Agenda item

The Committee received evidence from two providers of Alternative Provision on the quality and range of local provision.

Anna Cain, Chief Executive and Head of the Boxing Academy, provided a summary of her work. A discussion was had during which the following main points were made:

·         The Boxing Academy was based in Hackney and offered alternative education provision to pupils across North London at risk of exclusion due to violent or disruptive behaviour.

·         The Boxing Academy was a small provider with charitable status. The curriculum included a minimum of five GCSEs alongside boxing which improved the fitness and discipline of pupils. The Academy also offered PSHE and helped pupils to develop life skills such as employability. Intervention work on personal difficulties was offered after school hours. The majority of pupils passed their GCSEs.

·         Every pupil at the Academy had a personalised learning plan. There were only eight pupils per class, with each class having both a teacher and a support assistant. Some pupils attending the Boxing Academy had special educational needs and it was commented that Islington schools provided particularly good data to assist the Academy in this area.

·         The Academy originated in Tottenham and promoted an inclusive ‘family’ atmosphere which was particularly conducive for intervention work. It was suggested that many pupils struggled in traditional settings and had a low view of mainstream education. The different environment and focus on ‘tough love’ and team-work was thought to assist the pupils in their learning.

·         The Boxing Academy offered full time education. Pupils arrived at 9am for a 9.15am start and worked until 3pm. Those arriving late were subject to appropriate sanctions which could be either a physical challenge, such as push-ups, or a practical task such as washing up.

·         All pupils studied GCSE English, Maths, ICT, RE and PE. Pupils also received lessons on topical issues; the Academy had recently held a lesson on the Prevent strategy and democracy, and had also been visited by the Territorial Army and a barrister, who taught pupils about the legal system.

·         Pupils could arrive from 8am for a breakfast club. Pupils could stay at the Academy up to 4pm and after-school activities were provided regularly. 

·         A placement at the Academy cost £10,500 per year which included meals, school trips and uniforms. Transport was not usually provided however was considered in exceptional circumstances. Some pupils requiring support with attendance were collected from their homes by their mentors. 

·         The Academy had 40 pupils in total, including 18 Year 11s. 56% of the previous year’s cohort achieved a C or higher in maths, one pupil achieved an A. All pupils had passed GCSE PE.

·         The Academy had been approved to become an Alternative Provision free school and would soon be offering three additional GCSEs: science, a language, and a humanities subject.

·         It was noted that five of the 40 pupils were girls and these tended to perform best academically. The Academy welcomed both boys and girls however girls were rarely referred to the Academy due to the emphasis on previously violent and disruptive pupils.

·         It was commented that many Boxing Academy pupils had previously been excluded or at risk of exclusion from school due to their behaviour. Some pupils struggled to cope in larger classes and had behavioural difficulties since primary school. Some pupils had learning disabilities however had previously rejected support. Some pupils had difficult home lives including domestic violence and substance abuse.

·         The Academy did not set traditional homework as it recognised that many pupils did not have an appropriate home environment to work in. It was also recognised that homework could be the cause of arguments between pupils and their parents. The Academy instead set additional work to be completed at an on-site homework club.

·         After completing their GCSEs the majority of pupils enrolled in college, often studying sports-related subjects. However, some returned to their schools to study and in such instances schools had commented on their improved behaviour.

·         The Committee noted that schools retained responsibility for pupils on Alternative Provision. The Boxing Academy reported weekly to schools on their pupils’ progress and alerted the school to any concerns. Reports were also provided to the Youth Offending Service as required. Most schools and boroughs referring visited the Academy every term and it was emphasised to pupils that they had not been excluded. Pupils were often invited to attend their school’s Year 11 Prom, which meant a great deal to the pupils.

·         As with all local providers of alternative provision, the Academy was evaluated annually by the Quality Monitoring and Evaluation Team (QMET) of the North London Strategic Alliance, a partnership of North London local authorities which collaborated on Children’s Services matters. The Academy welcomed evaluation as a means of securing improvement in the Alternative Provision sector.

·         The Committee noted that the Boxing Academy was intended for pupils with a violent or disruptive background and queried how the Academy approached working with difficult pupils. It was advised that before pupils enrolled the Academy spoke honestly to parents and pupils about the curriculum, teaching style, and the Academy’s expectations. This allowed pupils and parents to determine if the Academy was right for them. The Academy offered pupils a ‘clean slate’ and did not take decisions based on previous poor behaviour. It was expected for all pupils to struggle at some stage; however the Academy provided intensive support to pupils and never used exclusion as a punishment. The Academy was flexible to the needs of its pupils, for example offering pupils with ADHD short breaks during classes. The Academy sought to develop the independence of pupils, which ultimately allowed them to take responsibility for their own learning and actions. 

·         In very rare circumstances the Academy referred pupils to other providers; however this was only used when pupils would not engage and all parties agreed the Boxing Academy was not suitable for the pupil. 

·         The Academy was questioned on the council’s goal to reduce the number of pupils entering alternative provision. In response it was advised that although minimising the circumstances which led to young people requiring alternative provision would be welcome, the Academy would not support an arbitrary reduction as some pupils struggled in traditional school settings and required an alternative provision environment to succeed. It was speculated if schools needed better mechanisms to support pupils struggling with mainstream education.

Rebekah Westgate, Assistant Principal at BSix Brooke House Sixth Form College, provided a summary of her work. A discussion was had during which the following main points were made:

·         BSix was a sixth form college based in Hackney which accepted 14-16 year olds as a form of alternative provision. Pupils on alternative provision participated in mainstream GCSEs and entry-level vocational courses. Almost all pupils passed their chosen courses.

·         Pupils sitting GCSEs were able to choose either the STEM pathway or the Humanities pathway. Each pathway was comprised of five GCSEs, with both including English and Maths. It was suggested that a pathway environment helped alternative provision pupils to see an end goal to their education.

·         The quality of BSix’s provision was regularly evaluated. The college was rated ‘good’ by Ofsted in March 2013 and received a ‘good’ rating by the North London QMET in October 2014. BSix carried out additional internal quality reviews each year and these involved input from pupils.

·         BSix offered full-time education from 9am to 3.30pm.

·         The Committee queried the college’s relationship to its school and local authority partners. It was advised that although this varied for each school and authority, schools were keen to ensure their pupils achieved to the best of their ability and took their duty of care to each pupil seriously.

·         Once alternative provision pupils completed their courses they could choose to stay at BSix, studying a higher level course, or participating in the post-16 GCSE re-sit programme if required.

·         It was advised that pupils referred to BSix for alternative provision often had additional emotional needs and some struggled to cope in a traditional education setting. Officers compared this to the background of those referred to the Boxing Academy and explained the importance of referring pupils to an appropriate provider following consultation with pupils and parents.

·         A placement at BSix cost £6,500 per annum. It was advised that this was less than the Boxing Academy due to the larger class sizes at BSix.

·         BSix considered that alternative provision was essential for pupils who could not engage with mainstream education, however the importance of schools maintaining responsibility for their pupils and engaging with providers of alternative provision was emphasised.  

The Committee thanked Anna Cain and Rebekah Westgate for their attendance.