Havering’s People Overview and Scrutiny Committee, 5th March, 2024 (part two)

This agenda included a Housing item and the School Performance analysis. The latter is the focus of this blog.

Matt Stanton (1 hour47)¹expressed concerns about how wide the variations in achievement between schools are. He asked the Director what was needed to rectify this problem. Trevor Cook replied ‘Context’ was needed to understand the issue. This is pivotal as it implies underachievement is inevitable. It chimed with remarks about fortunate authorities who suffered less from Covid-19 and had superior funding.

Praising Hall Mead and Redden Court damaged his argument. In 2019 both were below average.²They’re now average. This happened during five challenging years. Their performance has improved in the Covid-19 and Funding Crisis years.

The 2019 list of eleven below average schools has reduced to six in 2024.⁴ Emerson Park has dropped into the ‘below average’ group since 2019. A third of Havering’s secondary schools are below average (6 out of 12) and five schools left the 2019 list.

Matt’s concerns were echoed by Frankie Walker, Mandy Anderson and Judith Holt. Judith believed every Havering school should be above average. She refuted Trevor Cook’s response about Covid-19 and Funding. Her actual doubts related to whether his explanations were correlation or causation. All of Havering’s schools share the same challenges but nonetheless there are massive differences in outcomes.

Trevor Cook is soothing. However, members were in a combative mood looking for action. Some academies are successful but others are weak. A third of Havering’s schools are below average, which is far too many.

Notes

1 Agenda for People Overview & Scrutiny Sub Committee on Tuesday, 5th March, 2024, 7.00 pm | The London Borough Of Havering Go to webcast and then to one hour 47 for the beginning of his contribution

2 Havering and Redbridge: A Tale of Two Boroughs – Politics in Havering 29^th Nov 2019

3 All schools and colleges in Havering – Compare school and college performance data in England – GOV.UK (compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk) This gives the current status of every school in Havering.

4 Schools leaving the 2019 list are Abbs Cross, Hornchurch High, Royal Liberty, Redden Court and Hall Mead

Havering, Barking and Dagenham and The Attainment Gap, 2023

Providing great schooling is the single most important thing we can do to help any child from a disadvantaged background succeed. It’s also the single most important thing we can do to boost the long-term productivity of our economy George Osborne’s Budget speech in full (ft.com) 2016

Education is the, “single most important thing” (see above) for disadvantaged students and the national economy. George Osborne funded the Pupil Premium (PP), which, in 2023, had a £2.9bn budget as an investment.¹ Schools are allocated £1,035 per student from PP funds. They are expected to close the attainment gap because it is a negative in human and economic terms.

The ‘attainment gap’ is based on failing to achieve Grade 5 GCSE in English and Maths because of poverty. It is used by the government in their analysis of results.² There are shocking variations between boroughs in their achievement. Students in Redbridge are more than twice as likely to get the Gold Standard as those in Havering.³ (see graph below)

Barking and Dagenham is the fifth most deprived borough in England⁴whilst its neighbour Havering is prosperous. Many schools have a successful learning environment for disadvantaged students. Other schools, apparently, expect them to fail by not meeting their needs.

Havering’s 653 Year 11 disadvantaged students in 2023 achieved a ‘Gold Standard’⁵ pass rate of 27%. Barking and Dagenham’s 939 disadvantaged students achieved a 38% pass rate. Eleven percentage points is a chasm. If Havering’s schools matched Barking and Dagenham’s, the success rate would soar. Put simply, it equates to an additional 68 passes for Havering’s Year 11s in 2023.

All of Havering’s schools are academies who are accountable for these disastrous results. The academies are entirely responsible for educational outcomes.

Notes

1 SN06700.pdf (parliament.uk)

2 Compare the performance of schools and colleges in England – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk) This is an invaluable resource and is relatively straight-forward.

