APPENDIX 13
Memorandum submitted by Somerset Local
Education Authority (T14)
This evidence has been contributed by various
officers of the LEA and, for ease of reference, has been linked
to the commitments in the Rural White Paper Implementation Plan
which relate to "Supporting Local Schools" and "Better
Access to Childcare and Early Education." The paragraph numbering
therefore refers to the appropriate RWP Ref.
Attached as Annexes is information regarding
the size of schools and costs per pupil in Somerset.
3.4.1. Creating a Fairer Financial Regime
for Schools
We welcome the recognition of sparsity within
"education primary" and "education LEA" sub-blocks
of the Provisional Settlement, but believe that this is far short
of the real cost pressures faced by sparsely populated authorities.
Sparsity should receive greater recognition within the formula
for grant distribution, and existing evidence and research must
be fully taken into account. We feel the Government should immediately
increase recognition within the grant distribution system, including
within the "under five's", "secondary", "youth
and community", and upper tier EPCS blocks. We also believe
that the provisions made within the Provisional Settlement for
the LEA and primary blocks should be increased.
3.4.2. New Merged Fund to Assist Small Schools
The Small Schools Fund is a valuable source
of funding in assisting small schools with tackling administration,
and developing innovative practices in sharing resources and collaboration.
We welcome the continuation of this funding in 2003-04, albeit
under a new category, "School Support Staff", but are
concerned that this funding is planned to cease from 2004-05.
3.4.3. Connect All Schools to the National
Grid for Learning
Investment in ICT in schools continues to grow,
although there is a shift from hardware purchase to digital learning
resources and support. Spending is set to rise still further for
the next three financial years with increased funding coming from
the Comprehensive Spending Review, some of which remains to be
announced. Spending patterns show that the majority of schools
invest from their delegated budgets, as well as the devolved Standards
Fund specifically targeted for ICT.
The following NgFL targets have been met:
— Computer:pupil ratio 2002 target
will be met by August, 2003 in 99% of schools.
— Connection targets for schools using
broadband through SWGfL has been exceeded in 2002 although keeping
pace with the targets in the future will prove more problematical.
The costs of connections in rural areas is far higher than in
some more urban areas—some of these already have 100% cent
school connected at far higher bandwidth than we could ever afford
in Somerset. We remain on course for 100% broadband connection
during 2006, the Government target date.
— 95% of teachers have undertaken ICT
training.
— Teacher confidence in using ICT at
77% in 2002.
— Attainment at KS3 has continued to
rise, although there are issues that need to be addressed. Per
cent gaining Level 5 at KS3 in 2002 rose from 65-76%. GCSE IT
Grades A-C at 54%; this does not include an increase in the uptake
of GNVQs in ICT.
— National studies by BECTa have linked
improved performance at KS assessments in the core subjects with
high investment in ICT within the school.
— Year one of the "Laptops for
Teachers Scheme" has gone well, with 605 laptops being provided
to eligible teachers. Year two starts in April for the remaining
354 funded from the initial scheme. Additional funding to extend
this scheme has just been announced.
— Implementation of the DfES Information
Management Strategy (IMS) has gone smoothly, with all schools
producing the new Pupil Level annual Cencus (replacement for Form
four) on time in 2001.
If additional resources were available beyond
the School Standards Fund, a major priority would be to upgrade
SomerNet. This is the ICT infrastructure running around the County
which carries the information. Provision of this type of infrastructure
in a rural area is very expensive, and is penalising our schools.
3.4.4. Encourage Greater Community Use of
Schools
One of the strategic priorities of Somerset
LEA is the development of Community Learning Partnerships, incorporating
the concept of schools as Community Learning Centres. These will
include provision not only for the school age population, but
for pre-school and adult learners, and will act as a base for
a wide range of community services and facilities. One current
proposal, which will be considered in the light of our emerging
policy review on small schools, is that for Stawley Primary School
near Wiveliscombe. The school has a NOR, as of September 2002,
of 42 and has the following vision statement:
— to develop the existing school facilities
to include a sustainable community centre which serves as the
heart of Stawley and the surrounding rural parishes, and
— to provide education and community
services for all ages and needs to complement the development
of the sporting facilities at the adjacent pavilion and recreation
field.
The proposal is due to be considered by the
authority's Lifelong Learning Panel during the Spring Term. However,
the estimated cost of replacing the school buildings at Stawley
would be IRO £1 million and, with only 42 pupils on roll,
elected members would be hard pressed to regard this as a priority
amongst a wide range of pressing capital commitments.
One area for further support, were resources
available, would be to provide for the development of rural curriculum
initiatives, such as the Exmoor Curriculum which has been put
together at Dulverton Middle School.
3.5.1. National Childcare Strategy to Create
Additional Childcare Places
The main factor which affects the delivery of
early education and childcare in a rural area is sparsity of population
which leads to transport and sustainability issues, and a lack
of suitable accommodation.
Somerset is seeking to prioritise the use of
surplus accommodation in schools, where this exists, to provide
premises from which early education and childcare can be offered.
However, current capital guidelines do not cover extended services
such as these and priority cannot therefore be given to replacing/maintaining
buildings. Where surplus accommodation is not available we have
previously been successful in assisting groups to gain capital
funding from the National Lottery Community Fund to provide their
own premises, mostly on school sites. Now that early education
and childcare are no longer seen as priority areas for the Community
Fund there is now a significant problem in finding sufficient
capital funding to provide/replace buildings from which this provision
can be made.
3.5.2. Forum for Rural Children and Young
People
These comments are related generally to the
delivery of youth services in a rural environment:
— The fact that YP—particularly
teenagers—have needs outside of the school day must be acknowledged
so that opportunities can be made available for them to expand
their horizons, socially interact and also expand their skills.
Local communities often have provision for primary school age
and elderly, but not for teenagers.
— Ensuring that YP living in rural
areas can easily access youth provision is costly, particularly
when worked out as a cost per head.
— Transport to provision is often unavailable
and hence those YP who do not have access to family transport
are disadvantaged.
— Often, even where local facilities
are available eg village hall, these are not available for use
by local YP, or are not "YP friendly". Government could
look to ensure that any funding of community facilities reflects
the views of YP in their development, and are available for their
use at a reasonable cost.
— The sparsity of adults in rural areas
often means that provision falters when enthusiastic adults leave,
or feel that they have been battling alone for long enough.
— YP have a great deal to contribute
to the development of rural communities. This needs to be better
acknowledged so that they feel they have a status within the communities
in which they live.
16 January 2003
| 
