Raising Education Achievement and Breaking the Cycle of Inequality

This OECD report examined the two big strategic objectives which the government has for education policy (as outlined in the Public Sector Agreements). This report compares recent policy against international standards.

Key points:
- Whereas the UK often ranks very highly on certain measures of economic policy and outcomes, this is certainly not the case when it comes to educational standards.
- The test-dominated education system in the United Kingdom has pioneered the use of school benchmarking techniques and the use of targets to raise school quality. However, targets may have biased some national measures of education performance, and there is relatively little evidence of improvement in performance when evaluated using international tests of cognitive ability, such as PISA and PIRLS.
- Socio-economic background plays an important role in explaining education performance, and the government has tried to address this through the use of funding formulas which direct additional resources to areas with a higher proportion of pupils from deprived backgrounds. There has been some improvement in the most disadvantaged schools but pupils in the middle and lower half of the distribution continue to perform particularly poorly relative to students in countries with the best performing education systems.
- One explanation may be that local authorities and schools are not distributing deprivation funds as intended by the central government, resulting in outcomes which can be seen as inequitable. Stronger measures may be required to correct this imbalance.

The paper makes the following recommendations:
• Increase regular participation in quality early childhood education, and continue to target childcare services provided by Sure Start Children’s Centres to disadvantaged families. Sustained intervention once disadvantaged children have entered primary school will also be required, to ensure that the benefits of pre-school interventions are sustained.
• Continue to promote a focus on the acquisition of core literacy and numeracy skills for pupils at primary and secondary school.
• Ensure that the focus on core skills is not compromised by the goal of expanding the average number of years of schooling. Emphasise the role of core literacy and numeracy skills within the new Diplomas. Consider introducing a higher age for compulsory participation only for those students who have not already achieved a certain minimum standard of core skills by age 16.
• Evaluate returns to the new diplomas closely. When A-levels are reviewed vis-à-vis the new Diplomas in 2013, give serious consideration to moving towards a more unified framework of qualifications as originally recommended by the Tomlinson report.
• Ensure continued participation in international tests of cognitive ability, such as PISA and PIAAC.
• Reduce the focus on testing and targets and put more focus on supporting weak students and schools.
• Design all remaining targets in a way that limits the potential for gaming, by ensuring an interactive performance management system that captures the complexity of the education process. Ensure that remaining key performance measures are not based on targeted outputs.
• Encourage a public debate about whether the goal of the education system should be to make all schools high performers, and what societal values that would reflect.
• Consider ways of encouraging the highest quality teachers to move to the most disadvantaged schools – such as by giving bonuses for high quality teaching performance at such schools.
• Promote a national benchmark formula for local authorities to use in allocating funding between schools, while still permitting flexibility (i.e. deviation from the benchmark formula) to meet local needs.
• Promote the transition to a more efficient allocation of funds by providing standard procedures for taking deprivation-targeted funding out of the formula used to determine the Minimum Funding Guarantee.
• Evaluate the pros and cons of introducing a differentiated voucher system of funding (as in Chile) where pupils from poorer families receive vouchers that are valued more highly than those for the general population.
• Encourage more research into determining which resource mixes within schools are most successful at narrowing socio-economic gaps.

Volunatary and community services sector role in supporting parents and families

This report by the Tavistock Institute on behalf of the DCSF examined the role the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) plays in supporting parents, carers and families under the Every Child Matters agenda.

