Agenda and draft minutes

Apologies for absence was received from Councillor Reid and Ms Kally

The Chair will consider the admission of any late items of urgent business. Where the item is already included on the agenda, it will appear under that item but new items of urgent business will be dealt with at item 6 .

There was none

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 6 March 2007

The minutes of the meeting held on 6 March were confirmed

A member with a personal interest in a matter who attends a meeting of the authority at which the matter is considered must disclose to that meeting the existence and nature of that interest at the commencement of that consideration, or when the interest becomes apparent.

A member with a personal interest in a matter also has a prejudicial interest in that matter if the interest is one which a member of the public with knowledge of the relevant facts would reasonably regard as so significant that it is likely to prejudice the member's judgment of the public interest and if this interest affects their financial position or the financial position of a person or body as described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct and/or if it relates to the determining of any approval, consent, licence, permission or registration in relation to them or any person or body described in paragraph 8 of the Code of Conduct

The following declarations of interest were made:-

Councillor Egan – Employed in education involved in Graduate training, a Governor at St Thomas More School (not involved in Exclusions) and as a retired member of the NUT

Councillor Vanier – Employed in Education, a Governor at Northumberland Park (not involved in exclusions) and as a member of the NASUWT

Councillor Oakes – As a Governor at Bounds Green School

To consider the pre-emptive work undertaken in schools to prevent exclusions including a) the visits to Gladesmore and Bow Schools and b) fixed term exclusions  (report attached)

A

Councillor Egan explained that this part of the review was looking at work being carried out to prevent school exclusions, looking at what was currently happening in schools and seeking models of good practice that could be shared by other schools. The Panel had visited both Gladesmore School and Bow School in Tower Hamlets; the notes of these visits were tabled at the meeting.

As requested previously the appropriate Trade Unions had been invited to present evidence to the Panel. Although UNISON had declined to take up the offer Julie Davies from the NUT and Tony Brockman, Secretary of the Teachers Panel presented a paper on behalf of the NUT. A request was put to the meeting that the matter be treated sensitively.

The key points raised were:-

·         All teacher organisations shared the view that inclusion of pupils in school was important and an aim that should be supported.

·        Inclusion of the entire school population was insufficiently resourced. There was not adequate resources in schools to address the needs of violent or disruptive pupils with emotional and behaviour difficulties.

·        Failure of schools to report assaults should be treated as a serious disciplinary matter

·        Concerns about alleged failure of the Local Authority to meet its duty under health and safety legislation to systemically monitor assaults on staff and to seek to reduce them.

·        The development of Learning Support Centres in Secondary Schools was limited. There needed to be a full range of provision for SEBD pupils, which should include special school, off site provision managed by schools, as well as on site provision. A full range of provision was necessary to give a flexible approach to all pupils.

·        A robust monitoring system for pupil behaviour and a clear behaviour policy was needed across all schools. A simple model of good practice should be produced and dissimulated to all schools. The Union had produced some guidance on this.

·        Governing Bodies and Independent Appeal Panels continued to overturn decisions to exclude on grounds which were not in accordance with DCFS guidance. The Authority should ensure that Panels received training prior to appointment and had the necessary skills.

The Panel was informed that Schools appeared to be worried that if they reported assaults on staff it would become a publicity issue and affect the popularity of the school. The NUT representative felt that many Headteachers were not notifying the Authority of assaults on staff.

In response to a question as what the Council should be doing the Unions felt that the idea of Learning Support Centres within schools was a good one, but there were issues around the supervision of pupils when they entered school premises, at the start of the day, and at break and lunchtimes. There would be occasions when some pupils would not be able to cope with being on site and needed off site specialist provision. Also there was concern that there was a limited number of experts that were able to manage  extremely challenging behaviour and that if  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider any items of business admitted at item 2 above.