If the Committee wishes to exclude the press and the public from the meeting during consideration of any of the items on the exempt from publication part of the agenda, it will be necessary for the Board to pass a resolution in accordance with the provisions of Paragraph 21(1)(b) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2000 on the grounds that their presence could involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as described in specific paragraphs of Schedule I2A, Part 3 of the Local Government Act 1972.

The Committee may maintain the exemption if and so long as, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

This paper contains two not for publication appendiices to the report at agenda item 8

It contains information concerning un-moderated school attainment results and progress made by KPM schools.

The public interest in maintaining the exemption from publication is in order not to compromise the business affairs of the schools holding this information,  under paragraph 3 of Part 1, Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

Noted

Contact Officer: Anna Wright; akwright@oxford.gov.uk

The Head of Policy, Culture and Communications submitted a report (previously circulated now appended) detailing the progress made in schools involved in the Council funded Educational Attainment programme.

Councillor Kennedy, Board Member for Educational Attainment and Youth Ambition presented the report. She explained the main challenges the programme was facing was staff turnover, which required new staff to be re-trained and new Head teachers withdrawing from the KRM programme.  However she highlighted that the KRM programme was successful when fully implemented - KRM maths results are substantially above the national average.'

Schools can choose to opt out of the programme, as there cannot be a binding agreement either to join the programme or to adopt it for a minimum period. 

It was pointed out that the data in Appendix 1 was misleading as it shows the progress made since the start of the programme in 2012 – however most schools didn’t start the programme till April 2013.

The Committee asked how attainment was measured, and heard that this is mostly through SATs and KRM tests.

The Committee would like to have more commentary on why schools chose to leave the programme and the reasons why schools chose not to join.

A further progress report which will include future options, up to date results and moderated SATs will be presented to the Committee in December 2014.