0
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Education in Morpeth: a Changing
Landscape
A technical report from the Education Topic Group
Version Control
Creation Date
Version
Status
27 February 2013
1.0
Draft for comment: limited circulation
11 March 2013
2.0
4 July 2012
3.0
Draft for comment: wide circulation
Draft for comment within the Education and other Topic
Groups
education tr
[04 July 2013]
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Contents
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan...............................................................................................................................0
Version Control .................................................................................................................................................. 0
Creation Date ................................................................................................................................................. 0
Version ........................................................................................................................................................... 0
Status ............................................................................................................................................................. 0
Summary (Issues and Options) .......................................................................................................................... 4
“Our vision is for a highly educated society in which opportunity is more equal for children and young
people no matter what their background or family circumstances.” (DfE) ................................................... 8
Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................... 8
The Changing Educational Landscape in England .............................................................................................. 9
Commissioning New Schools and School Places ......................................................................................... 11
A New National Funding Formula for Schools ............................................................................................. 12
The Educational Landscape in Northumberland ............................................................................................. 14
Children with Additional Educational Needs (AEN) ..................................................................................... 15
Nursery and Child Care Provision ................................................................................................................ 16
The Educational Landscape in Morpeth .......................................................................................................... 18
Morpeth Schools in Figures ............................................................................................................................. 18
Morpeth Schools: Risks and Opportunities ..................................................................................................... 23
Losing the “Middle Tier” .............................................................................................................................. 23
First Schools ..................................................................................................................................................... 24
St. Roberts, Pegswood, and Tritlington First Schools ...................................................................................... 27
Nursery Provision in Morpeth ......................................................................................................................... 28
Middle and High Schools ................................................................................................................................. 28
Condition of School Buildings .......................................................................................................................... 30
Geographical Situation of Morpeth Schools.................................................................................................... 33
Pupil Travel To and From Local Schools........................................................................................................... 33
Other Infrastructure Issues .............................................................................................................................. 34
Broadband ................................................................................................................................................... 34
Sport and Leisure ......................................................................................................................................... 34
Adult Education............................................................................................................................................ 35
Combining to Achieve Certainty and Excellence ............................................................................................. 35
Education: the Economic and Social Payback.................................................................................................. 38
Where do we go from here? ........................................................................................................................... 41
1
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendices ...........................................................................................................................................................43
(All statistical data courtesy of Northumberland County Council) .................................................................. 43
Appendix A............................................................................................................................................................44
Structure of the Morpeth Partnership of Schools ........................................................................................... 44
Situation of Pegswood County First School within the Ashington Partnership of Schools ............................. 44
Appendix B1 ..........................................................................................................................................................46
Morpeth Partnership of Schools: Pupil Count, Capacity, Pupil Admission Numbers and Surplus Places ....... 46
Schools grouped First
Middle ............................................................................................................... 46
Appendix B2 ..........................................................................................................................................................47
Morpeth Partnership of Schools: Pupil Count, Capacity, Pupil Admission Number and Surplus Places......... 47
Schools grouped in phases, within and without scope of Neighbourhood Plan ......................................... 47
Appendix C ............................................................................................................................................................48
Appendix C/1 ............................................................................................................................................... 48
Schools within the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan ................................................................. 48
Appendix C/2 ............................................................................................................................................... 48
Schools within the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan but outwith the Morpeth Partnership of
Schools ......................................................................................................................................................... 48
Appendix C/3 Schools within the Morpeth Partnership, but outwith the scope of the Morpeth
Neighbourhood Plan .................................................................................................................................... 48
Appendix C/1 ........................................................................................................................................................49
Schools within the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan ................................................................. 49
Appendix C/2 ................................................................................................................................................... 60
Schools within the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan but outwith the Morpeth Partnership of
Schools ......................................................................................................................................................... 60
Appendix C/3 ............................................................................................................................................... 61
Schools within the Morpeth Partnership, but outwith the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan ... 61
Appendix D ...........................................................................................................................................................68
Nursery Provision in Morpeth ......................................................................................................................... 68
Appendix E ............................................................................................................................................................70
Morpeth Partnership – GP Data in Catchment (2012) .................................................................................... 70
Appendix F ............................................................................................................................................................72
Morpeth Partnership Pupil Forecast ............................................................................................................... 72
Appendix F (Contd.) ..............................................................................................................................................73
Morpeth Partnership Pupil Forecast (Contd.) ................................................................................................. 73
Appendix G ...........................................................................................................................................................74
Glossary ........................................................................................................................................................... 74
2
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix H ...........................................................................................................................................................76
Access to Sources Quoted ............................................................................................................................... 76
Department for Education ............................................................................................................................... 76
Northumberland County Council ................................................................................................................. 78
Other Sources .............................................................................................................................................. 78
Appendix I .............................................................................................................................................................80
Select Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 80
Appendix J.............................................................................................................................................................82
Summary of public comments on Education in Morpeth, from the MNP Launch Event, October 2012 ........ 82
Appendix K ............................................................................................................................................................83
Terms of Reference.......................................................................................................................................... 83
3
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Summary (Issues and Options)
1. This report examines the rapidly developing political policy on education provision in
England that amongst other things will see the growth of much greater autonomy for schools
and a commensurate decline in the role of Local Authorities. NCC will in future liaise with
schools largely by invitation. It will still monitor the performance of individual schools,
using publicly available data published by DfE, but it can only intervene directly where a
school is judged to be Inadequate by OFSTED.
2. A New National Funding Formula for Schools was introduced from April 2013. The new
arrangements allocate a much greater proportion of schools’ budgetary allocations on a perpupil basis rather than to school places. Schools with surplus places will receive less and
may even become unviable. Some Morpeth First Schools will be affected by these changes.
All schools must consider carefully the impact of these changes on their longer-term
management and financial strategies.
3. NCC is developing a County-wide approach for the provision of education to Children with
Additional Educational Needs (AEN) that will offer an opportunity for all schools partnerships
in Northumberland to create and manage new local structures for the provision of AEN.
There are new possibilities for Morpeth Schools to expand their role here and their income.
We await further initiatives from NCC before this can be evaluated.
4. Because of common demographic trends across Northumberland, Morpeth First schools
predict inexorably falling rolls. This is unlikely to be reversed entirely by additional housing.
So there is no clear requirement for an additional First school in Morpeth. However, because
parents/carers can now choose a school for their child the Morpeth Partnership of schools is
able to attract additional pupils from outside of its normal catchment. It is vital for the
continued sustainability of Morpeth schools that they continue to attract pupils from the
widest possible area.