Key points:
- The number of support services for parents and families (provided by all sectors) usually matched the population size of a local authority. The proportion provided by the VCS was subject to considerable variation, ranging from less than a third in some areas to nearly two-thirds in others, and did not typically bear a close relationship to population size.
- Half of all the services in the mapping were in the broad category of ‘social interventions’ (for example, generic and targeted parenting support, family relationships, early years services and support for families in which there had been sexual or domestic abuse or the death of a child). Health-related services accounted for a further 29%, education 17% and housing 1.5%. The largest proportions of service types, provided by all sectors, were targeted parenting support (social) and services for families in which there was a disabled or ill child (health).
- Rural areas tended to have very few services with a large number of users.
- In terms of approach (preventative or crisis driven), access (open or targeted) and the nature of support offered (therapeutic, educational, social or practical), there was a marked tendency for VCS services to be multi-faceted. For example, while the focus of a service might be on a targeted intervention for families in crisis who benefited from therapeutic support, this did not exclude the provision of other approaches or types of access and support.
- The vast majority of VCS managers struggled to maintain the service with their current funding, which varied from £10,000 a year or less in 25% of cases to £500,000 a year or more in 6% of cases.
- The majority of service managers sought to expand future provision, by diversifying their work or by increasing their number of users and/or staff. However, a major obstacle to continued, consistent or increased provision was a lack of funding, and especially secure and long-term funding.
- The mapping exercise pointed to relatively little provision directed at fathers, either specifically or as part of wider family provision. Other groups for whom there was a low level of service provision were Gypsy and traveller families and Black and minority ethnic (BME) groups, though areas which had been selected for their ethnic diversity did provide some specific provision for the latter group.
- The majority of voluntary sector service providers in the interview sample found the ECM framework useful in their work, by encouraging them to think more about outcomes for children, by making work with parents and children more focused and structured, by providing a common language and shared agenda when working with other services, or by providing a uniform structure for use in funding bids.
- Their practical implementation of the framework tended to be focused on ‘being healthy’, ‘staying safe’ and ‘enjoying and achieving’. Very few VCS services in the sample addressed ‘achieving economic well-being’.

Childcare and early year's providers survey

This survey by the DCSF gives data on the make up of this provision and it's workforce.

The report has many data, here are some points:
- All types of childcare provision have increased in quantity since 2001 (with the exception of sessional child care provision).
- The number of after school clubs continues to rise, although at a lower rate than previously, whilst the number of holiday clubs is in decline.
- Full day care and out of school providers appeared to be distributed reasonably proportionately across all areas (30% of these providers were located in the 30% most deprived areas). In contrast, childminders (18%) and sessional providers (17%) appeared less likely to be located in the 30% most deprived areas.
- The majority of full day care provision was privately run (66%), with just one in five settings run by a voluntary organisation. The opposite pattern was true for sessional care.
- With the exception of sessional providers, there has been a real increase in the number of paid and unpaid staff working in childcare settings since 2003.
- For most childcare providers, the proportion of staff having attained at least a level 3 qualification increased sharply between 2003 and 2006 while continuing to increase at a slower rate in 2007. While in early years provision in maintained schools, the proportion of staff with at least a level three qualification has increased steadily since 2003.

Equity within education

This is the third report on the state of equity in the English education system from the Centre for Equity in Education based at The University of Manchester. It argues that efforts to create a more equitable education system are now at a strategic crossroad – trapped between a target-driven ‘effectiveness and improvement’model of service reform, and efforts to develop localised and coordinated responses to inequity.

Key findings:
- The report argues that if equity is to be enhanced, the space must be created for policies to be joined up locally and oriented to meeting community needs.
- Despite repeated policy interventions, the most disadvantaged children and young people continue to be at greatest risk of impoverished educational experiences, low achievements and limited life chances.
- Policy has focused on ‘improving’ schools and other education settings and making them more ‘effective’, yet the source of inequities lies largely beyond the school, in social disadvantage. Efforts at educational improvement have to be linked into a coherent strategy to address wider social and economic issues.
- There is currently more potential than ever before to achieve greater equity within the English education system. In particular, we find that multiple co-ordinating mechanisms exist in the form of Local Strategic Partnerships, neighbourhood management initiatives, integrated children’s service networks, extended services clusters and the like. In practice, however, these deliver little by way of co-ordinated strategies that might address educational inequity.
- Often, these co-ordinating mechanisms have little effective involvement from schools and wider community stakeholders. Even where they do, their ability to generate strategy is hamstrung by the perverse consequences of the government’s target-setting regime. Participants are accountable for separate sets of targets, and have to achieve these within short timescales.
- Despite this, there are examples of more genuine collaboration. These are characterised by a contextual analysis leading to a local strategy. Participants probe beneath the surface of headline performance indicators to understand how local dynamics shape particular outcomes.
- If these approaches are to flourish, action is needed at three levels:
• Head teachers and other education leaders need to:
− be proactive in joining and forming partnerships with other key actors in the areas they serve
− work with their partners to understand ‘how things work round here’ and to formulate a long-term area strategy to tackle inequities
− harmonise work within their schools and settings with this wider strategy.
• Local authorities and other local leaders need to:
− promote the development of partnerships at area level
− offer support to partnerships for contextual analysis and strategy formulation
− develop their own contextual analyses and strategies as a framework within which area partnerships can operate
− bring a democratic voice to bear on the work of area partnerships.
• Central government needs to:
− continue to create spaces in which local partnerships can flourish
− encourage these partnerships to undertake contextual analyses and formulate long-term strategies
− counter the perverse consequences of the target-setting regime by locating accountability at the level of the partnership, entering into dialogue about local goals, and extending the timescale over which achievements are measured and the range of evidence this involves
− develop its own contextual analyses and strategies as a framework within which local authorities and area partnerships can operate.