3 Havering’s GCSE Attainment Gap, 2023 – Politics in Havering See also Havering and Redbridge’s Disadvantaged Secondary Students – Politics in Havering ‘Gold Standard’ as it is a principal gateway qualification post-16

4 IoD2019_Statistical_Release.pdf (publishing.service.gov.uk) See especially map 2 on p12

Havering’s GCSE Attainment Gap, 2023

GCSE Grade 5 English and Maths is as crucial for disadvantaged students as for all other youngsters. Unfortunately, disadvantaged students do so badly in some schools, it’s as if they’re victims of a conspiracy.¹

The Gold Standard for GCSE is ‘Grade 5 English and Maths’. This is the benchmark used to define the attainment gap. It’s ‘Gold’ because it impacts on post-16 opportunities where success is a game changer. Regardless of the excellence of other GCSE results students must have Grade 5 English and Maths to progress to ‘A’ level for example.

St Edwards is the only Havering school with a level playing field for disadvantaged students.

The Human Cost

In 2023, 653 disadvantaged students sat GCSE. The national success result for all students is 45.3%.² This benchmark means 295 disadvantaged students should have achieved the Gold Standard in Havering. Their actual results are 175 Gold Standard passes (27%). 120 students were denied many post-16 opportunities because their school didn’t level-up the achievement gap by using government funds efficiently.

(If St Edwards is used as the benchmark, Havering’s attainment gap increases to 151 students.)

Government funding for disadvantaged students

Schools with disadvantaged students receive £1,035 per student Pupil Premium (PP) funding. ‘Disadvantaged’ means receiving ‘Free School Meals’ or being ‘Looked After’. The money is paid directly to schools as they’re trusted to use the funds wisely and ‘level-up’ achievement.³ The minimum the government paid Havering’s 18 schools for Year 11s, 2022-3, is £678,249. Most of that funding wasn’t used efficiently as can be seen from the table above.

The Attainment Gap: Marshalls Park and Emerson Park

Both schools achieved 45% ’Gold Standard’ results for students in general but utterly failed disadvantaged students with a ‘success’ rate of 16% and 17% respectively.

Emerson Park don’t publish exam results but state, “Emerson Park Academy is, once again, celebrating an outstanding set of GCSE results.” (my emphasis)
Marshalls Park don’t publish their results either. They say, “We believe that we provide an academic education, that is grounded in strong literacy and numeracy….” (my emphasis)³

The government’s PP funding stream for Year 11 disadvantaged students is £46,575 for Marshalls Park and £48,645 for Emerson Park. Neither the government or Year 11 disadvantaged students got ‘value-for-money’. It’s clear PP funding isn’t used to the best effect. Both schools have strategies which need an urgent revisit with external experts.

The Attainment Gap: OFSTED

The attainment gap is not discussed in OFSTED reports nor is the use of Pupil Premium funding.⁴

Notes

1 The-Forgotten-Third-Interim-Report-March-2019.pdf (ascl.org.uk) This research focuses on Grade 4 and is less than what is used for this discussion. Grade 4 is an entry level qualification and is discounted for ‘A’ level courses.

2 Key stage 4 performance, Academic year 2022/23 – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK (explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk)

3 Emerson Park Academy – A message from Mr McGuinness regarding GCSE Results This relates to 2022 there is nothing for 2023 even though the data was accessed February 2024. See also Marshalls (marshallspark.org.uk)

4 Marshalls Park 50148108 (ofsted.gov.uk) See also Emerson Park 50193985 (ofsted.gov.uk)

Havering’s Secondary Academies and their Disadvantaged Students

Research:

The key metric is the Gold Standard of GCSE Grade 5+ English and Mathematics. For England, non-disadvantaged students’ outcome is 50%. Havering out-performs England by a significant 5 percentage points.

The 2019 statistics are from the government website¹ (see Addendum). The benchmark is 50%.

