are more focused on addressing the needs of deprived areas and to ensure that the existing public service reform agenda is tailored to deliver effectively within deprived areas.

Educational attainment is affected by neighbourhood characteristics. Concentrations of deprivation in an area affect the mix of children in a school; children from low socioeconomic groups tend to benefit from a more mixed school intake.

Poor educational attainment in deprived areas is the result of a range of factors

Deprivation has a significant impact on educational attainment. Underachievement is clustered in deprived areas. It is also made worse in those areas by poor liveability and disorder which add to the pressures faced by parents Concentrations enhance the negative peer influences which reduce aspirations.

There is more that educational services can do to address low attainment of pupils in deprived areas

Some aspects of educational services also contribute to poor attainment.

For instance:
  • there are problems with teacher recruitment and retention in deprived areas -teachers tend to be younger and turnover higher-where skills, including leadership, may need to be even stronger due to the challenging operating environment; and
  • current targets do not focus on raising the attainment of the lowest achieving pupils. This can affect behaviour within schools and the extent to which teaching methods are designed for the needs of more deprived pupils.
Transport plays a key role in helping residents access services

Poor transport provision and the inappropriate location of services can prevent residents of deprived areas accessing services which would help improve outcomes, including employment, health and education.

It also makes an area unpopular to those who can choose to live elsewhere. Problems with transport include difficult physical access, unaffordability and unreliability. Accessibility of services has not been a priority for local transport authorities (LTAs), for Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) or for service providers. There has been a lack of a joined-up approach between transport providers, land use planners and service providers in the location and delivery of services.

Increase schools' focus on deprived areas

Many education initiatives currently address the problem of low attainment in deprived areas.
  • Although some services, such as free part-time early education, are universal, others aimed at improving early years provision and support for parenting, for instance Sure Start local programmes and Children's Centres, are particularly focused on deprived areas. Pilots for the extension of the provision of free part-time integrated education and care ('educare') to two-year olds are due to start in 2006.
  • Individual pupil-level attainment targets and new curriculum materials for personalised learning should enable teachers to deal with the needs of lower-achieving pupils
  • London Challenge provides opportunities for schools in London to improve performance, for example enabling schools facing similar problems to share best practice.
Extended schools provide a range of services and activities to help meet the needs of pupils, their families and the wider community, from after-school clubs to health and social care provision. The familiarity and accessibility of school sites mean take-up of services in extended schools is good. If extended schools are to fulfil their potential in deprived areas, then the following issues need to be addressed:
  • the different priorities of agencies working in the same communities;
  • the lack of engagement, in some cases, of extended schools in the implementation of local strategies; and
  • issues of sustainability of projects and the need to co-ordinate multiple funding streams
Source: Improving the prospects of people living in areas of multiple deprivation in England January 2005
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/upload/assets/www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/strategy/deprived_areas.pdf
Source: Evaluation of the Extended Schools Pathfinder Projects Colleen Cummings, University of Newcastle - Alan Dyson, University of Manchester & Liz Todd, University of Newcastle with the Education Policy and Evaluation Unit, University of Brighton
http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RB530.doc

Stoke-on-Trent Deprivation
Multiple Deprivation
Map 1: Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2004 Stoke-on-Trent

Income Domain
Map 2: Indices of Deprivation 2004 - Income Domain

Education, Skills and Training Domain
Map 5: Indices of Deprivation - Education, Skills and Training Domain

Income deprivation affecting children
Map 9: Supplementary Index - Income deprivation affecting children

Source of all maps: http://www.stoke.gov.uk/ccm/navigation/council-and-democracy/statistics/index-of-deprivation/



Appendix Four - Travel to School distances

This proposal, unlike SERCO's, takes into account the unique geographic nature of Stoke on Trent with its linear rather than concentric nature.

Evidence shows that the average home to work distance for residents of Stoke on Trent is between 1 mile and 3 miles and figures in the 2001 Census show that 22.3% of people do not use their own vehicle to travel to work.

The Census figures also shows that 35,711 household out of a possible 103,197 households do not own a private vehicle (46,598 household own one car or van).