Family Intervention Projects Evaluation

This evaluation by the DCSF and the Department for Communities and Local Government examines the national network of Family Intervention Projects (FIPs) which were set up as part of the Respect Action Plan, launched in January 2006. These projects aimed to reduce anti-social behaviour (ASB) perpetrated by the most anti-social and challenging families, prevent cycles of homelessness due to ASB and achieve the five Every Child Matters outcomes for children and young people. FIPs use an ‘assertive’ and ‘persistent’ style of working to challenge and support families to address the root causes of their ASB.

Key findings:
- 53 FIPs were set up during 2006 and 2007. Of these 34 were effectively set up from scratch and the remaining 19 projects existed prior to 2006 and were not making fundamental changes when they became a FIP. Typically FIPs were working with families in their own homes for between six to 12 months. Most projects were either being run by a team within the Local Authority (LA) or a voluntary sector provider.
- 885 families were referred to a FIP between February and October 2007, of these 78% met the referral criteria and agreed to work with a FIP. FIPs appeared to be working with their intended beneficiaries as families had high levels of ASB and criminal activities and were homeless or at risk of becoming homeless because of their ASB. These families were also well known in the area for causing ASB.
- The early outcomes reported by FIP staff for 90 families who completed the FIP intervention displayed considerable improvements in all key areas of the FIPs’ work. ASB and criminal activities had declined considerably at the point families exited from a FIP, as had the risk of families engaging in ASB. The risk of families being evicted had also considerably reduced. The outcomes for children and young people were also reported to have improved.
- Eight features of the FIP model appeared to be critical to its success: recruitment and retention of high quality staff, small caseloads, having a dedicated key worker who manages a family and works intensively with them, a whole-family approach, staying involved with a family for as long as necessary, scope to use resources creatively, using sanctions with support, and effective multi-agency relationships.

Parenting Early Intervention Pathfinder Evalaution

This report builds on earlier papers by the DCSF and presents the evidence of the evaluation of the Parenting Early Intervention Pathfinder (PEIP). The PEIP was a DCSF funded programme over the period September 2006 – March 2008 at a cost of £7.6 million in DCSF grant payments to LAs. PEIP funded 18 local authorities (LAs) to implement one of three selected parenting programmes with parents of children aged 8 – 13 years: Incredible Years, Triple P and Strengthening Families, Strengthening Communities, selected as having a sound evidence base for their effectiveness. The main aim of the study was to explore the roll out of these three programmes on a large scale across a substantial number of LAs: to examine parent and child outcomes, cost-effectiveness and the processes that optimise (or impair) the delivery of parenting programmes.

Key findings:
- The Parenting Early Intervention Pathfinder has been successful in rolling out three evidence-based parenting programmes across 18 LAs with high levels of positive gains for parents and their children.
- The PEIP increased the pool of trained facilitators: approximately 1100 additional trained staff.
- PEIP provided parenting training for 3575 parents on 425 courses of which 338 courses finished by the end of the PEIP and 87 were continuing.
- Parental course completion rate was good and similar across programmes: 73% of parents overall.
- The training was very successful as measured by improvements in the parents’ mental well-being, their parenting skills, their sense of being a parent, and also in the behaviour of the child about whom they were concerned.
- The three programmes produced comparable outcomes on all measures of improvement.
- Cost effectiveness varied greatly between LAs using the same programme indicating the importance of local policy and organisational factors.
- Cost effectiveness also varied between the three programmes: the average cost per parent completing was £2955, with Incredible Years courses being the most costly.

