A Review of the Primary Schools in the North & Central Bath Area

Bathwick St Marys CE Primary, Parkside Infant, St Andrews CE Primary, St John's Catholic Primary, St Saviours CE Infant, St Saviours CE Junior, St Stephens CE Primary, St Swithins CE Infant, Swainswick CE Primary, Widcombe Infant, Widcombe CE Junior School

Why Are We Reviewing This Area?

All primary schools in Bath & North East Somerset are to be reviewed over the next four years. Each school will be reviewed alongside its partner schools in a geographical area. At the end of each Area Review elected Councillors may decide that some changes (school closures, new schools, enlarging schools etc.) appear to be necessary and initiate a further consultation process focussing on the school(s) affected. It is equally possible that Councillors may simply acknowledge that the pattern of school provision is working effectively and that no changes are required in the short or medium-term.

The process to be followed when undertaking an Area Review has been the subject of wide and lengthy consultation. It was finally approved by the School Organisation Committee (a body independent of the Council) on 22 July 2003.

A document entitled “The School Review Process” can be found on the Council website at: www.bathnes.gov.uk/Committee_Papers/OandSEYCL/EYCL021202/10SchoolReviewProcess.htm Paper copies are available on request.

The School Organisation Committee also approved the areas for review during the school year 2003/04. These are the areas showing the highest numbers of unfilled (sometimes referred to as surplus) places. The North & Central Bath area is amongst these areas.

The schools named below are considered in this Review.

Bathwick St Mary’s CE Primary School, Darlington Road
Parkside Infant School, Charlotte Street
St Andrew’s CE Primary School, Northampton Street
St John’s Catholic Primary School, Pulteney Road (and also at Oldfield Lane)
St Saviour’s CE Infant School, Spring Lane
St Saviour’s CE Junior School, Brookleaze Place
St Stephen’s CE Primary School, Richmond Place
St Swithin’s CE Infant School, Dover Place
Swainswick CE Primary School, Innox Lane
Widcombe Infant School, Archway Street
Widcombe CE Junior School, Pulteney Road

Introduction

The first stage of the Review involves the gathering of information on the following:-

current numbers on roll (September 2003)
historical numbers on roll (1997-2002)
anticipated numbers on roll (2004 and beyond)
levels of recruitment against Standard Number
unit cost per pupil
home addresses of pupils on roll
outstanding planned maintenance
suitability for curriculum delivery
level of surplus or deficit of places
levels of educational achievement

levels of educational deprivation and multiple deprivation in the ward in which the school is located (and more detailed information on the level of educational and economic deprivation amongst children at each school).

On 28 January 2004, a draft version of this document was circulated to the Headteacher of each school covered by the Review.

On 13 February 2004 a revised version containing amendments and clarifications of facts was issued to the Headteacher and Chair of Governors of each school covered by the Review, the Headteacher and Chair of Governors of the secondary schools serving Bath, senior officers of the Education Service, the Bath & Wells Diocesan Board of Education, the Roman Catholic Diocese of Clifton and Councillors representing the wards in which the schools are located. The document was also circulated to members of the Education, Youth, Culture & Leisure Overview & Scrutiny Panel in order to inform their discussions prior to the public meeting to be held on 9 March 2004.

School Organisation Plan

Each school has been assessed against policies, established through the School Organisation Plan, regarding school size. The School Organisation Plan states that;

Infant and junior schools should be at least one form of entry and a maximum of three with a standard number between 30 and 90.
No infant school should have 60 or fewer children on roll.
No junior school should have 90 or fewer children on roll.
Urban/suburban primary schools should be at least one form of entry and a maximum of two with a standard number between 30 and 60.
No urban/suburban primary school should have fewer than 180 children on roll.
The maximum desirable size for an all through primary school is 420 pupils.

Both junior schools and all, bar one, of the infant schools meet the criteria regarding planned admission number. Two infant schools do not meet the size criteria.

All bar one of the primary schools meet the planned admission number criteria. All the primary schools meet the size criteria for urban/suburban schools.

One school is regarded as a ‘rural’ school and therefore should be considered against different criteria. These were set out in the School Organisation Plan agreed on 18 July 2000. The Plan states that “…regard must still be paid to the desirable minimum size of rural primaries i.e. a Standard Number of 15 or more, at least three classes and an average of at least 10 children per Year Group”

The School Organisation Plan agreed on July 22 2003 stated the following in relation to North & Central Bath “The area has the highest number of surplus places in the Authority. This is boosted by a large number of surplus places at one school. Plans to relocate this school to another area are in hand. (Even) if these places are removed the area still has a substantial level of unfilled capacity. The vast majority of provision is in controlled or aided schools. A review took place between February and October 2002. No formal consultation was undertaken. A review that sets out to reduce surplus places to a tolerable level is urgently required.”