5. All Morpeth/Pegswood schools are rated as either Good or Outstanding by OFSTED and
Government policy urges such schools to expand. So, there is scope for all Morpeth schools
to increase their market share of pupils even in an environment of diminishing local
requirement for places. The alternative appears to be one of gradual decline in pupil
numbers, which at least at First School phase would lead eventually to a consolidation of
places within fewer buildings/schools.
6. Future expansion of housing in Morpeth is likely to take place to the north of the town.
Whilst travel to school for younger children may be seen as an issue, there is no doubt that
all existing First Schools in Morpeth are accessible from any area of the town.
7. Nationally, any new school commissioned by a LA must be fully funded by that LA, or by
other providers such as an Academy sponsor, or a Free School. NCC will not fund an
additional school, to the North of the town or elsewhere, whilst children in catchment can be
4
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
accommodated in local schools, even if this means that fewer children from outside of
catchment can be accommodated.
8. There is provision under the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 for
developer(s) to be required to provide funding to local communities for infrastructure
enhancements. This may be a source from which to fund an increase in school places in
Morpeth.
9. There is no direct link in admissions from maintained nurseries to associated first schools,
but it is assumed that most nursery children will be so accommodated through the standard
NCC admissions process. It is vital that First Schools in Morpeth retain sufficient places to
provide continuity from their associated Nursery, so that both Nurseries and schools can
maximise and sustain their regular intake of children.
10. Morpeth attracts many students who would otherwise attend Pegswood or Tritlington First
Schools. The Northern Relief Road to Morpeth may increase this flow.
11. Some 40% of children from the Pegswood catchment already attend Morpeth Schools. There
is an apparent ground-swell of opinion in Pegswood that it wishes to become a formal part of
the Morpeth Schools Pyramid. This could be accommodated within Morpeth’s other First
Schools but would displace other out-of-catchment children from the opportunity of places
at Morpeth’s Middle and High school, unless those schools expand their provision
accordingly.
12. The age for leaving full time education or commensurate training will advance to age 18 by
2015 but this is unlikely to have a major effect on KEVI as more than 80% of the current
school population already access post-16 provision there. An increase of maybe 50 students
is anticipated and the school considers this increase to be manageable.
13. Collingwood School and Media Arts College admits pupils from a wide area although many
students live within the Morpeth catchment. Collingwood works closely with KEVI with
whom it has formed a “soft federation” to enable joint development of 6th form provision for
pupils who require a more supportive atmosphere. It plans to provide places for deprived 2year olds under a Government scheme which together with plans from NCC for developing
AEN provision throughout the County, will have a significant impact upon the core role of the
school and its local community, offering a considerable opportunity for this highly
specialised local school to expand and develop further as a strategic advisor on AEN
provision within the Morpeth Partnership, and beyond.
14. A proposal for revised admission arrangements to the Three Rivers Learning Trust is
ongoing, stimulated by the increasing pressure on the three schools for places. There is some
spare capacity at middle school phase. However, KEVI is already struggling to accommodate
all applications it receives. It would be untenable for the economic success of the local
community and would go against Government policy, for the Learning Trust not to expand
capacity when there is a demand.
5
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
15. Following some recent investment in school buildings from central Government sources, the
general state of school buildings in Morpeth, whilst far from ideal, is at least satisfactory.
However, Goosehill will require more investment, sooner, than other schools and it is
suggested that achieving a new building for the school becomes a key aspiration within the
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan and that NCC be obliged to play its full and proper part in
finding a suitable way forward.
16. Capital investment to bring school buildings up to a reasonable standard is most likely to be
available from the Academy Capital Maintenance Fund available through the Education
Funding Agency (EFA), but only to Academies. Morpeth schools should have regard to this in
assessing how best to fulfil their future capital requirements for repairs, maintenance and
development of their buildings.
17. The geographical situation of Morpeth schools is not ideal. This exacerbates traffic flow
through the town centre at school start and finishing times, especially around First Schools.
Solutions to traffic density and control are needed. There is no obvious panacea to resolve
these problems. Each school is dealing with this situation as best it can but as they have no
jurisdiction outside of their school grounds so what schools can achieve on their own is
limited. To gain the associated economic benefits for the community that comes from
expanded schools, solutions to these issues need to be found. Schools must continue to work
with the wider community, law enforcement, and planning authorities to seek some
amelioration of what is an entrenched and growing problem.
18. Many students attending Middle Schools and KEVI are dependent on bus transport. In the
absence of subsidies for uneconomic services some have already been lost or are under
threat. This is a deterrent to students from outside of Morpeth catchment.
19. Schools require access to good quality Broadband services. They are only one of a
burgeoning set of users that are dependent on, and demanding of, these services as a normal
infrastructure element akin to power and water.
20. High quality athletics facilities at KEVI, the availability of a dance studio and (shortly) a new
rehearsal space and music department, are community facilities hosted, to mutual benefit, in
one of our schools.
21. Any development in the placement, access, facilities, usage etc of our schools should take
into account the valuable community amenity of Morpeth Adult Association.
22. Free Schools can develop anywhere, even when there is no apparent local requirement or
demand. Local schools need to be aware of this when considering the security of their
position within any locality, and especially where there is competition to access existing
school places, such as in Morpeth’s Middle and High schools.
6
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
23. Schools are now positively encouraged to free themselves from control by LAs, to realise
their potential through networking together, and to understand that government expects
good schools to thrive and expand and others to wither and close. It is vital that our schools
recognise this and act together accordingly.
24. Current Government policy requires that good schools lead the charge on improving
standards by expanding their influence within and beyond their local community of schools.
Morpeth has an unprecedented opportunity to broaden its present success in achieving high
standards for pupils, deepen foundations and expand its footprint within and beyond the
town. Our Schools should work together to achieve mutual security and success.
25. Morpeth schools should consider what arrangements could eventually afford a
comprehensive organisational structure assimilating all pupils of school age (2 years to 19
years) within a single managerial unit.
26. By maximising their potential Morpeth’s schools can draw families into the town who will
require housing and stimulate jobs, who will then support other local markets and pay local
taxes so helping to develop our infrastructure, including schools, in a virtuous, selfsustaining cycle.
27. Morpeth schools represent a considerable economic asset to be ranked alongside other
successful commercial sectors. There are 16 schools employing 400+ people with a
combined salary bill in excess of £13m. Capital expenditure from these schools in the last
year was nearly £3.5m. There are over 4000 pupils of which 3000 attend Middle and High
schools and so are likely to have some independent spending power of their own. Our
schools create one of the largest economic groupings within the town. As a community we
should recognise and celebrate this benefit and exploit it vigorously.