Training and Development Needs of Leaders of Children's Services

This report follows a study involving six in-depth local area case studies including interviews with the Director of Children’s Services, assistant directors of children’s services, members of the Children’s Trust, the Chief Executive of the local authority (LA) and the Lead Member for Children’s Services (LMCS). A further sixteen interviews were carried out with DCSs over the telephone.

Key findings:
- The study highlighted the importance of strong leadership underpinned by a number of personal qualities and values necessary for effective delivery of the DCS role. The qualities identified were generally similar to those that might be expected for other local authority leadership roles. However, one in particular was considered critical for the DCS role - the passion for the children’s rights and entitlements agenda.
- Stakeholders described a range of professional characteristics (or behaviours) which they
considered to be important. These included:
• displaying a personal and professional demeanour which commands the confidence of
others;
• the ability to anticipate, manage and take risks;
• working collaboratively and recognising and respecting the skills of others;
• a commitment to developing others;
• ability to remain robust under pressure, and inspire others to do the same.
- Other issues which were considered to influence effective delivery of the role were raised by the DCSs consulted. These were:
• the corporate and political demands of the role;
• the mismatch between the statutory responsibilities and decision making powers;
• the expectations associated with the size and breadth of the role;
• the emphasis of responsibilities across all ECM outcomes.
- Given that many DCSs currently come from a specific professional background, gaining
experience of the sectors they were less familiar with was initially important;
- The integration agenda means that DCSs’ attention is predominantly focused on issues
such as: developing robust lines of accountability; outcome based management.
pooling budgets; joint appointments; and commissioning services. These represented
new challenges and have therefore required strong leadership skills.
- Some consultees identified that, for them, leading the partnership required an additional
set of skills and a change in style.

White boys from low income families: good practice in schools

This report by Ofsted is based on a small survey of good practice in the education of white boys from low-income backgrounds. It is based on a study of six primaries, 10 secondaries, 3 special schools and 1 pupil referral unit.

Key points:
- Examples of good practice are grouped under the following questions that inspectors asked schools during the survey.
~ What teaching and learning strategies work best to raise standards?
~ How do schools promote the personal development and well-being of white boys from low-income backgrounds?
~ What do schools need to do to understand and meet the needs of white boys from low-income backgrounds?
~ How do schools support white boys from low-income backgrounds to become independent learners?
~ How should schools make use of increased flexibility in the curriculum to support white boys from low-income families?
~ How should schools seek to engage parents and carers?
~ How should institutions make the best use of resources?
~ What are the roles of others beyond the school in helping to personalise teaching and learning?

- Schools that are successful in raising the attainment of white boys from low income have these features:
~ an ethos which demonstrates commitment to every individual and which
treats staff and pupils with fairness, trust and respect
~ consistent support to develop boys’ organisation skills and instill the importance of perseverance; any anti-school subculture ‘left at the gates’
~ rigorous monitoring systems which track individual pupils’ performance against expectations; realistic but challenging targets; tailored, flexible intervention programmes and frequent reviews of performance against targets
~ a highly structured step-by-step framework for teaching, starting with considerable guidance by the teacher and leading gradually to more independent work by the pupils when it is clear that this will enhance rather than detract from achievement
~ a curriculum which is tightly structured around individual needs and linked to support programmes that seek to raise aspirations
~ creative and flexible strategies to engage parents and carers, make them feel valued, enable them to give greater support to their sons’ education and help them make informed decisions about the future
~ a strong emphasis on seeking and listening to the views of these pupils
~ genuine engagement of boys in setting individual targets, reviewing progress, shaping curricular and extra-curricular activities and making choices about the future
~ key adults, including support staff and learning mentors, who are flexible and committed, know the boys well and are sensitive to any difficulties which might arise in their home
~ a good range of emotional support for boys to enable them to manage anxieties and develop the skills to express their feelings constructively
~ strong partnership with a wide range of agencies to provide social, emotional, educational and practical support for boys and their families in order to raise their aspirations.

Teaching and learning in FE

This think piece by the Learning and Skills Network explores changes to the Further Education sector by considering what the impact would be if the focus was on Teaching and Learning.

