Agenda item

This is the annual school performance report to inform the Committee of the provisional outcomes of the Summer 2022 assessments and examinations in Hammersmith and Fulham’s schools, and an update on Ofsted inspections. The report provides an overview of the outcomes and how they compare with the national picture.

Peter Haylock (Operational Director for Education and SEND) presented the report with support from Georgina Herry (Lead Adviser for School Improvement).

Peter Haylock said he was very pleased with how schools have performed and published outcomes continued to be above national averages at EYFS, Primary, KS4 and KS5. The proportion of schools rated good or outstanding had also improved since the report was published and now stood at 100%.

Councillor Lucy Richardson asked if the Council could do something to celebrate the results with the borough’s Headteachers. Peter Haylock said the team were planning an event in the summer.

Councillor Richardson noted the borough’s impressive figures for persistent non-attendance, particularly against the national figure which had doubled since the pandemic. She said it was worth looking into the reasons for this and spread practice to other areas. Peter Haylock said the team had made funding available to support schools and put systems in place to ensure children were in school.

The Chair said she hoped that national Government were looking to the borough and the Education team as examples of good practice. Jacqui McShannon (Strategic Director of Children’s Services) said officers met regularly with the Department for Education and they did promote the borough and volunteer where appropriate. Officers also liked the opportunity to learn from other Local Authorities.

Councillor Aliya Afzal-Khan congratulated the borough’s schools and the Education team on such positive results. She highlighted the success of the Learning Partnership and asked if it could offer support to struggling schools. Peter Haylock said the Learning Partnership only ran in primary schools at present, though once the partnership was more developed it may expand. He noted that there were secondary headteacher meetings and other collaboration forums in place. He also explained that secondary schools were all Academies and they tended to work together in their Trusts.

Nadia Taylor asked if the move to Academies had improved schools. And if so, which of them were better in the current arrangements. Jacqui McShannon said the borough had a rich landscape of school provision and it was too complex to generalise. One of hallmarks of Hammersmith & Fulham was the way that schools worked together, both formally and informally to achieve the best results for the borough’s children and young people.

Nandini Ganesh asked if the NEET (young people who were Not in Education,

Employment or Training) figures in the report included SEND pupils. Peter Haylock said they did – they were tracked through the Education Health and Care Plan (EHCP) casework team and other colleagues in the borough’s institutions.

Nandini Ganesh asked if falling rolls was still an issue for schools in the borough. Peter Haylock said it was a concern for some schools as there had been a decrease in the birth rate across London.

The Chair asked if there was learning to be taken from the impressive SEND performance. Peter Haylock said the credit should go to schools and the work they had put in behind the scenes including putting intervention plans in place and exam preparation work. His team made sure SEND services could be accessed and provided advice, guidance, and shared good practice with schools.

The Chair noted the low persistent absence figures and asked officers if they knew why that was the case. Peter Haylock said there was a strong culture of achievement in the borough’s schools which combined with better tracking meant the likelihood of persistent absence was lower.

The Chair congratulated the borough’s schools and the efforts of the Education team for their fantastic work.

RESOLVED

1. That the Committee reviewed and commented on the school performance details in the report and the school improvement priorities identified.

2. That the Committee noted that outcomes should be viewed within the context of the pandemic and the effect of school closures, pupil & staff absences, staff well-being and the resulting effect of the pandemic on pupils’ social, emotional and mental health.