28. There are many challenges and opportunities facing our schools. These are inescapable and
an overriding message is that there is no do-nothing option. Schools now have
unprecedented freedoms from both national and local government control. They must look
to themselves and each other to maximise their potential. Our own Three Rivers Trust is a
prime example of what this changed environment can achieve. Morpeth has a better
opportunity than most to fulfil the rhetoric and specific demands of government policy
because we start from a high base – our schools are perhaps the best in Northumberland and
amongst the best in the country. The case for sustaining this quality, to the benefit of the
entire local community, is unarguable. We must maximise our schools’ potential because it
provides a basis for the economic success of our town and all that flows from that. The
opportunities are there for the taking.
7
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
“Our vision is for a highly educated society in which opportunity is more equal for children and
young people no matter what their background or family circumstances.” 1 (DfE)
Introduction
1. This report provides a baseline for the current and possible future pattern of education
provision in the various communities of Morpeth and those adjoining parishes within scope
of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan. It seeks to inform and influence any future
development proposals for the area. It is complementary to and forms a part of the Morpeth
Neighbourhood Plan.
2. The report examines projections of future pupil numbers within the Plan area in the light of
projected housing and economic growth and other demographic change such as an aging
population, and how this will translate into demand for school places. It seeks to place all of
this within the context of rapidly developing political policy on education provision that
amongst other things will see the growth of much greater autonomy for schools and a
commensurate decline in the role of Local Authorities.
3. Plans and proposals within the Neighbourhood Plan are based on objectively assessed needs
and reflect current political priorities. Current patterns of service provision may constrain or
influence future development patterns and existing issues that need to be addressed through
the Plan are highlighted. To ensure a sound and robust plan which the local community –
and the LPA and Examiner - can support, this report is heavily referenced to show an
accurate comprehension of education provision and opportunities across the plan area.
1
Strapline of the Dept of Education web-site: http://www.education.gov.uk/
8
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
The Changing Educational Landscape in England
4. The provision of state education in England is changing. The publication in November 2010
of the Schools White Paper, The Importance of Teaching2, heralded perhaps the most far
reaching set of proposals in a generation seeking a transformation in the mode of education
delivery and with it the responsibilities and accountabilities of all involved.
5. The role of Local Authorities (LAs), already diminished under the previous Government, will
shrink further to become little more than “light touch” regulators responsible for ensuring
that sufficient local school places of acceptable quality are available. These school places will
be delivered by a burgeoning range of possible providers organised in a dizzying array of
possible organisational and managerial structures, and largely independent of direct local or
national intervention. As the Schools White Paper summarises:
5.1. We want every school to be able to shape its own character, frame its own ethos, and
develop its own specialisms, free of either central or local bureaucratic constraint……..our
direction of travel is towards schools as autonomous institutions collaborating with each
other on terms set by teachers, not bureaucrats.3
6. The motivation for these developments is a drive to improve standards. The DfE argues that
international evidence supports the conclusion that:
6.1. the most effective systems in the world seek to combine significant operational
independence for schools with effective accountability. A system in which schools are free
to decide how things should be done and are then accountable for the results appears to be
the most effective in raising achievement.4
7. With this growing independence, comes commensurate accountability and scrutiny. Schools
are to be held to account even more stringently than under previous administrations. This
will come from greater transparency – publication of more data about individual school
performance5 and a refocusing of OFSTED who will lead the supervisory charge through
rigorous assessments that concentrate more singularly on teaching and learning, with other
issues, perceived to be less central, removed from their consideration.6
8. Schools themselves are expected to work ever more co-operatively and closely7 to ensure
that local provision is at least above a declared “floor standard”8, and always showing,
through independently published and moderated data, a manifest improvement in
2
DfE: The Importance of Teaching - The Schools White Paper, November 2010
Ibid: Para 15
4
DfE: The Case for Change, November 2010: Para 74
5
DfE; The Importance of Teaching - The Schools White Paper, November 2010: Para 6
6
Ibid., Para 6.16
7
Ibid., Para 7
8
Ibid., Para 6.24
3
9
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
standards.9
9. The White Paper makes it abundantly clear that bureaucracy in the management of schools
at both a national and local level is to be considerably reduced leaving Headteachers,
Governors, and their schools to manage independently whilst at the same time giving a
strong impulsion towards inter-school support and co-operation.
10. The role of LAs is trailed in the White Paper as providing:
10.1.
a strong strategic role as champions for parents and families, for vulnerable pupils
and of educational excellence.
11. However, it is clear that this amounts to a commissioning and co-ordinating role limited to
ensuring that sufficient schools places are available10. In practice this is described as:
11.1.
the local authority as a convenor of partnerships; the local authority as a maker and
shaper of effective commissioning; and the local authority as a champion for children,
parents and communities11.
12. In particular, LAs now have no direct powers of management in relation to any schools, only
limited and indirect powers of intervention in relation to Maintained schools, and no powers
of intervention in Academies and Free Schools12. In practice LAs will have a role in assuring
the quality of provision by: challenging schools which fail to improve13, but must do so at
arms-length, through data monitoring rather than direct intervention, by brokering cooperation between schools rather than enforcing, and by offering support services to
schools, but usually at a cost to be paid by individual schools.14 In contrast:
12.1.
The primary responsibility for improvement rests with schools, and the wider system
[…] designed so that our best schools and leaders can take on greater responsibility,
leading to improvement across the system15.
13. LAs will continue to coordinate admissions and ensure fair access to all schools, including
Academies and Free Schools; and will retain responsibility for school transport
arrangements which promote fair access16.
9
Ibid., Para 7
Ibid., Para 5.30
11
DfE: Action research into the evolving role of the local authority in education: final report for the Ministerial Advisory
Group, June 2012: Page 5
12
DfE; The Importance of Teaching - The Schools White Paper, November 2010: Para 5.38
13
Ibid., Para 5.37
14
Ibid., Para 5.30, final bullet & 5.44
15
Ibid., Para 22
16
Ibid. Para. 5.34 & 5.36
10
10
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Commissioning New Schools and School Places
14. Despite these radical changes the Government has made it clear that it considers that:
14.1.
The creation and development of state-funded schools is strongly in the national
interest;
15. and that it is:
15.1.
firmly committed to ensuring there is sufficient provision to meet growing demand
for state-funded school places, increasing choice and opportunity in state-funded education
and raising educational standards.17
16. It also states that:
16.1.
For the immediate future, the majority of schools will remain as local authority
maintained schools and their funding will be routed through local authorities. But we
anticipate that, as Academy status becomes the norm, local authorities will increasingly
move to a strategic commissioning and oversight role.18
17. This prediction is rapidly coming to pass as the pace of conversion to academy status
accelerates, especially among secondary schools. It is even more remarkable to note that
some LAs are choosing to delegate their role in commissioning to other local bodies19;
apparently even the shrinking residue of LA involvement in schools is in some instances
being relinquished.
18. The White Paper also states that:
18.1.