Evidence from Sue Dawson from North Staffs Passenger Transport Users Forum -Travelwatch West Midlands

Travel Patterns In Stoke On Trent
The City of Stoke on Trent consists of 6 towns but to locals it consists of 96 villages. Historically local people have not travelled far from their 'village' and their families, who have lived there for many generations. With limited time from working in the pottery and local heavy industry and low wages, still prevalent today, travel any distance was limited. When paid holidays came into being trains took people to Blackpool and Rhyl, a Sunday School trip might be to a local Park or nearby beauty spot and during Wakes Week each area would have local events to keep people entertained. Women shopped at their local shop, of which most streets had a corner shop, and markets, as shopping took place most days.

Although obviously things have moved forward, with locally low wages and people still mainly thinking parochially, travelling any distance, other than on holiday, is still not the lifestyle many Potteries people take up. There are still some corner shops and local markets so although locals have at times to go someway further they still tend to stay as near home as possible. Hampering travel is the fact that there are now fewer bus services and very few in the evening, train fares are too expensive for most 'ordinary' people and old habits die hard in the City. What about young people's attitudes to travel around the area? David Beckett, City Youth Services, reported to the Forum that young people are often still unaware of certain areas in the City; for example - young people in Trent Vale do not travel much further than Newcastle or Hanley and have little idea about areas in the North of the City. Older people are not keen to change the habits of a lifetime and other City residents have not got the background of much travelling around.

The situation in the City re. public transport has not always been conducive to encouraging residents to use local buses and trains. Obviously high rail fares and competitive bus services are a national Government issue but local people's views and concerns need to be recognised and taken on board if people are to be encouraged to use public transport both for local and regional travel. For example, many City residents do not have a car and yet already one local station, Etruria, has been closed; much house building has taken place in this area and now there is no station for residents to use, discouraging people to leave their cars at home. Hopefully this will not happen to Longport station, which is also in a Regeneration area.

As far as local bus services go some areas are better served than others - bus operators needing to collect many fares to make a service viable. Free bus travel for the disabled and older people has helped but better information re local services, publicity and encouragement to encourage people to use what is available and more modern and attractive vehicles for them to use would be a good start. If local bus time tables showed places of interest in the City and simple instructions on how to get there more local people as well as visitors would use the bus.

We have found that other obstacles to using local buses are - very few evening services (you may be able to get to the cinema but find there is no bus home) and Sunday services, Hanley bus station is a frightening place to wait for a bus after dark, many bus stops have no shelter or lighting or sometimes even no easy to read timetables and young people found that many bus drivers have an aggressive attitude towards them. Obviously more central funding for bus services, places of interest showing how to get there by bus in their literature, improved and modernised bus stations and Real Time Information at bus stops are some of the ways to help improve the situation.

Using the experience of local user groups such as ours and the North Staffs Rail Promotion Group would provide a source of obtaining the views, needs and concerns of local people and thus improve their quality of life'.

The provision of home to school transport is governed by the Education Act 1996 (in England and Wales, and similar legislation in Northern Ireland) which defines maximum walking distances of two miles for children under eight and three miles for older children up to the age of 16 to the nearest available school. Children who live more than these distances from their 'nearest suitable' school receive free transport. Those who live closer, or who choose to attend a different school, may not have a bus service available.

Travelling to School

How does your child travel to school?

Many of the problems highlighted by parents and carers are associated with the congestion found around schools at the start and end of the school day. Increased car use for the school journey now means that one in five cars on urban roads at 8.50am are taking children to school.

But increased use of cars can have damaging consequences. Children who are driven to school:

How can you help improve the safety of children?

We receive many calls from concerned headteachers and parents about the perceived dangers outside schools at the beginning and end of the school day due to vehicle congestion outside the school entrance. Unfortunately, in many cases, parents are the root cause of the problem. Parents need to think carefully about their journey to school and consider the following:
Source: http://www.stoke.gov.uk/ccm/navigation/education/schools-and-nurseries/transport/

School Travel Plans
A school travel plan is a document that sets out the long-term strategy for:
Source: http://www.stoke.gov.uk/ccm/navigation/category.jsp?categorylD=127693

Pupils previously attending Longton High school would have to travel a further 4.5 miles if they were to attend Birches Head, for example, instead if other more local schools were full. As Blythe Bridge is only 1.5 miles away it seems more likely that pupils would attend that High School.

The DfT published the report, Factors Leading to Increased School Journey Length in May 2003. Extracts from the report's conclusion showed:

Factors leading to an increase in distance travelled

1.18 Where increases were found, the study has been able to throw light on those factors and hypotheses that have had the largest effects on increasing distance.