PP = Pupil Premium this is additional funding for closing the attainment gap of disadvantaged students. A higher figure indicates a greater number of disadvantaged students in the school as it’s a per capita payment. Total PP funding for Havering’s secondary academies is £3,578,103

Coopers Coburn

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 57% PP £87,450

Sacred Heart of Mary

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 55% PP £137,889

Francis Bardsley

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 44% PP £216,440

St Edwards

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 37% PP £188,182

They tacitly blame their students by saying that “33% [of] St Edward’s students live in Barking and Dagenham (ranked fifth most deprived local authority in England).

See Pupil-Premium-Report-2020-2021-md.pdf (steds.org.uk)

Royal Liberty

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 36% PP £143,250

Harris Academy Rainham

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 35% PP £230,000 (approximately)

They arrogantly don’t give an accurate figure for their PP funding.

Abbs Cross

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 34% PP £153,340

Emerson Park

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 31% PP £218,005

Bower Park

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 29% PP £275,995

Brittons

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 29% PP £265,985

Gaynes²

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 29% PP £69,100

Hall Mead

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 28% PP £166,309

Drapers

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 23% PP £384,640

Campion

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 21% PP £67,675

Redden Court³

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 21%¹ PP £157,685

“A significant proportion of students at Redden Court School (c.25%) are disadvantaged. We never use this as an excuse; rather, it adds to our moral purpose. Our school motto is: ‘Committed to Success for All’; this is something we strongly believe in – we are, therefore, committed to the success of all our disadvantaged students.”

Pupil Premium Strategy 2020/21 – Google Docs

Marshalls Park

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 18% PP £232,245

Hornchurch High²

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 17% PP £367,218

Sanders Drapers

English and Mathematics Grade 5+ Disadvantaged 7% PP £216,785

Discussion

As both the 2020 and 2021 GCSE examinations are unnoticed on government, and usually, school websites, drawing conclusions is tricky. For example there’s a new management team at Sanders Draper Academy and schools aren’t static places. Nonetheless some broad brush statements can be made.

Correlation is poor between PP funding and outcomes. St Edwards is 10^th in Havering’s PP funding rankings but 4^th in outcomes for disadvantaged students. Meanwhile Marshalls Park is 5^th in PP funding and 15^th in outcomes.

Three average schools in Havering at co-equal 9^th

Bower Park’s 2018 OFSTED inspection rated the school as ‘Good’ in Bower Park’s case a third of disadvantaged students (49/147) are discounted as their outcomes are less than good.

Brittons 2019 examination results show that 30% of their cohort achieved the Gold Standard, which is virtually identical to those of disadvantaged students. So they are below the borough average for non-disadvantaged students but average for disadvantaged students.

Gaynes has a solid performance of 60% in English and Mathematics for the school⁵but that isn’t translated to disadvantaged students. Their statistics are affected by the small numbers in the cohort where a single student can be disproportionate.

Addendum: Covid-19 and GCSE results

Both the 2020 and 2021 GCSE examinations were teacher assessed. It’s immediately apparent that those results aren’t used in a customary way. The government website doesn’t use them and most schools publish a summary. Why? Are these GCSE results problematic? Are they fatally flawed and a pale imitation of the real thing? This places a constraint on understanding current, 2021, outcomes for disadvantaged students.

Notes

1 GOV.UK – Find and compare schools in England (compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk)

2 These blogs were written some time ago and it was at that point I decided to review every secondary school in Havering. Gaynes School Gaynes School, the Pupil Premium and Accountability – Politics in Havering and Hornchurch High School Hornchurch High School, the Pupil Premium and Accountability – Politics in Havering

3 Ofsted: Redden Court School could be ‘outstanding’ | Romford Recorder

4 2771545 (ofsted.gov.uk) Bower Park is at Havering’s average along with Brittons and Gaynes at joint 9^th out of 18.

5 All schools and colleges in Havering – GOV.UK – Find and compare schools in England (compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk) See also Achievement and Performance – Gaynes School