We expect that local authorities will encourage good schools to expand and
encourage Free Schools or Academies to meet demand.
19. In practice there is now a presumption that all new schools will be either an Academy or a
Free School. It goes on
19.1.
This will be particularly important in areas of significant demographic growth,
where birth rates have risen and there is a particular need for new places. Even in areas
where there is not significant demographic growth, we want local authorities to focus on
supplying enough good places rather than removing surplus places.20 (Our emphasis.)
17
Planning For Schools Development - August 2011; Policy statement by Secretary of State for Communities and Local
Government and the Secretary of State for Education; published by Department for Communities and Local Government
18
DfE: The Importance of Teaching - The Schools White Paper, November 2010: Para 5.42
19
The future role of the local authority in education: ADCS
20
Ibid., Para 5.31
11
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
This latter statement is of particular interest for Morpeth in formulating and achieving
its vision for the future of education in the town.
A New National Funding Formula for Schools
20. The financing of schools in England is achieved through a national funding formula for the
distribution of funds to Local Authorities who then agree with their Schools Forum a local
formula through which to distribute that funding to individual schools.
21. This scheme is being revised with the declared aim of building, over an unspecified period,
“a fairer, simpler, and more consistent funding system in which schools…have confidence” 21.
Implementation begins in 2013 with the intention of making local formulas simpler, more
transparent, and efficient. Although the changes remove much previous flexibility and
prescribe new restrictions, the changes represent early moves towards the introduction of a
national funding formula during the next Spending Review that will achieve fairer funding
across the country. Given that Northumberland is close to the bottom of the league table of
school funding, this is a welcome development. The Scheme applies to all schools maintained
by the Authority.
22. The new arrangements will allocate a much greater proportion of schools’ budgetary
allocations on a per-pupil basis rather than to school places. This will mean that schools with
surplus places will receive less. In some instances the impact of this approach is potentially
considerable and if fully implemented may make some schools financially non-viable. DfE
has advised schools that:
22.1.
in some cases, schools may need to consider operating more efficiently and …. this
could include federating, merging or joining an academy chain22.
23. However, for the years 2013/14 and 2014/15 a Minimum Funding Guarantee (MFG) has
been given that will restrict any loss to a limit of 1.5% per year. DfE has said that the MFG
will extend beyond 2014/15 but cannot quantify this as it falls within the next Spending
Review period23. Some schools will make a commensurate gain, and in Northumberland that
is similarly capped to ensure that the Northumberland Funding Formula does not overspend.
24. The consequence of this is that schools that manage to fill all or most of their places will
potentially increase their funding. Furthermore, this encourages schools that can, to attempt
to expand up to and perhaps beyond their current capacity. This situation will undoubtedly
be significant in achieving a key factor within current national policy - to allow “Good”
schools to expand, at the cost of others that are less successful. Some Morpeth schools have
surplus places and so will be affected by these changes. Although the MFG should
21
DfE: School funding reform: Next steps towards a fairer system; March 2012
School Funding Reform; DfE General Article, 5 December 2012
23
Ibid.
22
12
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
prevent any immediate crisis of funding, all schools must consider carefully their
longer-term management and financial strategies.
13
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
The Educational Landscape in Northumberland
25. Northumberland has 180 maintained schools24. There are Eight Academies and one Free
School.
26. The Northumberland Corporate Strategy25 makes a key reference to the situation of
education within the County:
26.1.
We…..need to ensure we deliver a high quality school system to improve the chances
of young people securing positive outcomes. However, Northumberland’s future success
relies on this being co-ordinated with an economic strategy that creates new job
opportunities, affordable housing, the infrastructure to start up new businesses and places
to develop skills further so that young people choose to stay in the county.
27. The associated Northumberland Local Development Plan: Core Strategy Preferred Options
Consultation Document26 acknowledges the ascendancy of Academies and Free Schools and
the power of LAs to require sites to be available for both.27 In a previous version of the
Strategy - Core Strategy Issues and Options: Consultation Document: May 2012, reference is
made to the current mix of two and three tier systems of education within Northumberland
as a legacy from a previous Northumberland County Council (NCC) strategy28. Here it is
acknowledged that NCC cannot commit to continue this policy because of the capital costs
involved. Both versions of the Strategy commit to exploring other options that could attract
capital funding29 such as the formation of Trust Schools and Federations (of schools) and the
Priority Schools Building Programme30 (which replaced the earlier Government’s Building
Schools for the Future Programme) under which NCC has successfully bid for funds to rebuild
three Northumberland high schools – but not in Morpeth.
27.1.
From April 2013 NCC will adapt to the requirements of the Education Act 2011
with a restructured and re-focussed Early Years and Schools Service31. The aim is to
provide strategic leadership for Northumberland schools through the development of an
Education Trust. In December 2012 NCC published a Paper setting out in detail how this
new service will operate within the constraints of increased freedom and autonomy for
schools and an emphasis on school-to-school collaboration. The Paper describes NCC as
being:
24
DfE: http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/performance/geo/regionA_all.html
Stronger Together: Leading Northumberland to a Greater Future, The Corporate Strategy for Northumberland County
Council, December 2010, page 6
26
Northumberland Local Development Plan: Core Strategy Preferred Options Consultation Document - para 15.8;
February 2013
27
Planning For Schools Development - August 201; Policy statement by Secretary of State for Communities and Local
Government and the Secretary of State for Education; published by Department for Communities and Local Government
28
NCC Putting the Learner First: A Strategic Plan for the Provision of Education in Northumberland (2005)
29
NCC; Footnote to page 107 of Northumberland Local Development Plan: Core Strategy Issues and Options Consultation
Document: May 2012
30
DfE: Priority School Building Programme
31
NCC: Early Years and Schools Business Planning Framework 2011-2014 Refresh, October 2012
25
14
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
27.2.
committed to providing a broad range of school improvement services to all schools
as a traded service; it goes on to say that it will:
27.3.
pursue strategies to build the capacity of strong schools to be able to support those
causing concern or requiring improvement; and
27.4.
commission or broker effective collaborative arrangements to ensure expertise in
leadership and teaching and learning are shared.
28. The result of this is that NCC will liaise largely with schools by invitation. It will still
monitor the performance of individual schools, using publicly available data
published by DfE, but it will only intervene directly where a school is judged to be
Inadequate by OFSTED. In that circumstance the options are radical, including the
imposition of Sponsored Academy status and even closure.