These can be summarised as:
• 1) Increases in car ownership. The rising proportion of households with access to a car, but particularly the faster rising proportion of households with access to two or more household cars appears to have fuelled the use of cars for taking children to school. Although a shift of mode for the same journey will not increase distance travelled, once the decision has been made to take children to school by car the opportunity arises for schools to be chosen which are further away.
• 2) Patterns of women's working and childcare arrangements. Over the last ten years the proportion of women in employment, with the introduction of more flexible childcare arrangements to accommodate this trend, has influenced the choices that parents will make about where children go to school.
• 3) School's admission policies. Of the schools where an increase in distance was noted, nearly all were oversubscribed, and were thus using their admissions policies to select students. This finding should be surprising since most schools, once oversubscribed take students on the basis of a) whether they have a sibling in the school, b) whether they have other special requirements, and c) distance. Thus, although distance is not the main criteria it should mean that those schools that are oversubscribed should end up having shorter distances. This has not been clearly understood by this study, but possible explanations are:

Factors leading to increased school journey length
• If a school is oversubscribed it is likely either to be located in an area where there is a shortage of school places, or it is likely to be a popular school as seen by parents (for a wide range of reasons). If the second explanation is true, then it is likely to receive applications from parents across a wider area, hoping to get their children into this popular school
• During the process of a school becoming oversubscribed parents further away may get their elder children into the school, and subsequently younger children will gain 'sibling priority' when they are old enough.

Source:
http://pims.parliament.uk:81/PlMS/Static%20Files/Extended%20FJIe%20Scan%20Files/LIBR ARY OTHER PAPERS/STANDARD NOTE/snbt-02778.pdf

Social Exclusion Unit report: Making the Connections

The Social Exclusion Unit report, Making the Connections, published in February 2003, also recommended that LEAs should have greater freedom in the way they manage home to school transport. The report highlighted the relationship between education and the drive to increase participation and achievement in education. It noted the negative impact the current school transport arrangements can have on low-income families by restricting parental choice of school and access to learning outside school hours if transport is not available. The report said that the Government intended to introduce a number of measures to address this problem. These included encouraging LEAs to introduce pilot schemes to test wider free home-school transport entitlements, which could enable children to benefit from education in specialist or faith schools, or those offering alternative ways of learning through more flexible 14-19-year-old curriculum.

DETR, Increasing bus use for journeys to school - a guide to best practice within existing legislation, 2001:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_susttravel/documents/page/dft_susttravel_504056-03.hcsp
http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/reports/NATIONAL-REPORT.asp?CategorylD=&Prod!D=F624E5F1-A7E4-419a-94BA-7DF2FC096CE2
http://www.socialexclusionunit.gov.uk/downloaddoc.asp?id=66
Appendix Five - Secondary and Special School Reorganisation

A Special School Perspective

This document has been written and fully endorsed by the 5 special school Head Teachers, November 2007.

Concerns with the Council's proposals:

1. Specialist provision
  • Lack of centre / unit provision for autism and SEBD/MLD.
  • The needs of the more vulnerable pupils, e.g. PMLD, ASD could be lost in a generic school. The LA currently has 'Outstanding' special schools with this provision.
  • A generic approach will reduce the skills base, resulting in a higher demand for out of county places and a recruitment + retention crisis. It is extremely difficult to recruit staff with the relevant experience so we tend to grow our own.   A reduction in numbers of special school places will also increase the demand for out of county placements.
  • There should be discrete "resourced" ASD provision.
  • 120 place generic school is not cost effective in terms of being able to employ staff to deliver the full curriculum for the huge spectrum of needs.
  • There is a major concern, from looking at practice elsewhere, that mixing very vulnerable children (e.g. PMLD) with very challenging children (e.g. ASD) is detrimental to both. Parents concur with this view.
2. Numbers
  • The projected numbers of pupils requiring special education do not withstand scrutiny. There is a fear that schools will immediately be oversubscribed and will therefore not fulfil their function in meeting needs. The proposal is numbers driven, not needs driven, based on DCFS targets and statistical neighbours - ie relatively arbitrary. Need to discuss provision not numbers.
  • Reduced provision from 530 to 360 places will increase out of county provision.
  • The model doesn't take into account the impact of the increase in numbers of the proposed 16 plus provision. This will result in even fewer 5-16 places in the 3 new special schools

3. Meeting needs

The model reintroduces 16-19 provision for SLD and enhances it for complex needs. This we welcome. However, this extended provision is included in the 360 total for special schools. We feel this should be in addition to. The proposal will not fully address the needs of SEN pupils in mainstream schools. Feel that the 60 place SEBD school will accommodate existing pupils in Middlehurst, Aynsley and Abbey Hill and not pupils from mainstream. Do not feel that the SEBD provision will be sufficient. We also welcome the acknowledgement that purely MLD can be catered for in mainstream schools with additional support. This is already happening in Stoke. The special schools are now populated with young people with complex needs.