Key points:
- A focus on teaching and learning would ensure increased professionalism of tutors and the agency of learners, alongside improved relationship between tutors and learners, which is the cornerstone of success. This means improving the cultures of learning in every centre of post-16 learning, in the
post-16 sector and in the educational system as a whole.
- A definition and theory of learning is needed.

The paper is intended to be used with activities for professionals to complete whilst reading.

Reaching the hardest in Children's Centres

A report by Capacity was carried out to look at the effectiveness of children’s centres in reaching the most highly disadvantaged families, the ways in which they meet the needs of those families and the outcomes achieved.

Ket findings:
- The study revolved around four “exemplar” children’s centre case studies, examining their work within the context of current government policies, best practice and a wide range of research perspectives.
- The centres within the study were found to be highly effective in delivering multi-agency services to and for children and families. Each has been successful in reaching a number of families who would be considered “difficult to include”, giving thought to and overcoming the practical and other barriers which might prevent those families using the various services on offer.
- It is possible that more resources than are currently allocated for the children’s centre programme are needed to ensure that it can meet its objectives. In acknowledgement of this, the DCSF has recently announced a cash injection of more than £4billion to children’s
centres which will include additional funds for outreach workers.
- The reach strategies adopted by successful centres have been implemented in a particularly thorough way. Some of the community consultations, for example, have been extensive and highly structured, utilising focus groups, outreach and public information campaigns, as opposed to more limited consultations and surveys.
- If children’s centres are to achieve their objectives, they need to capture detailed information about their users, both at the point of first contact and at subsequent intervals.
- In all four centres, the expertise and depth of experience of those leading the work was very considerable and this was a critical factor in their extensive achievements.

Safeguarding children report 2008

This report by Ofsted (on behalf of 8 inspectorates) examines arrangements for safeguarding children, is the 3rd such report and assesses arrangements for safeguarding children and young people in four key areas:

1. the effectiveness of the overall safeguarding systems and frameworks that are in place
2. the wider safeguarding role of public services
3. the targeted activity carried out to safeguard vulnerable groups of children. This includes updated evidence on the groups considered in the previous report, including asylum-seeking children, children in secure settings, looked after children and children treated by health services
4. the identification of and response to child protection concerns by relevant agencies.

Some key points:
- Local Safeguarding Children Boards have grown in independence but are still not fully developed.
- Strategic Partnerships are developed in all areas, but still need to improve joint commissioning and the management of high risk offenders.
- CRB checking is standardised, but good practice is not always followed.
- Inspections found evidence of a strong commitment by agencies to focus on the wider safeguarding needs of children and young people in addition to child protection.
- A shared, consistent understanding of safeguarding is still lacking, particularly between social care services and the criminal justice system.
- Some children and young people continue to express significant levels of concern about their personal safety and about being bullied, particularly in institutional and secure settings.
- There is better identification of needs at an early stage and increasingly effective provision of preventive and earlier intervention services.
- Many areas have identified domestic violence as a high priority area for action.
- Most areas are making good progress in developing the Common Assessment Framework.

The report goes onto make a series of recommendations, relevant at national and local level.

Next Practice in Education Programme

The DCSF innovation unit have produced this report which examined their Next Practice in Education Programme.

"Next Practice is ‘practice that is aware of conventional 'good' practice, its strengths and its limitations; and which explicitly sets out to move it to a new level, or even in some cases radically to change it.’

Next Practice significantly changes methods of service delivery, organisation or structure. It is so far in advance of good practice that little hard evidence of its effectiveness currently exists. That does not mean that it lacks rigour. Next Practice is consciously designed with an awareness of the strengths and limitations of conventional ‘best’ practice and draws on ideas generated by informed practitioners who are aware of the existing knowledge base. It is informed by critical scanning of the wider environment. Usually, Next Practice is not (yet) officially sanctioned so it may entail some political risk. It tackles important, contemporary long term educational problems and, above all, is focused on outcomes for children and learners."

The Next Practice in Education Programme has 4 projects.

Key points:
- The Next Practice Innovation Model has three clear phases: Stimulate, Incubate and Accelerate, relevant to all projects.