The reference in 3.5 above to the relocation of a school relates to St John’s Catholic Primary School. Possible legal barriers to relocation of the school to the preferred site have been identified since the approval of the Plan.

The School Organisation Plan agreed on 17 July 2001 stated that “the LEA’s preferred option for school organisation at Key Stages 1 and 2 is all-through primary schools. This also includes the Foundation Stage in nursery and reception classes.” Of the schools covered by this Review there are four infant schools and two junior schools. Two infant schools and one primary school operate an LEA nursery class.

Readers will note that nine of the eleven schools covered by this Review are Church schools. Five of these are Voluntary Aided. Any changes in the area may result in a change in the proportion of denominational places in Bath & North East Somerset and such changes would require the support of the relevant Diocese. At present, approximately 54% of primary school places in Bath & North East Somerset are in Church schools. In the North & Central Bath area the percentage is 88%.

All schools have also been assessed under the Authority’s Asset Management Plan (AMP). The AMP is concerned with the Condition, Suitability and Sufficiency of schools. The Key Data sheets at the back of the document show the position at these schools in relation to the AMP headings.

The Context

A map showing the location of the schools is attached. An outline map showing where pupils live is also attached. For legal reasons it is necessary to state that the maps have been reproduced from the Ordnance Survey with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Ó Crown Copyright under License Number 100023334.

The area covered can be defined as land bounded by the A4 to the south, the A46 to the east, Lansdown Hill to the west and the northern border of B&NES.

Population data from the Primary Care Trust shows the position at April 2003 in the wards in which these schools are located.

Levels of Educational Achievement

There are various measures of educational performance. Simple examination of headline results may not reveal the success (or otherwise) of a school.

Care must be taken when analysing results of small year groups and making comparisons with schools that are significantly different in size. In small schools one pupil can have a very marked effect on the percentage figures. OFSTED makes the following statement:

Care should be taken when analysing the results of small year groups and small schools. The effect of one additional pupil on, for example, a school percentage measure can be considerable, whereas in larger schools the effect will be less marked. This does not mean that analysing the performance of small cohorts is invalid. Rather it means that the findings from such analyses should be interpreted carefully, and may need to be augmented with other information or considered over more than one year

Levels of Educational and Multiple Deprivation

All wards in England have been assessed under a range of headings in order to determine, not only the overall levels of deprivation in a given community, but to compile an elemental breakdown of the type of deprivation. The headings are Income, Employment, Health, Education, Housing, Geographical Access to Services and Child Poverty. The results of this survey were published by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister in August 2000.

The measure of educational deprivation is compiled by considering the following data:-

the number of working age adults with no qualifications
the number of children aged 16 and over who are not in full-time education
the proportion of 17-19 year olds who have not successfully applied for university
KS2 primary school performance data
primary school children with English as an additional language for 1998
absenteeism (authorised and unauthorised) at primary level for 1998.

8414 wards were assessed. The lower the score the higher the level of educational deprivation. For comparison purposes readers will wish to know that the wards with the highest and lowest scores in the Bath & North East Somerset area are Peasedown (728) and Combe Down (8015)

In terms of multiple deprivation, the comparison should be made with Twerton which is ranked at 1111 and Saltford, which at 8135, is the least deprived ward in Bath & North East Somerset and is within the ‘top’ 5% of wards in England.

Information regarding the extent of child poverty is also included as an illustration of the economic deprivation in the area in which the school is located. For comparison purposes, Twerton scores 286 placing it within the ‘bottom’ 5% of wards in England. The former ward of Chew Valley West scores 8056.

Given that electoral ward plays no role whatsoever in the choices that parents/carers make the LEA has gathered data showing the numbers and proportion of pupils from each ward actually on roll at each school. This is shown on the Key Data Sheet.

The School Organisation Plan agreed on 18th July 2002 identified certain schools as “strategic schools in areas of educational deprivation”. None of the schools within this Review are covered by this designation.

Timescales and Consultation

The OSP will hold a public meeting to hear contributions from invited stakeholders. This will take place on March 9 2004.

The document will be further considered by the Overview & Scrutiny Panel (OSP) at its meeting on March 24 2004.

A meeting for Bath & North East Somerset Councillors representing the relevant wards will take place on a date to be determined.

The final paper will be considered by the Council Executive which meets at 10 a.m. on 7 April 2004 at the Guildhall, Bath.