Children with Additional Educational Needs (AEN)
29. Northumberland has a comprehensive strategy for supporting children (and their families)
who have additional requirements beyond that provided by mainstream schooling32. This
includes any pupil who suffers an identified barrier to learning. The aim is to meet the needs
of most children and young people with AEN within mainstream schools, with suitable
support arrangements including specialist services provided as required from within the
NCC or beyond. Some children with more complex needs attend Special Schools or Special
Units attached to mainstream schools. The proportion of Pupils in Northumberland and
Morpeth schools with AEN, and the manner in which their needs are fulfilled, are broadly in
line with national averages33.
30. Northumberland is restructuring the delivery of AEN services following an external review
in 201034. A comprehensive local provision will be created within or perhaps between
school partnerships, in what is described as school “Clusters” combining to offer
comprehensive AEN services locally. This will establish AEN services within communities
and spread the necessary expertise more broadly. Overall it should lead to needs being met
much closer to home, within a familiar local setting, projected throughout all school phases,
and provided by a continuity of staffing resources that can become familiar to children and
their families.
31. Community special schools will act as ‘hubs’ within each Cluster providing early intervention
and high need special provision in each locality, where pupils will have access to mainstream
and special education support centres. Appropriate AEN funding will be delegated to each
Cluster of local schools and the entire local AEN service will be managed and administered at
32
NCC Policy Statement on Children and Young People with Special Educational Needs
DfE: Percentage of Pupils with Special Educational Needs
34
NCC Northumberland Special Educational Needs: Cambridge Associates, on behalf of NCC
33
15
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
school level.
32. As part of this far-reaching development the County will amend the age ranges and redesignate the specialist provision of eight existing Special Schools and two Special Units.
Many will extend their age range down to 2 years in line with incipient Government policy of
expanding Early Years Education and Child Care provision to all disadvantaged 2 year olds
and children with AEN. Several will eventually offer an age range provision from 2 to 19
years35.
33. Since planning these changes Government has published plans36 to radically alter the
structure and requirements of education to children and young people with AEN in England
from 2014. Under the Children and Families Bill37, parents will have a new legal right to buy
in specialist special educational needs (SEN) and disabled care for their children. Parents
will be given control of personal budgets for their children with severe, profound or multiple
health and learning needs and be able to choose expert support outwith their home LA. The
new law will also require Education, Health, and Social Care Services to jointly plan
comprehensive services for children and young people with AEN and to assess their needs
from birth to age 25.
34. All Northumberland schools partnerships are expected to participate in these changes. In
Morpeth the result of addressing both the changes instigated by NCC and those required by
new legislation are not wholly developed. However, NCC is developing a County-wide
approach that will offer an opportunity for all schools partnerships in
Northumberland to create and manage local structures for the provision of AEN. The
Children and Families Bill is to be implemented with effect from April 2014 (with
provision for some delay to September 2014 in particular circumstances). The new
possibilities for, and impact upon, Morpeth Schools awaits further initiatives by NCC
and so cannot yet be assessed.
Nursery and Child Care Provision
35. Since September 2009 LAs in England have been delivering a targeted offer of between 10
and 15 hours free early education to “disadvantaged” two-year-olds. This will extend to
around 20 per cent of the “least advantaged” two-year-olds (around 150,000) from
September 2013 and be extended from September 2014 to around 40 per cent of two-yearolds. Generally the assessment of entitlement is in line with that for free school meals38.
36. Since September 2010 all three- and four-year-olds in England have been entitled to 15
hours a week of free early year’s education offered by a range of local providers and funded
by LAs. Over 95 per cent of three- and four-year-olds access this entitlement. Most First
35
NCC: Northumberland Special Schools and Special Units: Consultation – Autumn 2012
DfE: Support and Aspiration: A new approach to special educational needs and disability - progress and next steps
37
DfE: Children and Families Bill 2013
38
DfE: Early education for two-year-olds
36
16
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Schools in Northumberland offer dedicated places to 3- and 4-year olds39.
37. Northumberland also has 25 Children’s Centres/Sure Starts40.
39
40
Ibid
NCC: Children's Centres (also known as: Sure Start); http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=1928
17
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
The Educational Landscape in Morpeth
38. The Morpeth Partnership of schools comprises 12 first schools feeding into 3 middle schools
which ultimately feed into the King Edward VI School. The structure is set out at Appendix A.
Because the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan incorporates a more limited area than that
covered by the Morpeth Partnership, the Plan addresses directly only those schools within
this more limited area, although it takes account of other schools which ultimately feed into
and therefore increase the number of pupils within the partnership at middle or high school
phases.
39. The Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan incorporates the parishes of Hebron, Hepscott, Mitford,
and Pegswood. Only Hebron and Pegswood have a First School (Tritlington CE First School
and Pegswood County First School respectively). Hepscott and Mitford are incorporated into
the catchment of schools within Morpeth town.
40. The statistics held by DfE at national, regional, LA and individual schools levels includes
pupil numbers within age groups at regional, LA and School levels41. Projections are also
made on the changing demographics of the school population. However, given the huge task
of gathering and collating the constituent figures, these are, inevitably, usually no more
recent than two years after the event.
41. NCC also gathers statistics at an individual school level and because of the more manageable
size of the task and their expert local knowledge, it is able to maintain more up-to-date and
accurate data. In particular, numbers are collated on individual school age cohorts, together
with projections from birth to age 18 of the potential school population for the County,
school partnerships, and individual schools. Relating this information to Pupil Admission
Numbers (the maximum pupil intake for a school, calculated from a common national
formula) the spare capacity of a school is readily calculated. Adding further information on
live births within individual school catchments adjusted to project for potential additional
housing, it is possible to predict future demand for places. From there, judicious assumptions
can be made about future numbers of school places required per school phase, over time,
and at a finely grained geographical level.
Morpeth Schools in Figures
42. The structure of the Morpeth Partnership of Schools is set out at Appendix A. This nominates
all schools within the Partnership, within Phase (First, Middle, and High) and shows how
each feeds through into subsequent Phases (First to Middle; Middle to High).
41
DfE: School and Local Statistics
18
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
43. A digest of key statistics per school – Current Pupil Count, Capacity, Pupil Admission
Number, and Surplus Places - is given at Appendix B1.
44. A detailed and comprehensive set of place-data per year group per catchment for all schools
within the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan and the Morpeth Schools Partnership
is shown Appendix C.
45. Using information from GP practices of the number of children registered with doctors’
surgeries residing in the catchment area of each school it is possible to project future take-up
of school places from within the Morpeth area up to 4 years ahead. An alternative data
source is the record of Live Births. Both are collected annually and maintained by NCC. It is
accepted that the former data are more accurate, but both sets of figures are cross-checked
to ensure that the best estimate is available. Current data are shown at Appendix E.
46. NCC anticipates future school place requirements up to 8/9 years hence. This is done by:
46.1.
establishing a baseline using information on live births as described above,
adjusted by actual pupil retention ratios taken from the succeeding 5 year period; and
46.2.
anticipating an increased housing stock within the town and utilising an industrystandard ratio to generate resulting additional school place requirements per year
group.
