You are here: Home » Your City Council » Council Meetings » Cabinet » Agendas 2003 » Agenda 10th December » School Attendance Strategy

School Attendance Strategy - Making a Mark Phase II

IMPROVING ATTENDANCE – PHASE TWO OF MAKING A MARK (AN ATTENDANCE STRATEGY FOR SHEFFIELD)

1. Purpose of the Report

1.1. This report informs Cabinet of the levels of attendance in Sheffield schools and describes the plans for the implementation of Phase Two of the Attendance Strategy for Sheffield, Making a Mark.

2. Background

2.1. In November 2001, a new Strategy for improving attendance was launched in the city. The Strategy was subject to extensive consultation and was met almost universal consent before becoming City Council Policy following approval by Cabinet.

2.2. The five main themes of the strategy are:

a. better support for schools’ own management of attendance

b. targeted support for schools in greatest need

c. earlier intervention

d. full and effective use of legal powers

e. efficient and effective use of data

2.3. A major thrust of the Strategy is concerned with the provision of support and training for schools in the skills and techniques to promote good attendance. A great deal of work has also taken place with parents, who are, after all, children’s first educators, to support them to improve their children’s attendance. For the first time in the city, this has led to the introduction of a city-wide universal approach.

3. Impact of the Strategy So Far

3.1. The Strategy was implemented in January 2002 and, as the data in this report shows, has played a major role in the significant rise in attendance.

3.2. During its first full year, September 2002 – July 2003, attendance in all our schools across the city rose 0.9%. This equates to a total of 266,000 additional half days saved over this period compared to the previous year.

3.3. In the primary sector attendance has risen from 93.2% in 2001/02 to 93.9% in 2002/03.

3.4. Whilst in secondary schools attendance has improved by a staggering 1.4% from 89.1% to 90.5%.

3.5. These figures represent considerable progress. Of the 14 other LEAs with whom we are compared none have made the same level of improvement. Sheffield schools have also out-performed schools nationally and similar LEAs by as much as three and a half times.

4. Why the Need for a Second Phase?

4.1. It has been widely acknowledged that the current Making A Mark strategy is having a significant impact on attendance across the city. There is a strong desire to maintain this impetus and to build on the momentum established this year

4.2.
Despite the considerable gains last year there is no room for complacency. This level of improvement needs to be consolidated. In addition, as indicated below, the performance of Sheffield schools, the secondary sector in particular, can be improved further in order that we can stand comparison to our statistical neighbours and schools nationally.

4.3. In addition to the national challenges, efforts to continue to reduce absence have a crucial role to play in helping to meet local aims and aspirations.

ü A cleaner greener, safer Sheffield. The links between street crime and absence are already well established.

ü Reducing the equity gap. The correlation between poor levels of attendance and poor levels of attainment is extremely high.

4.4 In Sheffield, the largest attendance problem is absence that is condoned by parents. We are trying to change a deeply ingrained local culture in which a significant minority of parents do not value education.

4.5 One of our strategies is to strongly encourage schools to challenge parental reasons for their child’s absence. In the longer term it is fully expected that this will continue to reduce overall rates of absence. Unfortunately one bi-product of this strategy, as far as the DfES is concerned, is a rate of reduction in the number of absences recorded as unauthorised which is slower than that required nationally.

4.6 Despite this reduction the DFES has set Sheffield the challenging target of 1% unauthorised absence. This would require a threefold improvement of 0.3% over last year’s performance.

4.7 The challenge will be to achieve this target without compromising any of the major principles of ‘Making a Mark’, and hence the need for a second phase to the strategy.

5. Underpinning Principles

5.1. It is important that any additional approach to reducing absence must be seen as developmental and not in any way undermining our overall strategy.

5.2. The large majority of schools need to be encouraged to continue their practices and feel even better supported to achieve this; hence it is recommended that Phase Two is not regarded as a new start or relaunch.