- The Next Practice System Leadership work has generated six main conclusions:
1. Energy and commitment – School leaders are eager to invest time, energy and commitment in working as system leaders.
2. The challenge of moving from vision to practical delivery.
3. The lack of models of leadership and governance.
4. Local Authority support - without active support from the local authority, new forms of system leadership struggle to survive.
5. Changing leadership requirements - new forms of system leadership for schools and their partners have needed at least one strong leader with the vision and tenacity to drive them forward in order to get off the ground. But
6. The critical role of governance - it is usually these emerging forms of system leadership that precede the development and adoption of new governance structures for the new system.

- The main emerging conclusions from the Community Engagement in Learning project, which also bear directly on ‘achieving an excellent education for every child’, are threefold:
1. Within communities there is a great deal of motivation to contribute to student and community learning, in ways that complement and add to the school curriculum.
2. The learning that results from engagement with the community tends to be practical, relevant and a rich model for learning for life, with learners taking greater ownership of their learning and becoming more confident.
3. This learning has substantial implications for the roles and responsibilities of teachers and support staff, and thus for their recruitment, training and development (plus for support staff their terms and conditions of employment).

- The Next Practice work in parent and carer engagement in learning generated four key findings:
1. Evaluation and measurement is vital to making the case for parental support.
2. Supporting parental engagement is best achieved by projects that involve parents in their design, delivery and evaluation - the most successful projects are parent-led projects such as parents led mentoring programmes, or peer parenting classes.
3. Parental engagement in children’s learning grows outwards from the school and requires a ‘whole school approach’ – the school might become a hub where professionals lead projects to develop family learning, or it might be a site where regeneration programmes and charities run projects which then support family learning.
4. Existing policy already promotes the greater inclusion of parents, for example parents can be involved in supporting children when they take part in progression pilots at KS2.

- The Resourcing Personalised Learning programme has identified the essential characteristics of schools that personalise a student’s education:
1. Provision is designed to suit learners – the school diagnoses pupil learning characteristics and supports or intervenes appropriately because it believes all pupils can be successful learners. It makes flexible use of time, place, pace and space because pupils learn in a variety of ways and at different rates. Assessment is personalised.
2. The school fosters a sense of belonging - pupils actively participate and take increasing responsibility for their learning and school experience. They organise themselves in such a way that pupils have a sense of belonging and can learn both individually and collaboratively.
3. The school draws on a broad range of skills – it has an ethos of support, congeniality and co-operation embracing all who work in the school, parents and carers and the local community. It makes innovative use of staff and pupils by creating new roles and responsibilities.
4. Teaching and learning is grounded in the real world – the School has a flexible curriculum which helps pupils connect their education to their future.

Children's Centres - reaching the hardest

This study was carried out to look at the effectiveness of children’s centres in reaching the most highly disadvantaged families, the ways in which they meet the needs of those families and the outcomes achieved. The study revolved around four “exemplar” children’s centre case studies, examining their work within the context of current government policies, best practice and a wide range of research perspectives.

Key points:
- There might be a case for additional resources if children's centres are to achieve their objectives, this is more likely as children's centres attract middle class parents who can afford to pay for services.
- The reach strategies adopted by successful centres have been implemented in a particularly
thorough way. Some of the community consultations, for example, have been extensive and highly structured, utilising focus groups, outreach and public information campaigns, as opposed to more limited consultations and surveys.
- Achieving high visibility for the work and value of children's centres, particularly among those who are most remote from services, requires motivation, painstaking research, rigorous planning, effective communication and a range of professional skills and expertise. Children’s centres which have not yet formulated their strategies may not have ready access to this range of skills and expertise.
- If children’s centres are to achieve their objectives, they need to capture detailed information about their users, both at the point of first contact and at subsequent intervals. Only by this can they demonstrate both that they are engaging the most “difficult to include” and offering them services of value.
- Best practice involved highly differentiated and personalised planning for individual parents, built around their specific circumstances and needs, whether in relation to support for particular family difficulties, or involvement in centre activities, learning or volunteering opportunities. The concept of progression was very evident, each parent moving through a continuum of involvement at the pace which was most appropriate.
- In all four centres, the expertise and depth of experience of those leading the work was very
considerable and this was a critical factor in their extensive achievements. It would be difficult for any qualification to provide benefits comparable to this level of experience.
- On the evidence of the studies, a critical requirement for reaching the most disadvantaged families is an understanding of poverty and disadvantage. Training to provide skills and knowledge in this area should be part of the updated strategy for the children’s workforce.