47. The results of this projection, providing the principal basis for school place requirement
planning within the Morpeth Partnership, are shown at Appendix . A digest of the key
elements of the table are set out below:
First Schools Total
Jan-12
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
Middle Schools Totals
High School Y9-Y11
Totals
1
2
3
1
2
3
1
2
3
1,150
1,171
1,149
1,115
1,055
1,023
990
973
984
1,488
1,488
1,488
1,488
1,488
1,488
1,488
1,488
1,488
23%
21%
23%
25%
29%
31%
33%
35%
34%
1,212
1,152
1,108
1,072
1,040
1,044
1,055
1,031
984
1,269
1,269
1,269
1,269
1,269
1,269
1,269
1,269
1,269
4%
9%
13%
16%
18%
18%
17%
19%
22%
980
989
990
967
959
915
888
838
831
1,449
1,449
1,449
1,449
1,449
1,449
1,449
1,449
1,449
0%
0%
0%
1%
2%
5%
7%
11%
13%
Total all
High
Phases Excl. 16-19 School
6th Form
Y9-Y13
1
1
1
3,342
3,312
3,247
3,154
3,054
2,982
2,933
2,842
2,799
469
460
465
474
467
467
456
446
427
1,449
1,449
1,455
1,441
1,426
1,382
1,344
1,284
1,258
Overall
1
2
3
3,811
3,772
3,711
3,628
3,521
3,449
3,390
3,288
3,226
4206
4206
4206
4206
4206
4206
4206
4206
4206
9%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
19%
22%
23%
Figure 1: Morpeth Partnership – projection of school place requirements (i.e. excluding Pegswood
First)
1=
2=
3=
Projected number of places required
Total available capacity
% of surplus places
NB: figures do not include projection of
additional housing from 2017 onwards.
19
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Inter alia it is notable that the trend is one of inexorably falling rolls. This is because;
47.1.
within the Morpeth area and across Northumberland the age demographic is
increasing42; commensurately, the birth-rate within the Morpeth Partnership of schools
is falling; and
47.2.
the number of pupils generated by additional housing is relatively low - only 2 or
3 pupils in each year group per 100 houses (Appendix makes a presumption of an
additional 100 houses per year to and including 2016).
48. These figures are for live births only without regard to the additional impact of immigration.
However, the current impact is already reflected in these figures, and in the light of
developing Government policy it seems likely that any future impact will be small.
49. However, parents/carers are able to choose any particular school for their child(ren) so long
as a place exists. It will be seen from the figures in Appendix A to Appendix C that such a
choice is being actively pursued within the Morpeth Partnership. First Schools in particular
accommodate up to 40% of their pupils from the catchments of other Morpeth schools. This
feature is less prominent at Middle School where the choice is more limited, although it is
still apparent, e.g. Newminster accommodates 23% of its pupils from the Chantry catchment;
and Chantry accommodates 13% of its pupils from the Newminster catchment. As there is
only one High School this factor does not apply.
50. Furthermore, most schools have a notable number of pupils from outside of the broader
Morpeth catchment area, typically 10% - 35% (excluding church aided schools which by
their nature can always be expected to gather pupils from a much wider area). Chantry
Middle accommodates up to 35% of its pupils from outwith the Morpeth Partnership
catchment; Newminster Middle similarly accommodates 25%; and KEVI 17% of its Year 9 to
11 pupils. In First Schools this is typically 10% - 20%; exceptionally, Tritlington C of E First
has 86% from non-Morpeth catchments. However, it will be seen at Appendix B1 that
relatively few pupils from the Morpeth catchment attend schools further afield. It is
significant that the Morpeth Partnership of schools is able to attract this additional
cohort of pupils as without them our schools would carry significant proportions of
surplus places to the extent that individual schools may otherwise become financially
non-viable. It is vital for their continued sustainability that Morpeth schools attract
pupils from the widest possible area.
51. The result of falling school rolls already impacts schools within the Morpeth Plan area. For
example, the four (non-Catholic) Morpeth First Schools offer 195 school places for Reception
pupils each year but in September 2012 there were only 139 children who applied for these
places, well below the available capacity. This is further illustrated at Appendix B which
shows that several schools are under-subscribed and have surplus places (only Newminster
42
NCC: Stronger Together: Leading Northumberland to a Greater `Future , December 2010; page 6 – Northumberland’s
Population
20
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Middle School and Morpeth First School (Goosehill) are more-or-less “full” in all year
groups). In the catchment feeding into Chantry Middle School the First Schools are carrying
21% - 40% surplus places. Chantry itself has a 20% surplus. Within more rural schools this
is even more marked, with Netherton First and Harbottle First, feeding into Dr Thomlinson
Middle and thence KEVI, showing a surplus of 76% and 54% respectively. With the advent of
the new A New National Funding Formula, which slants funding increasingly towards actual
pupil numbers rather than school places, this will inevitably become a growing problem for
these schools, particularly as the associated Minimum Funding Guarantee diminishes yearon-year. School closures in these (mainly rural) areas would potentially increase the number
of pupils attending schools in, or closer to, Morpeth.
52. The choice of education provider in England is now unashamedly market-driven as the DfE
makes clear:
52.1.
A well‐functioning system should mimic market incentives for high‐performing and
popular schools to expand43.
53. This “market” for “Good” schools – that is, schools that are classed as “Good” or
“Outstanding” by OFSTED - is encouraged by current national policy, to the extent that the
Schools White Paper encourages local authorities:
53.1.
Even in areas where there is not significant demographic growth……..to focus on
supplying enough good places rather than removing surplus places.44.
54. A recent report sponsored by DfE exemplifies this:
54.1.
On top of a simple basic needs requirement, we would ideally like the system to
encourage high‐performing schools to expand disproportionately, in order to offer a better
education to more student”45
55. Within pre-school provision OFSTED recommends LAs to encourage “Good” schools to
actively link with and support other providers, saying:
55.1.
….there is a case for linking pre-school provision, including child-minders and
children’s centres, more closely to good and outstanding primary schools46.
56. All schools within the scope of the Neighbourhood Plan are rated as either Good or
Outstanding by OFSTED – a wonderful fillip for the town as a whole that must be the major
reason why so many families select Morpeth schools for their children. Therefore there is
scope for all schools to increase their market share of pupils even in an environment of
diminishing local requirement for places. It can be argued that in a time of reducing local
43
DfE: How can we encourage good schools to expand? September 2012
The Importance of Teaching - The Schools White Paper, November 2010: Para, 5.31
45
DfE: How can we encourage good schools to expand? September 2012
46
Ofsted Annual Report 2011/12
44
21
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
demand it is incumbent upon our local schools to sustain their viability in this way, and
so indirectly fulfil national policy requirements. The alternative appears to be one of
gradual decline in pupil numbers, which at least at First School phase must lead eventually to
a consolidation of places within fewer buildings/schools.