4. Inclusion

'New build' will not automatically lead to a more inclusive curriculum. The reduction in special school numbers will mean mainstream schools will have pupils with increasingly complex needs. This will be in direct conflict with their drive to raise standards. Co-location for special schools is best when combined with secondary, primary, nursery & Children Centres with multi-disciplinary provision. This has been agreed at meetings but are not part of the proposals.
Alternative proposal

The Special School Head's recognise the need for change in Stoke-on-Trent, & wish to support a quality education service that meets the needs of all pupils.

Special schools are not underperforming or underachieving. In fact, they have excellent examples of SEN provision as proved by Ofsted reports. Please see the schools below, each with a very brief description of some the many characteristics that make them the excellent provision they are.
  1. Secondary schools need to be smaller not bigger to give more parental choice and to provide a more appropriate environment for young people with SEN. Smaller Secondary Schools will be more "SEN friendly" The proposed very large high schools will need to be designed so that there are small operational units that have a high degree of autonomy. Research suggests that this is more "pupil friendly", not just "SEN friendly".
  2. Once Secondary Schools are set up and proving they have good inclusive practice then it will be more effective to establish enhanced provision. Special school outreach role will help to ensure this.
  3. Special School reorganisation should be implemented only after the successful transition of the Secondary Schools, with special schools supporting the development of inclusive practices.
  4. Special schools to continue to work with 'new' secondary schools to provide support in inclusive practice. Special schools to play a major role in the leadership and management of SEN resourced provision in both primary and secondary mainstream schools across the city.
  5. Co-locate one Special School fully, rather than three poorly done.
  6. Co-locate a Special School with Secondary, Primary & Pre School provision. This could be financed from the Special School sites vacated in the co-location process.
  7. Under primary BSF build co-located provision for existing special schools because primaries have a proven, better culture of inclusion. Ensure that primaries with co-located special schools are at least within easy walking distance of secondary schools and Children's Centres and are federated. This may mean the co-located Special School(s) being single phase
These proposals would result in the excellent values and ethos prevalent in special schools contributing to raising standards.

Current Special School Provision
Brief description of some of the characteristics of the 5 special schools currently serving families of the Stoke on Trent area
Abbey Hill School
Greasley Rd., Bucknall, ST2 8LG
Head Teacher: Phillip Kidman
  • The school has a record of being a high performing school, achieved in part by having a very stable senior leadership team
      • Beacon School 2000
      • EXCELLENT Ofsted 2002
      • Achievement Award 2001, 2002, 2003
      • Specialist Status in Performing Arts 2003 and 2007
      • OUTSTANDING Ofsted 2006
      • High Performing Specialist School 2007
  • A 40 place Unit for pupils with Autism. The Unit is specialist provision for the City and North Staffordshire (38% of Unit are 'Out of LA' pupils)
  • School is 3-19 provision for pupils with moderate learning difficulties, social & communication difficulties and ASD.
  • School has been invited to apply for a second specialism. The second specialism will be SEN (Communication and Interaction), from April 2008.
  • School provides generic outreach for Cluster 2 and Cluster 4
  • School provides specialist outreach for ASD as well as general SEN outreach & regular training for the City via SEN Network.
  • Trialling  Person  Centred  Reviews/Thinking  in  partnership with  West Midlands Valuing People Support Team, promoting the student voice.
  • The school is committed to Stoke Speaks Out. All school staff have had some training (including Admin and Lunchtime Supervisors).
  • Pupils undertaken a range of external accreditation including ASDAN, Entry Level, BTEC and GCSE's
  • School supported by LSU (2.5 staff), Transition Manager and Outreach Manager
  • School has very active School Council.
  • "The key to the school's success is it's single-minded striving to do even better which means that its capacity for improvement is exceptional" Ofsted 2006
Aynsley School
Aynsley's Drive, Blythe Bridge, ST11 9HJ
Head Teacher: Angela Hardstaff

Aynsley School is a Special school for pupils with moderate learning difficulties, with an additional 20 place specialist provision for pupils with learning difficulties and social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. The school has had many difficulties in the past but is now constantly and consistently improving, and provides a good education for its pupils.