"On Track" evaluation - reducing youth crime and anti-social behaviour

This is the final report from the second phase (March 2003-April 2006) of the national evaluation of On Track, a multi-component initiative which operated in 24 areas of high crime and high deprivation in England and Wales (including Bradford, Scarborough and Sheffield in Yorkshire & Humber region). The aim of the programme was to reduce the propensity of youth crime and anti-social behaviour for children aged 4-12 and their families. The evaluation included monitoring and tracking of 1,100 On Track services and 17,000 service users, longitudinal surveys of primary and secondary school staff and pupils in On Track areas, as well as a longitudinal cohort study which compared On Track area residents with similar families in non-On Track areas.

Key points:
- On Track was primarily a multi-agency, cross-sector programme with partners drawn from education, social services, youth offending services, health and local councils.
- Overall, home-school partnerships accounted for the greatest proportion of On Track services (33%), and by the second phase of the evaluation in some areas On Track was almost entirely school-based.
- Referrals to On Track projects came from a variety of routes, and overall education agencies were the largest single source of referrals comprising 35% of all referrals.
- Three quarters of all service users were children (53% girls), and almost a quarter were parents (mostly mothers – 88%).
- Across the programme as a whole, nearly seventeen thousand children and parents were recorded as users of On track in the second phase of the evaluation.
- Children in On Track areas and those using On Track services reported increasing warmth and praise from parents over time, and a decrease in hostility and criticism. Primary aged children were most likely to report these findings.
- In the primary school range, both children and their parents reported increased communication over time, and younger children were reported as reading more often with parents.
- Overall, there was no clear impact of On Track on school truancy and exclusions rates. However, there was some indication that for primary school children and for children and young people in a booster sample of high-need families that temporary exclusions had dropped over time. Results were also mixed for the impact of On Track on bad behaviour and bullying at school.
- Older children’s attachment and enjoyment of school showed significant positive changes over time including increased involvement and participation at school.

Outcomes of early childhood education

The New Zealand Ministry of Education commissioned this literature review into the impact of early childhood education (ECE) on children and families. The authors explored 117 international and New Zealand texts to addresses three questions:

(a) What developmental, educational, social, and economic outcomes are associated
with participation in ECE for learners and their families?
(b) Are different outcomes associated with different population groups and under different circumstances/ contexts? Considering whether there are adverse impacts more likely and for whom?
(c) How do different outcomes interact/relate with one another?
i. What is the size/significance of the different impacts of ECE? How long do the effects last?

Key findings:

- ECE participation is positively associated with gains in mathematics and literacy, school achievement, intelligence tests, and also school readiness, reduced grade retention, and reduced special education placement.

- the small number of studies that examined associations between ECE participation and learning dispositions found positive impacts.

- There are mixed findings on the impact of ECE participation on antisocial and worried behaviour.

- There is a suggestion that children may catch more infections (ear, nose, and throat) through ECE participation, and that young children attending all-day centres may experience higher cortisol levels (symptom of stress). Where centres are good quality, cortisol levels tend to be lower.

- Studies found cognitive gains for children from low-income/ disadvantaged homes could be greater than for most other children in mathematics and literacy.

- Children for whom English is an additional language, and children from some ethnic minority groups (including Black children), made greater progress on numeracy and pre-reading measures during ECE participation than the white U.K. children or those for whom English is a first language in the English EPPE study.

- Longer duration of ECE experience is linked with cognitive (“academic”) gains for children from all family socioeconomic backgrounds but full-time attendance has no benefits for cognitive outcomes over part-time attendance in studies of children from a range of socioeconomic backgrounds.

- A small number of international studies found an early starting age before age 2 or 3 is associated with higher levels of antisocial or worried behaviour at the time of attendance or shortly after school entry. These associations were generally found in centres rated as low-quality.

As the diagramme shows, early childhood services that contribute to positive child and family outcomes are settings characterised by:
- intentional teaching;
- family engagement with ECE teachers and programmes, where social/cultural capital and interests from home are included, and both family and teachers can best support the child’s learning; and
- a complex curriculum involving both cognitive and non-cognitive dimensions

Children's Social Workforce

The CWDC have released a statistical analysis of the workforce of children's social workers in England. This includes children and family social work, residential care, foster care, education welfare, family court advisors, support workers and volunteers.

