OF THE FULL GOVERNING BODY MEETING
Date / Thursday 30th March 2017 at 6pm
Venue / St James CE Primary School; extended schools room
Present / Derrick Watson
Gavin Shortall
Hilary Jones
Imran Naseem
Jess Kippen
Jo Westhead
Lynda Newton
Steve Lomax / Parent governor
Headteacher
Foundation governor
LA governor
Parent governor (Chair)
Staff governor
Foundation governor
Associate member
Apologies / Andy Gait
Hayley Matthews (Rev)
Peter Baylis / DBE foundation governor
Ex-officio governor
Parent governor
Absent / None.
In attendance / Laura Nicholson
Victoria Cantley / Clerk
Observer
The meeting met its quorum
AGENDA ITEM 1 / OPENING PRAYER & APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCEDiscussion: / There was no opening prayer. The Chair stated that this will be discussed later in the meeting.
Hilary Jones reported that Hayley Matthews will be leaving Holy Innocents to take up another post. Jess Kippen has sent a letter of thanks on behalf of the governing body. Gavin Shortall has also sent a letter of thanks on behalf of the school too. Hilary further advised that the Parish can nominate someone as governor during an interregnum and will address this in due course. LN advised that governors need to be mindful of retaining the majority of foundation governors on the Board in light of the other foundation governor vacancies too (Governance Handbook Jan 2017, page 52, point 52)
The apologies of Andy Gait, Hayley Matthews and Peter Baylis were received.
Decision / RESOLVED: that the apologies of the above named governors be accepted.
AGENDA ITEM 2 / DECLARATION OF PERSONAL, PECUNIARY & EDUCATIONAL INTERESTS
Discussion: / There were no new declarations made.
AGENDA ITEM 3 / DECLARATION OF ANY OTHER BUSINESS
Discussion: / · Jess Kippen - a number of items to raise.
· Derrick Watson stated that that governors had looked at a system to promote ‘random acts of kindness’ to the staff. GS reported that this had been fed back to the staff at a staff meeting and was well received. In the same spirit, it was also suggested that governor certificates of recognition could be given to children to recognise when they do certain acts of kindness for others. This would also supports the link to raise the profile of governors in the school.
AGENDA ITEM 4 / PART ONE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING (16th February 2017)
Discussion: / Governors reviewed the minutes which were circulated prior to the meeting.
Decision / RESOLVED: that the minutes be accepted as a true and accurate record. The Chair signed the minutes.
AGENDA ITEM 5 / MATTERS ARISING
Discussion: / Item 5:
· To arrange for the Governor Noticeboard to be updated with information in respect of new Governor, Steve Lomax. Action completed.
· Update to be requested on what business forms still need to be returned (to include information for Edubase). Action completed.
Item 6: DW to review Recruitment Strategy. This action is for both GS and DW in conjunction with the piece of work on recruitment of the staff in the school.
Item 7: Questions to be raised (by governors) around school RAISEonline data to include information around the progress of pupils considered to be high attainers. GS addressed this under the Headteacher’s report.
Item 15: To enquire with Laura Nicholson if any documents re governor competency framework were to be brought to the FGB meeting. LN explained how the framework can be used and whilst there is a spread of expertise on the board, that it can be used as a checklist to confirm that governors are compliant with the DfE’s expectations. Governors discussed this.
Action: / What:
Jess Kippen will look at this, identify some areas of focus and feedback a proposal at next meeting. / Who:
JK / By when:
Next FGB meeting.
AGENDA
ITEM 6 / GOVERNING BODY MEMBERSHIP
Discussion / · Vacancies:
o 2 x Foundation governors. HJ reported that in light of the information presented under item 1, Paula Robinson will join the governing body as foundation governor during the interregnum. The other foundation governor vacancy will be addressed by Derrick Watson as per discussion below.
o Derrick Watson’s term of office ends in May. A parent governor nomination/election will be organised after the Easter holidays. GS has spoken to Hilary Jones about Derrick Watson being nominated as Foundation governor. He has the appropriate foundation governor requirements and his skills and contribution are invaluable to the governing body. Hilary Jones and Lynda Newton agreed to vouch for DW as Foundation governor.
LN advised that the parent nomination/election process should be started once Derrick Watson’s term has ended at the end of May.
AGENDA ITEM 7 / GOVERNOR TRAINING REQUIRED/ATTENDED
Discussion / a) Lynda Newton reported that she has attended the last two Chair’s briefings. The topics included the National Funding Formula. 71% of LAs are going to gain on the funding and 29% will lose. Manchester will be the 7th ‘loser’ as a result of the new formula. The first three years will be transitionally protected up until 2020.
b) There were also reports on support staff pension protection. If schools outsource external contracts, they have to be careful where contracts with suppliers are concerned as the school is responsible for pension protection for anyone who transfers across. If Schools are considering outsourcing, schools must get in touch with technical pensions scheme at MCC who will provide advice and oversee any contracts to ensure pension protection takes place.
c) The new competency framework was discussed and is to be used by governors as guidance and for self-review. Ofsted will now report on the extent to which governors are committed to their own professional development in order to ensure continued school improvement. Q: Are governors attending enough of the training sessions as a governing body? A: It was felt that governors do attend training. Q: Is there a governor training log? A: LN offered to keep a log for the governors.
Governors felt that the courses are useful to attend to meet other governors and share experience/learning. It is always good to grow in knowledge. Steve Lomax suggested keeping a log of the number of hours of training in the log.