Aynsley school has many strengths but in particular:
  • In extended curricular activities. We have established strong links with secondary and primary mainstream schools.
  • The school has a very high level of value added in terms of youngsters' achievement.
  • Well developed and continually improving our use of ICT across the curriculum. We have prioritised this area in recent years and are very well equipped in comparison with other similar schools eg having an interactive whiteboard in every teaching room - and having trained staff in effective use of these resources.
  • In addition to our generic outreach role, we have developed a specialist role in terms of providing advice on good working practice for SEN and inclusion in mainstream high schools, and advice and training for staff with challenging behaviours
  • Over 1 million pounds has been spent on refurbishing and adding to the buildings of Aynsley in the last 4 years.
Our additional provision known as Aynsley Centre aims to meet the complex needs of 20 young people who have learning difficulties combined with social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. They have experienced some very challenging and difficult life experiences. Many have previously been out of the school system for long periods of time. Many of these young people have offended and are at risk of further offending. They have very challenging behaviours, some can be violent. They need very specialist and intensive support, as do their families.
Heathfield School
Chell Heath Road, Chell Heath, ST6 6PD
Head Teacher: Catherine Lewis

Recent OFSTED report highlighted the following strengths:
  • The development of pupils' communication skills is an important element in overall success.
  • Good outreach work is typical of the high quality, collaborative partnerships that the school has developed.
  • Good improvements in the building
  • Pupils achieve well, as a result of good teaching.
  • Pupils make good progress across all subjects especially English, Maths and PSHCE
  • Behaviour is good and pupils have a positive attitude to learning.
  • Developing confident learners
  • The development of the Personalised Learning Base provides effective additional support for pupils with ASD and Challenging Behaviour and has great success in re-integrating pupils back into main stream school.
  • Pupils have many good opportunities to work and play alongside their more able mainstream peers.
  • Good enrichment activities are provided
  • High quality collaboration with a wide range of agencies and professionals.
  • Achieved Investors in People, Arts Mark Gold and Sports Mark.
  • The new Head Teacher provides good leadership and has worked tirelessly to improve the way the school does its work and re-established its sense of worth.
Kemball School
Duke Street, Fenton, ST4 3NR
Head Teacher: Elizabeth Spooner

Extracts from Ofsted report December 2006:
  • OUTSTANDING
  • Exceptionally effective care and support for its pupils and families.
  • Pupils helped to make excellent progress in their personal development through
  • highly focused, unsentimental guidance which helps them become as confident and independent as they can be.
  • Leadership and management are excellent.
  • The school has been awarded Active Mark, Eco School status and Healthy School status.
  • Parents and carers are very pleased with their children's education.
  • Personal development and wellbeing of the pupils are exceptional.
  • Self Review is very effectively informed by regular monitoring and robust performance management, which in turn influences excellent professional development opportunities for staff."

Particular strengths include:
  • Curriculum for profound, multiple learning difficulties.
  • Working closely with parents.
  • Stable staff with very specific expertise in highly specialised areas e.g. pmld, asd.
  • Leadership and management.
  • Outreach work to support individual pupils and families with very specific issues (usually pmld and, more recently, challenging behaviour).
Middlehurst
Turnhurst Road, Chell, ST6 6NQ
Head Teacher: Jonathon May

Ofsted 2006: GOOD all round
"All pupils, regardless of their special educational needs, make good progress because their specific needs are well catered for."

Particular strengths include:
  • Robust target setting procedures. Ofsted say, "...very good system that tracks pupils' personal and academic progress."
  • Embedded Transitional practice.
  • Strong links with families. Ofsted say,"The school goes out of its way to support parents and carers and develop their confidence through courses ... which ensures they are better able to support their children's learning."
  • Full Core Offer Extended Schools.
Strengths and features with respect to mainstream are:
  • Wave three interventions.
  • Revolving door practice for pupils in mainstream and special schools.
  • Primary SEBD