Key points:
- Although progress has been made in improving service delivery the latest annual OFSTED report states that there is still considerable room for improvement.
- The sector relies on a diverse range of organisations to deliver its services which increases the complexity of people management and means that there may be significant variation in organisational culture and working environments.
- The workforce is varied and this impacts on the ability to recruit and retain a suitably skilled workforce in some occupational groups; recruitment and retention issues also vary by occupation and region;
- The workforce has a higher than average proportion of part-time workers, and is predominantly female, although, at management level, the proportion of men is higher;
- During the last three years there have been major workforce development initiatives focused on the children’s social care workforce: the Options for Excellence review; the Children’s Workforce Strategy; Care Matters: Time for Change; the Children’s Plan; Building Brighter Futures: Next Steps for the Children’s Workforce; and related initiatives.

Positive Leadership at school level

This research by the Audit Commission (which was blogged earlier), explored the external factors to school success, of which 6 "Key Features" were identified. One of which, "Positive Leadership at School Level" is summarised below:

Key points:

- The leadership of individual head teachers is critical in mobilising staff, pupils and the community behind the broader agenda. This level of commitment is variable across schools.

- The NCSL, Ofsted, ECM and workforce remodelling are ensuring schools need to develop schools ability to respond to the wider community needs.

- Schools partnerships with local church or other faith communities; local business or the voluntary sector can also be useful.

- Schools need to set out a clear and individual vision, incorporated within school plans, which sets out the school's role in the local area and how the school will work with the whole range of public services in support of both school and community success.

Examples of schools in Kirklees and Leeds inform the report.

The Institute of Public Policy Research have produced this report looks at early years pay, profession and professionalisation as a key way to address poverty. The authors state that the early years workforce is low paid (£6.80 p/h) and consists of 98% women. Hence, early years employment can not only greatly assist service users escape poverty but also directly assist those staff in the sector.

Key points:
- The low wages paid in the sector will limit potential to ensure high skills exist in the workforce, often reinforced by social status.
- The lack of staff with level 3 qualifications (currently just 7% of the workforce) limits potential for increased earnings in the sector and the lack of career progression restricts demand for higher skills.
- The current process of professionalising the early years workforce is alienating practitioners and skewing efforts to drive up the quality of services. This is manifested in complaints about the dominance of paperwork over direct work with children and of qualifications over broader skills and experience. These raise important questions about what makes an expert practitioner and how policy changes (such as the Early Years Foundation Stage) are being implemented.

School Improvement Strategy

They are coming thick and fast from the DCSF now! Alongside the National Challenge, the DCSF have also launched their School Improvement Strategy, intended for all schools in England.

The government is talking a lot about the 21st century school: a learning centre for the community where students receive personalised learning by working across professional boundaries and with parents. The ambition, it says, is to achieve this for every school.

Key points:
- Educational achievements to be measured by attainment and progress.
- There is a correlation between attainment and progress, however some schools are good at attainment and poor at progression ('coasting').
- Each school is responsible for their own improvement and will need to work with others to achieve.
- Some schools can support others and the system is to be freed to allow this to occur.
- Ensuring students leave primary school competent in English and Maths.
- A focus on the school's teaching and learning, through the school leadership, teachers, school improvement plan.
- Extension of programmes like Teach First and Transition to Teaching to ensure diversity and best talent within the school workforce.
- Teachers performance management and professional development will be linked.
- Ensuring governing bodies are fit for purpose and assisting school development.

Sure Start Children's Centres - the impact

The report by the DCSF gives a summary of the research undertaken into the impact the Sure Start (later named Children's Centres) have and what lessons have been learnt. Drawing on the National Evaluation of Sure Start (NESS) research as well as ofsted and international research. A good read for anyone interested in Early Years!

The report is spilt into assessing the impact on:
- good outcomes for children
- reaching excluded and disadvantaged groups (BME, SEN-D)
- support for parents (including fathers)
- joined up working & partnership
- health
- governance, leadership, consultation
- workforce