Action: / What:
All governors to send LN records of any training visits – date, type of training, who delivered training and how useful it was. / Who:
All governors/LN / By when:
Ongoing.
AGENDA ITEM 8 / GOVERNING BODY VISITS/REPORTS ATTENDED SINCE LAST MEETING
Discussion / Pete Baylis attended the School to meet with a group of children to discuss English this week. Governors stated that a governor visit proforma was needed to keep records of visits.
Action: LN/HJ to send GS template proforma.
LNewton attended a SEND visit on 15th March
AGENDA ITEM 9 / CHAIR’S ACTION
Discussion: / There was no Chair’s action taken since the last meeting.
AGENDA ITEM 10 / HEADTEACHER’S REPORT
Discussion / 10a – HT Update Mar 2017
10b – HT Update Appendix 1 – KS1 and KS2 Attainment Tracking Spring 2017
GS drew governors attention to the following points:
· Improvement in attendance. Q: How has the school managed this? A: Celebrations of attendance with children take place in class and assemblies. SLT meet with families where attendance is a concern and attendance sweeps take place (target days where parent support worker has visited the home of children who are absent). SLT meetings have been most effective. Visits to address extended absences are managed consistently and transparently. GS explained the school’s system in relation to parents taking children out of school during term time for holidays. If there are no safeguarding concerns and attendance is good, the school will manage this by working with families but doesn’t authorise absences.
Q: Can the School differentiate between genuine absences such as visiting families in another country and where there are challenging situations at home preventing the child from attending? A: Gavin Shortall explained that this data is kept and managed in school. Ofsted expect all children to be in school all the time.
· Progress of High attaining children.
From 2013-2016, there were 1 out of 9 instances where progress was below the national average.
Challenge: At the last PPC meeting, Pete Baylis raised the issue of the progress of higher attainers. The Headteacher went away to review this and provided the following update to governors.
There is a new system of tracking progress of groups of children together according to their prior attainment. This can mean that when working with small groups, one or two large scores can skew an average. Looking deeper at the 2016 Higher Attaining cohort, there were 6 children. Of those 6 children there was one child with a large score of negative of progress in all areas. The child did very well in KS1 and then achieved the expected standard in KS2 but what he should have achieved was not above the expected standard. Excluding that child in progress score would have been
o Reading: 1.4
o Writing: 3.1
o Maths 0.5
The School always looks for trends and patterns and doesn’t believe there to be an issue with high attainers overall in this data. The issue was with one child.
· Academies:
GS attended a meeting with the Diocesan Board of Education. The DfE focus is now on the grammar schools initiative. Therefore there is less focus on academies. However Schools still need to consider the academy situation. Funding works similarly to the existing situation. The advantages to forming/joining a MAT come in shared economies of scale, shared costs, provision/staff etc.
JK explained that governors can amend the format of Headteacher’s report to the information they would like and to receive information termly or half termly. GS felt that it is useful to know that governors meetings are approaching and keeping matters up to date. GS welcomed governors’ input and ideas for the report for areas of specific focus.
DW suggested an executive summary on each topic. JK suggested presenting the data in a simpler format in order to ask more questions.
Action: To set the questions in Headteacher’s report and support with an answer.
It was suggested a log of actions is kept in relation to variances, to look at trends which are improving and what action the school is taking etc.
Governors noted that the PPC committee ask questions around the school data which is interrogated in more depth. LNewton noted that in relation to the progress of HA pupils this question came in response from governor (PB) in the form of challenge at the PPC committee.
Governors also suggested that a national comparison/benchmark in attendance etc would be useful. GS explained that at the end of each year MCC and DfE will produce national average.
AGENDA ITEM 11 / UPDATE OF SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2016-17 AND SEF
Discussion / · 11 – St James 2016-17 SDP – 24 Mar 2017
JK explained that she and GS reviewed the SDP across the year. Governors need aspects of this identified to have a clearer view of the plan that is relevant. GS tabled the most recent aspect of the plan.
JK explained that she is exploring a governor development plan which can be updated and include what governors want to achieve and work towards etc.
GS explained that objectives are set in the school development plan which feed into a set of actions and outcomes. This focuses on what the school needs to do, what it has done and an outcome/evaluation. It’s about stripping out governor questions and looking at whether actions have been achieved and if the School is on track to achieve outcomes. This relates to making data more manageable and prompting questions to look at if/where the School is on track or not. RAG rating the plan provides a clear prompt to ask questions of the School. JK added that the SDP belongs to the school but governors need to understand this and offer guidance.
Q: who sets the objectives? A: The Senior Leadership Team. Next steps then form objectives and how to achieve them (Actions). These are written in response to Ofsted criteria and last report.
JK suggested planning ahead for the following year in the form of a governor development plan. In July the governing body will review what they have done over the year e.g. recruitment, training etc and the impact. It will adapt over the year. This will feed into the SDP. JK tabled a draft. This will provide an idea of what work the governing body has done over the year and how. It was also noted that there is an increased scrutiny of Ofsted on governing bodies and this document would support its work. This is not intended to be a huge or labour intensive document. Action: JK to email round the proposed governor development plan.
Given the work on different sections of the SDP, GS stated that he can present a summary of work completed in comparison to where it relates on the plan. GS will circulate the document summarising all four areas for each FGB meeting. Steve Lomax suggested that it would be useful to highlight any areas of concern i.e. ‘red’ rated and why. Derrick Watson suggested governors are sent both the summary and full version of the document.
JK emphasised that this is a new idea and is open to development.
AGENDA ITEM 12 / COMMITTEE REPORTS