5.3. In order to make continued improvements, particularly in the overall levels of unauthorised absence required by the DFES, it will be necessary to take both a universal and targeted approach. Our ability to reduce one type of absence without reciprocal rises in the other will demand skill and maintenance of existing rigorous approaches.

5.4. The aim should be to continue our original strategy and practice, and use our additional resource to target a number of schools with the highest unauthorised absence levels.

5.5.

Increased Partnership Working

City Council

· Commitment to the delivery as well as the aims

· Funding inclusive learning

Connexions

· Firming protocols

· Establishing roles

· More Joint publicity

Education Directorate

· Review of school improvement roles

· SPR contribution

· Alternative curriculum

· Delivering joint campaigns

Other Agencies

· Development of Children’s Trust

· BEST practice

Schools

· Consistency of approaches

· Commitment to strategy

· Greater customer focus

· Clearer, more holistic support

South Yorkshire Police

· Police in Schools

· Developing Truancy sweeps

· Street Crime Initiative

Magistrates

· Fast Track

· Deterring uncooperative parents

Making A Mark provided a focal point for support services and partner agencies. The successful implementation of Phase Two will require all our partner agencies to sign up to the strategy and specifically to address areas of inconsistency and start to present a more unified approach. It is proposed that a number of steering groups will be established to implement and oversee the developments of Phase Two.

6. Phase Two Proposals

6.1. Targeted approach to reducing Levels of Unauthorised Absence

6.1.1. A number of schools have been identified as having very high levels of unauthorised absence. These schools are the same schools as those identified in the City Council’s “Closing the Gap” strategy. Most of these schools have already made significant improvements, due in part to a rigorous approach to challenging absence, and should not be regarded as having high levels of truancy or a casual attitude to absence. Quite the reverse.

6.1.2. The intention is to target additional support to these schools in order to get to grips earlier with the route causes of these unauthorised absences. If, by so doing, these schools can reach stiff stretched targets and every other school performs no worse then it did last year, the DFES target will be reached.

6.1.3. Some of these schools are already in the Behaviour Improvement Programme and are in receipt of additional resources. The emphasis of their work will shift with the targeted schools to focus on absence which cannot be authorised.

6.1.4. In addition, the focus of the Project Team, within the Attendance and Inclusion Service, will similarly be redirected to concentrate fully on the targeted schools.

6.2. Universal elements to build on the good work within all schools

6.2.1. As previously stated, a significant part of the new phase has to be the maintaining of practices which have already proved successful, for example:

Education Welfare Officers working with pupils who attend under 90%

The role of Senior Inclusion Officers, who give appropriate support, guidance and challenge to all schools

Holiday Discount Scheme (in liaison with local travel agents who offer discounts to families booking holidays in school holiday time), to reduce the number of pupils taking holidays in term time.

6.2.2. It is also intended that there will be further development of some of the elements already in place; for example:

Prosecution Strategy to include the new Fast Track to Court (cases submitted to court after 3 months intervention instead of the more usual 20-24 weeks).

Authorised Absence Pass Scheme (all schools issuing passes to pupils with authorised reasons for being out of school, for example, a dentist appointment).

Extended leave citywide protocol (protocol for pupils requesting to take leave during school time to their country of family origin).

Truancy Patrols During 2002/03 Sheffield scheduled monthly Truancy Patrols in close co-operation with the S.Y. Police. New arrangements, recently introduced, now mean that truancy patrols may be undertaken on any day over the next twelve months without having to apply for permission. Consequently Phase Two will implement additional Truancy Patrols in public places throughout the city, and on a daily basis around identified schools.

6.3. Publicity

6.3.1. During Phase One of ‘Making a Mark’ attendance received considerable media coverage. Headteachers welcomed this publicity and felt that it supported their efforts in school.It is intended that, during Phase Two, publicity will have an even greater emphasis. A comprehensive media strategy is required, including the press, radio, posters and leafleting which builds on a growing sense of collaboration and involves all partners.

6.3.2. We are already committed to a six month South Yorkshire radio campaign with the Radio Station Galaxy 105. This campaign will provide radio slots on attendance, written for young people and with the aim of improving the general image of school.