22
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Morpeth Schools: Risks and Opportunities
Losing the “Middle Tier”
57. An overriding change facing all schools in England is the much reduced role of LAs in the
future of local schools partnerships as discussed above. LAs will withdraw from the
management and to some extent the support of local education. The loss of this so-called
“middle tier” (i.e. that between DfE and schools) has been much debated in academic and
other papers (see Select Bibliography: Appendix I)
58. In an arresting summary of these changes a report for the Association of Directors of
Children's Services47 summarises:
58.1.
…what is very striking about these government changes is the unprecedented
pressure this is going to place on schools …: the increase in floor targets; the reduced
flexibility in 14-16 qualifications; the tougher Ofsted standards which will threaten the
majority of schools’ current rating; the tight funding regime compounded by the
introduction of a new funding formula producing many losers; questions to consider about
whether to be an academy or not; the challenge of coping with a new curriculum; as well
as the prospect of inadequate capital funding to meet rising primary numbers; and the
possibility of regional pay for teachers. One Assistant Director for a large county authority
described this rather aptly as a ‘perfect storm’48.
59. Given its diminishing role in managing education provision strategically, NCC apparently has
no preferred vision of schools provision in Northumberland. In any event, its intervention in
Morpeth has been limited for many years as it has concentrated effort on more deprived
areas of the County. In particular it sees no need to expand any school in the Morpeth
partnership given its projection of falling rolls in the area and the availability of places
currently occupied by pupils from outwith the Morpeth catchment - School Admission
procedures favour children from within catchment, who are generally accommodated first,
so that over time a considerable intake of in-catchment pupils could be accommodated in all
phases. In all practical terms NCC is likely to concentrate simply on ensuring the provision of
sufficient school places; and given the topography of Morpeth’s school catchment, where all
schools are readily accessible by all in-catchment pupils, it seems unlikely that NCC will seek
to intervene in the geographical placement of school places. In any event, given the national
policy presumption that any new school will be an Academy or a Free School, LAs are
generally prevented from investing in new schools except in rare and peculiar circumstances
which are unlikely to prevail in Morpeth.
60. The future ambition of NCC for its role in education can now be assessed following the issue
of ‘Championing Children and Young People: A strategic vision and policy for education in
47
48
The Future Role of The Local Authority in Education: The Association of Directors of Children's Services
Ibid.
23
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Northumberland’ – a draft document which is presently being discussed between Officers and
Headteachers. This document “…describe(s) a radical new partnership between schools,
families, local communities and NCC and how together we will secure an autonomous and selfimproving school system49”. Note that the “autonomy” of school is acknowledged. A personal
reading of the document suggests that the greatest effort and resources will – rightly – be
targeted at schools that are performing below an acceptable standard.
61. Funding for maintained schools will continue to be “passported” from the DfE through LAs to
schools through a local formula brokered by LAs and approved by elected members and
Schools Forums. This money is ring-fenced and it is highly unlikely that LAs will find
themselves able or even willing to contribute any more to schools from their own
(diminishing) resources. Indeed, what reduced services LAs do make available to schools
will inevitably be the minimum prescribed by regulation with anything beyond that charged
for at an economic rate. This is true of running costs, and capital costs for maintenance,
repair, refurbishment, and new buildings. LAs, including NCC, will not contribute to schools
from other budgets50.
62. This, then, shifts responsibility for the provision (as against the commissioning) of
school places, from LAs to local communities and schools.
First Schools
63. The projections by NCC at Appendix indicate that, even with additional housing, Morpeth
is unlikely to be able to sustain its existing schools provision without increasing the
cohort of pupils drawn from outside the Morpeth catchment. Therefore, without a
considerable expansion of pupils, to levels not foreseen in these projections, and potentially
requiring an unprecedented increase in house building in the town, the likelihood of
achieving the establishment of an additional First school is very distant.
64. The present expectation is that immediate future expansion of Morpeth (both housing and
jobs) is most likely to take place to the north of the town. Therefore First school places are
most likely to be required by families from that area (it is assumed that Middle and High
School children will be able readily to access school places from any part of the town, as they
do now). Whilst there may be some, or even sufficient demand, over time, for a First school
in that area, it seems unrealistic to expect that this may be achieved, given the numbers of
surplus places elsewhere in the partnership. Whilst travel for younger children may be an
issue there is no doubt that all existing First schools in Morpeth are accessible from any area
of the town and in any event Local Authorities will retain responsibility for school transport
arrangements which promote fair access51.
49
NCC: Championing Children and Young People : A strategic vision and policy for education in Northumberland
(Draft – June 2013)
50
NCC: Northumberland Core Strategy Preferred Options: Feb 2013 - para.15.9
51
DfE: The Importance of Teaching - The Schools White Paper, November 2010: Para. 5.36
24
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
65. LAs, in their capacity of ensuring access to sufficient school places, can decide that a new
(additional) school is required. There is then a presumption, set out in The Education Act
2011 (EA 2011), that all such new schools will be either Academies, or Free schools (with a
limited number of exceptions including the replacement of existing maintained school
buildings). Furthermore, no funding is available nationally for new schools; rather, it is
presumed that any new school commissioned by a LA will be fully funded by that LA, or by
other providers, for example, an Academy sponsor, or a Free School funded directly by the
DfE52. A further possibility is that a future developer(s) could provide funding under the
Community Infrastructure Levy53, which allows LAs to negotiate contributions to the
additional cost of infrastructure demands, such as schools, consequent upon new
development.
66. The new National Funding Formula (paragraph 20), will direct funds largely according to
pupils rather than places, which will clearly work to the advantage of such schools. Goosehill
is already full. Abbeyfields has an apparent surplus of places, but this is confined to the latter
Years of the school with Years R, 1 and 2 full, and projections showing that future Reception
years will be similarly fully subscribed, so that any surplus is likely to disappear within two
further academic years. Here, again, the new National Funding Formula will work to its
advantage. All Saints C of E and Stobhillgate are below their potential intake but at least with
the prospect of sufficient pupils to retain financial viability; and given the presumption of a
concentration of “Good” schools expanding and a commensurately reduced focus on surplus
places (paragraph 52), their future should be secure. Tritlington, unusually, draws 86% of its
current 36 pupils from outside of the Morpeth catchment, but can be regarded as an
exemplar for the “allowing-good-schools-to-expand” national policy described earlier. St.
