Agenda item

Ms Jane Edwards, Assistant Director Schools & Learning Service and Ms Eghele Eyituoyo, Headteacher, Virtual Head of School, presented the report. Members welcomed the report.

The Committee heard:

· Mastery could be defined as interventions that were happening to ensure that a young person can master a skill or a particular area of what they were studying. This would be something that happened in a classroom whereas tuition would be identified as a one-to-one activity.

· In relation to attendance, meetings were held on a regular basis to discuss attendance figures. An intervention would then be planned for a young person. Attention had to be paid to attendance figures to read behind the workings of them. It may be that the school had given a young person unauthorised absence which should not be listed as an unauthorised absence because, for example, the appointment the child was out of school for had been planned. The meetings helped to understand how the figures ended up as they did. Consultations would be held with the school to provide advice and guidance. The structure of the virtual school was changing. There was an attendance and inclusion manager who would hold attendance forums to support the professionals and other people around the young person. There was a national issue with attendance. This tied into other work in terms of how a child needed to feel that they belonged in a school and working with schools to make sure that young people felt belonged. Work would also be done to mitigate issues that a young person may have in possibly preventing them from attending school.

· When a child was suspended, assurances were sought to make sure the school was not using suspensions as a behaviour management tool. This had happened in the past and what was really required were other tools to support the young person. Other solutions were actively sought and the Council, at times, acted as a negotiator to avoid the outcome of a permanent exclusion or that another arrangement was in place as an intervention so that the placement could be maintained.

 · In relation to suspensions, during around 2018, exclusions and suspensions in Haringey were very high. During this time, schools would inform the Council what it could have done to prevent the issue after a child had been excluded. The Council now tried to get ahead of any such interventions. Every case was audited to make sure that best possible efforts could be made. There had always been national stories of a child who had progressed well in school only to then once come into school with a knife or leave one at the school gate. This created a blemish for the child’s record that became an impossible hurdle to pass. In such cases in Haringey, discussions had been held regarding understanding why a child may have transgressed, and although teachers were not told they could not make certain decisions, they were engaged along with the families to understand what other actions could be taken and this had caused a cultural shift. The same approach had been taken towards suspensions. The Council’s achievements had received attention and had also been mentioned in national reports.

 · There was still a lot of work to do and the service plan and the improvement plan recognised that. One of the key priorities was improving attendance, but the Council was also aware that some cohorts had not reached their desired progress. Maintaining placements wherever possible was fundamental. Continuous school placement changes were disruptive to young people.

· The introduction of the statutory role would mean that funding would become more stable. Lewisham Council had a virtual school where the Council was trying to build their own models of monitoring. Haringey had looked at the Year 11 cohorts who were underachieving. Data was being collected on the children each term to see where they were in relation to attainment. In terms of aspiration, this would rely on knowing where the child was in relation to their personal progress to understand what needed to happen. Regular meetings would be held to make sure that the child had the right intervention to meet their target grade.

· When the ILACS inspection too k place in February 2023, it was made clear that the Education Improvement Consultants (EIC) should be following the child. The EIC needed to provide constant support and a Virtual School staff member needed to follow their journey. For the children, there had been the consistency of knowing that they had the same EIC.

· In relation to NEETs (Not In Education Employment or Training), services were being commissioned and a mentor had been contacted to set up a program. A program of support would be set up for young people who were NEET. The UK social fund, which was given to lots of different organisations around London, was something that the Council was trying to access. There was support available for young people which was provided through funds. On occasion, if a young person was a parent or had any mental health challenges, they would not be able to enter the workforce, but where a child was able to progress, as much support as possible would be given to them which they felt was useful to get them back into the job market.

RESOLVED:

To note the outcomes of the Haringey Virtual School Report for 2023/24.