6.3.3. As part of this new media strategy it is proposed to launch a poster campaign to be conducted at different points during the school year. This will buttress other elements of the strategy and provide focal points at key times in the year. Collaboration with South Yorkshire Police will be key to this campaign.

6.3.4. A series of events, including three conferences are proposed throughout the academic year to which key speakers, including local and national politicians will be invited.

6.3.5. It is also proposed to build on the ‘City Achievement Awards’ evening through a recognition of the pupils who have maintained high levels of attendance over the course of their school careers

6.4. Punctuality

6.4.1. A major theme of Phase Two will be to focus on punctuality as research clearly demonstrates the direct correlation between lateness and poor attendance.

6.4.2. Approaches to punctuality need to be carefully balanced. Tackling the problem in an over-zealous manner may well turn lateness into absence, whilst a laissez-faire attitude may well have the same effect.

6.4.3. It is, therefore, proposed that guidance will be issued to schools in an attempt to ensure a consistent approach is adopted. ‘Clocking on’ weeks will be introduced where it is hoped that all schools will place an emphasis on punctuality. It is intended that pupils who arrive late on several occasions during these weeks will be followed up by a visit from an Education Welfare Officer.

6.5. Bullying

6.5.1. Bullying has been cited as one of the main concerns for Year 6 pupils prior to starting secondary school, it is also a common subject during visits made by Education Welfare Officers and in court cases. It is therefore proposed to undertake a significant piece of research on the subject of bullying; its causes and how it can be prevented.

6.6. Sharing Good Practice

6.6.1. There have been enormous developments over the past year on the methods we can adopt to access and analyse data from schools. All schools now record attendance data electronically and send it to the LEA on a weekly basis. It is proposed to make better use of this data, including the sharing of individual school statistics to help Head teachers compare their performance with that of similar schools.

7. Financial Implications

7.1. The developments in this report can be contained within the existing resources available to the Access and Inclusion Service

8. Recommendations

8.1. Members of the Cabinet are asked to note this report and agree to receive further regular reports on the progress of attendance and in particular Phase Two of the Making A Mark strategy.

Jonathan Crossley-Holland

Executive Director Education

Graph 1 : Attendance figures for Sheffield LEA.

These are divided into primary, secondary and special schools. The total attendance figure for the whole LEA is also calculated. The graph demonstrates an improvement in attendance for the whole city and in primary and secondary schools between the academic years 2001/02 and 2002/03. Primary attendance has increased by 0.7%; secondary attendance has increased by 1.4% and whole city attendance has increased by 0.9%. However, special school attendance has decreased by 1.3%.

Appendix

Graph 2.1

A comparison of primary school attendance between statistical neighbours 2000-03.

North Tyneside and Wigan are yet to submit data for 2002/3. LEA’s are ordered from the left by 2002/3 attendance (highest to lowest). Bolton has the highest primary attendance for 2002/3 at 94.8%. Newcastle has the lowest primary attendance at 93.6%. Sheffield is in seventh position out of the nine LEA’s that have submitted data for 2002/3 with primary attendance of 93.9%.

Graph 2.2

A comparison of the % point change in primary attendance between statistical neighbours (2001/02- 2002/03)

The LEA’s are arranged from the left in order (highest to lowest improvement). Sheffield LEA has demonstrated the largest improvement in primary attendance between 01/02 and 02/03 with 0.7% increase. The next highest improving city is Rotherham with an increase of 0.4%. Stockton-on-Tees and Gateshead have not made any improvement on last academic year’s attendance.

Graph 2.3

A comparison of secondary school attendance between statistical neighbours 2000-03

North Tyneside is yet to submit data for 2000/3. LEA’s are ordered from left by 2002/3 attendance (highest to lowest). Wigan has the highest secondary attendance for 2002/3 at 92.1%. Newcastle has the lowest secondary attendance at 90.1%. Sheffield is in ninth position out of the ten LEA’s that have submitted data for 2002/3 with secondary attendance of 90.4%.

