28th July 2017
Department for Education
19 local authorities invite applications to run new special free schools. It will mean 19 new schools, providing high quality provision for children with special educational needs and disabilities. Organisations ranging from successful Multi-Academy Trusts to specialist charitable organisations can now apply to the 19 local authorities, setting out how they will be able to meet the specification for each project. Criteria have been developed by the local authorities, in conjunction with the Department for Education, to ensure they meet the needs of each local community and provide much-needed places for special educational needs and disability (SEND) pupils.
Guidance and application forms on how to set up a new special free school, and the criteria new school proposers must demonstrate.
Updates added to the 2017 document to clarify submission dates for requests to change pupil data, which would show in the January amended SFR publication; and the methodology and threshold for the coasting schools definition.
DfE issued the notice in August 2015 following Ofsted’s judgement that children’s services provided by West Berkshire council were inadequate. The notice required West Berkshire council to address all the areas for improvement identified.
A spreadsheet listing all academy trusts in receipt of pre-warning notice or warning notice letters about poor or inadequate performance.
Department for Education- Further Education
An update to the 2017 document to clarify submission dates for requests to change pupil data, which would show in the January amended SFR publication; and the methodology and threshold for the coasting schools definition.
Added benefits realisation update document.
These are not formal qualification achievement rates and should not be used as such. The implementation of the improved methodology for the 2015 to 2016 qualification achievement rates led to a significant impact on the estimates compared to previous years. The Department for Education have assessed what additional information it can publish to allow for some comparability at provider level for earlier years based on 2015 to 2016 methodology.
This review of funding and expenditure arrangements for post -16 vocational programmes looks at data and evidence for countries with similar vocational education systems to the new system proposed in England. Countries include: Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Norway.
Findings show that data is not systematically collected on a comparable basis. Therefore it is necessary to exercise caution when making direct comparisons between levels of expenditure in different countries.
However, countries included in this review are investing substantial resources into post-16 VET. It is widely recognised across these countries that additional funding will be needed for the coming years to increase the quality of upper vocational education in order to: attract high performing students; improve recruitment and retention; streamline and improve the transparency of vocational pathways; and ensure that upper secondary VET is continuously adapted to meet evolving skills needs and changes in the labour market.
Upper secondary vocational education is high on the policy agendas of the countries and major reforms are currently underway, especially in Denmark, Norway and the Netherlands. These include: raising the standards of entry to VET programmes; using preparation and transition programmes to prepare students for the challenges they will face on vocational programmes; opening government-funded training centres to provide work placements; ensuring that employers and other social partners are extensively involved in the VET systems; and professionalising and up skilling VET teachers.
The researcher concludes that It will be instructive to monitor these initiatives in order to ascertain what works well or not so well and to identify lessons that can be learned from them.
This statistical first release (SFR) provides analyses on the characteristics of pupils by their: level of special educational needs (SEN) and type of SEN. It is based on pupil-level data collected through the school census, general hospital school census and school-level annual school census (SLASC).
Findings show that:
The number of pupils with special educational needs (SEN) has increased from 1,228,785 in January 2016 to 1,244,255 in January 2017. While this is the first annual increase since 2010, the percentage of pupils with special educational needs remains stable at 14.4%.
242,185 pupils have a statement of SEN or an Education, Health and Care (EHC) plan. This is an increase of 5,380 since January 2016, but remains equal to 2.8% of the total pupil population. A further 1,002,070 pupils are on SEN support. This is equal to 11.6% of the total pupil population and remains unchanged since January 2016.
Primary need for those on SEN Support: 25.2% of pupils on SEN support have Moderate Learning Difficulty as a primary type of need in January 2017.
Primary Need for those with a Statement /EHC Plan: 26.9% of pupils with a statement or EHC plan have Autistic Spectrum Disorder as a primary type of need in January 2017.
6% of pupils with special educational needs are eligible for free school meals compared to 11.8% of pupils without special educational needs.
Pupils with statements or EHC plans are more likely to be eligible for free school meals than pupils on SEN support (31.4% compared to 25.4%).
Findings show an increase in the number of trainee teachers for 2015-2016. Even allowing for the inclusion of Teach First trainees (first year included), there was still an increase. In addition 91% of post graduate trainees were awarded QTS.
See also: The ups and downs of teacher recruitment, blog by Maire Williams, 27th July 2017: NfER - Maire Williams suggests that recruitment and retention of teachers is likely to continue as starting salaries and pay progression remain lower for teaching than other graduate professions.
See also: More than 600,000 pupils in England taught by unqualified teachers, says Labour, 25th July 2017: The Guardian
Changes in expenditure for the year showed that expenditure on teaching staff fell by 3.2 ppts since 2011/12 when the data were first collected. However, it rose by 1.2 ppts between 2014/15 and 2015/16, and remains the largest expenditure at 50.1% of all expenditure by academies. The longer term fall has been offset by increases in the proportion of expenditure on back office functions, education support staff and supply staff, although much of this change occurred between 2011/12 and 2012/13, where back office expenditure rose from 9.5% to 12.6% of all expenditure.
The article highlights the lower amount of funding received by secondary academies in 2015-2016. The median income per secondary pupil in academies for 2015-16 was £5,714, down from £6,340 in 2011-12, not taking into account inflation.
The Fostering Network announced the launch of the new Fostering Wellbeing programme in partnership with Cwm Taf Social Services and Wellbeing Partnership Board. The aim is to recognise foster carers as a key part of the education team as well as improving engagement, knowledge and confidence among carers, social workers and health and education professionals. The programme will encourage aspiration and ambition among fostered young people as well as shared values among all those involved with looked after children.
Pioneer Professional Learning Schools will assist in the development of training for the implementation of the new curriculum and will join up with Curriculum Pioneers to develop the AoLEs in the Autumn. Their focus will be to pilot aspects of the new curriculum as they are created by the AoLEs. Further details will be made available in the Autumn term. Their current work has centred around developing aspects of the twelve pedagogies of Successful Futures, working on pilot projects and assisting with the delivery of the ERW professional learning programme. Pioneer Professional Schools will continue to disseminate information to partner schools to involve them more fully in Successful Futures
Impacts of the Retired Mentors for New Teachers program, Dale DeCesare Abby McClelland: Institute of Education Sciences in the US
A randomized controlled trial of a two-year intervention using retired mentors to support teachers who were in their first three years, conducted in collaboration with Aurora Public Schools in Colorado and using 2013/14 and 2014/15 data, showed some causal findings:
At the end of the first year math achievement was significantly higher among students taught by teachers in the program group than among students taught by teachers in the business-as-usual group.
Although the differences were not statistically significant, reading achievement was higher among students taught by teachers in the program group than among students taught by teachers in the business-as-usual group.
The program’s effect on teacher evaluation ratings and teacher retention was not significant after two years, although more teachers in the programme group left after two years than in the control group.
Informing Progress: Insights on Personalised learning (PL) implementation and effects by Pane et al.: RAND Corporation
A study by RAND Corporation aimed to describe the practices and strategies used by a sample of schools to implement PL, understand some of the challenges and facilitators, and consider these alongside achievement findings to discern patterns that may be informative.
Findings showed that:
Teachers and students reported higher levels of many aspects of personalization than their counterparts in a national sample. These included time for one-on-one tailored support for learning; using up-to-date information on student progress to personalize instruction and group students; students tracking their own progress; competency-based practices; and flexible use of staff, space, and time. However, some more-difficult-to-implement aspects did not appear to differ from practices in schools nationally, such as student discussions with teachers on progress and goals; keeping up-to-date documentation of student strengths, weaknesses, and goals; and student choice of topics and materials.