Graph 2.4

A comparison of the change in secondary attendance between statistical neighbours (2001/02- 2002/03)

The LEA’s are arranged from the left in order (highest to lowest improvement). Sheffield LEA has demonstrated the largest improvement in secondary attendance between 01/02 and 02/03 with 1.4% increase. The next highest improving city is Tameside with an increase of 1.0%. Stockton-on-Tees has made the lowest improvement on last academic year’s attendance with an increase of 0.1%

Graph 2.6

A comparison of the change in special school attendance between statistical neighbours (2001/02- 2002/03)

The LEA’s are arranged from the left in order (highest to lowest improvement) Newcastle has demonstrated the largest improvement in special school attendance between 01/02 and 02/03 with 3.7% increase. Sheffield is the only city out of the seven that submitted special school data to have a decrease in special school attendance.

Table 2.5

A comparison of special school attendance between statistical neighbours 2001-03

North Tyneside, Stockton-on-Tees, Tameside and Rotherham do not have special data available. LEA’s are ordered from left by 2003/3 attendance (highest to lowest). Gateshead has the highest special school attendance for 2002/3 at 91.3%. Wigan has the lowest special school attendance at 85.4%. Sheffield is in fourth position out of the seven LEA’s that have submitted data for 2002/3 with special attendance of 87.4%.

Graph 3.2

A comparison of the change in primary school attendance between core cities (2001/02- 2002/03)

The LEA’s are arranged from the left in order (highest to lowest improvement). Sheffield has demonstrated the highest improvement in primary attendance with an increase of 0.7%. The next highest improving city is Manchester with an increase of 0.5%. Birmingham’s primary schools are the only school’s to decrease in attendance; the decrease was 0.3%.

Graphs 3.1 – 3.6 show how Sheffield’s attendance compares with the core cities. The data is broken down into primary, secondary and special schools. The core cities are Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle and Nottingham. The data for 2002/3 was obtained from the relevant officer at each LEA and is provisional, as some authorities are waiting on data from a few schools.

Graph 3.1:

A comparison of primary school attendance between core cities 2000-03.

LEA’s are ordered from left by 2002/3 attendance (highest to lowest). Leeds has the highest primary attendance for 2002/3 at 94.2%. Bristol has the lowest primary attendance at 92.9%. Sheffield is in second position out of the eight core city LEA’s with primary attendance for 2002/3 of 93.9%.

Core Cities

Graph 3.4

A comparison of the change in secondary school attendance between core cities (2001/02- 2002/03)

The LEA’s are arranged from the left in order (highest to lowest improvement). Nottingham has demonstrated the greatest improvement in secondary attendance, with an increase of 1.7%. Sheffield has made the third highest improvement, with an increase of 1.4%. Newcastle has made the least improvement in secondary attendance with an increase of 0.5%.

Graph 3.3

A comparison of secondary school attendance between core cities 2000-03

LEA’s are ordered from left by 2002/3 attendance (highest to lowest). Birmingham has the highest secondary attendance for 2002/3 at 91.3%. Manchester has the lowest secondary attendance at 89.0%. Sheffield is in third position out of the eight core city LEA’s with secondary attendance for 2002/3 of 90.5 %.

Graph 3.5

A comparison of special school attendance between core cities 2001-03

LEA’s are ordered from left by 2002/3 attendance (highest to lowest). Nottingham has the highest special school attendance for 2002/3 at 88.6%. Leeds and Sheffield have equal special school attendance of 87.4%. Birmingham, Bristol, Liverpool, Manchester and Newcastle did not submit special data.

Graph 3.6

A comparison of the change in special school attendance between core cities (2001/02- 2002/03)

The LEA’s are arranged from the left in order (highest to lowest improvement). Leeds has made the greatest improvement in special school attendance with an increase of 1.7%. Sheffield is the only LEA out of the three that submitted special data to have decreased in special school attendance.