Roberts RC, whilst not full, is well subscribed, and given its religious character naturally
draws pupils from a wide geographical area. Given its particular constituency and the fact
that it is Voluntary Aided, it seems reasonable to assume that its future is secure.
67. Consideration of schools within the scope of Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan cannot fully
account for itself without also examining the potential impact of schools within the wider
Morpeth Partnership, and even beyond. First schools feeding into Dr Thomlinson Middle
School and thence into KEVI potentially have an effect upon all phases of schools covered by
the Plan. Rural first schools feeding into Chantry Middle have an even more direct effect
upon the Middle and High school phases of this report.
68. The First schools feeding into Dr Thomlinson Middle at Rothbury and Thropton are full or
almost full. On the other hand, Netherton Northside and Harbottle C of E, although relatively
small with Net Capacities of 25 and 37 places respectively, are only 25% and 54% full. These
schools will inevitably face financial challenges in years to come as result of the new National
Funding Formula (Paragraph 20), unless they can increase their pupil intake. The most
obvious possibilities are that the schools will close; or Federate; or merge with neighbouring
school(s) in a way that allows a sharing of resources. But there is another possibility: re52
53
DfE: Establishing a new school: advice for LAs and proposers
DCLG: The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010
25
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
designating to Primary (age 4 – 11). For a Voluntary Aided (Harbottle C of E) school the
Diocese can propose to redefine the Phase/age range by process prescribed by Regulation54.
Similarly, LAs can propose to redefine the age range of a Maintained (Netherton) school55.
Always assuming that there is a will to do this by the relevant authority, it seems to be a
practical method of expanding a school that is under-subscribed and which has existing
space to utilise without major, or even any capital cost. In any event a school can choose to
become an Academy and in the process can extend its age range without reference to the LA.
Additional staff costs would naturally accrue from the associated increase in pupils, but this
should be matched by an increased amount of per pupil funding.
69. The three smaller rural schools feeding into Chantry Middle (Cambo, Longhorsely St Helens
C of E, and Stannington), although not so under-subscribed, could find it advantageous to
make the same choice although none has the same level of underused capacity and therefore
may face commensurate capital costs which would undoubtedly be a major deterrent.
70. Such a change would continue the commitment espoused by NCC in the report Putting the
Learner First, of May 2004, of moving from three-tier to two-tier education in
Northumberland. Although put on hold in 2008 because of financial constraints it was
affirmed in October of that year as continuing policy by the (then) Executive Director of
Children’s Services who stated:
70.1.
“…the commitment to full accountability for key stages and minimum school
transfers remain key Council policy56.
71. In particular, this would reduce the number of younger children having to travel from rural
first schools to distant Middle Schools, and reduce travel costs otherwise met by the LA.
Whilst the possibility is speculative, it is feasible, and the three middle schools in the
Morpeth Partnership should be alert to the possible consequences.
72. An alternative view is that it is prudent to allow the relatively new Three Rivers Learning
Trust to exploit its now unified provision for the age range of 9 – 19, including maximising
the possibilities provided by its separate geographical locations, land, and buildings, in ways
that may leap-frog the more simplistic view of two tier/three tier provision. Add to this the
opportunities of working more closely with feeder first schools and there arises a whole set
of intriguing structural possibilities that are within the managerial scope of the schools
involved rather than with NCC as in the past. However, this possibility is highly speculative
and is outwith the resources and the remit of this report; but we hope that the possibilities
will be explored by the wider Morpeth Pyramid, over time.
54
DfE: Other changes to a school and expansions
Ibid.
56
NCC: Letter TD/JA/L311.08 to Headteachers and Chairs of Governors of all Schools in Northumberland
55
26
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
St. Roberts, Pegswood, and Tritlington First Schools
73. Each of these schools is considered further here as each has one or more particular element
that requires further comment.
St. Roberts
74. St. Roberts is a RC Voluntary Aided First School. It feeds into the RC Diocese partnership of
schools and its associated middle school is St Benedict's RC Voluntary Aided Middle School,
Ashington. However, St. Roberts is a popular first school in the centre of Morpeth that
attracts a number of pupils from Morpeth Town as well as many nearby rural areas, who
ultimately move into the Morpeth Partnership (both) Middle Schools and thence KEVI High
school.
Pegswood
75. Pegswood First School falls within the Ashington Partnership feeding into Bothal Middle
School. However, only 55% of children living in the Pegswood catchment attend Pegswood
First with 40% attending Morpeth Partnership First Schools supporting the conjecture that
for many residents of Pegswood, Morpeth is the natural direction of travel (rather than
Ashington).
76. The capacity of Pegswood First is 216 and the number of pupils within the potential
catchment is in excess of this at 233. Although it currently carries 36% surplus places,
Pegswood may ultimately have a case for extending its First School provision if further
housing development is planned for that area.
77. This becomes more intriguing when considering the potential impact of the Northern Relief
Road. This should make the northern side of Morpeth much more accessible from Pegswood
(and vice versa). This may encourage even more families from Pegswood to place their
children in the Morpeth Partnership? Will this make All Saints C of E First School – as most
accessible from the new road - the most likely beneficiary? What will the ultimate impact be
on Pegswood First School? It is all very well for “The Market” to decide this, but surely a
more considered and planned approach would be better all round? All Morpeth schools (and
Pegswood) have a stake in this particular debate. A managed change in the declared
catchment for Pegswood may be a more robust solution rather than leaving the
outcome to less predictable market forces.
Tritlington
78. The issues raised above in relation to Pegswood are equally applicable to Tritlington C of E
First School. Only 4 pupils from a total catchment of 38 attend Tritlington; the remainder
accrue from other Partnerships. A corollary is that of the other 34, all except 1 attend first
schools in Morpeth. The major beneficiary of this is, once again, All Saints First School (with
27
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
12 pupils). Looking ahead:
78.1.
will the Northern Relief Road increase this flow?
78.2.
what will be the impact of housing developments to the North of Morpeth?
Nursery Provision in Morpeth
79. Morpeth offers a comprehensive choice of nursery places for 3- and 4-year olds in six (state)
maintained and four private nurseries offering a total of 484 places. Some of the private
nursery places are available to younger children.
80. There is no direct link in admissions from maintained nurseries to associated first schools,
but it is assumed that most nursery children will be so accommodated through the standard
NCC admissions process. It is vital that First Schools in Morpeth retain sufficient places
to provide continuity from their associated Nursery, so that both Nurseries and
schools can maximise and sustain their regular intake of children.
81. Details of nurseries in or near Morpeth are set out at Appendix D.
Middle and High Schools
82. At Middle and High school phases, Chantry and Newminster Middle, and KEVI High are now
Academies within the overarching Three Rivers Learning Trust. Although the schools are
funded as separate academies, they operate jointly under the œgis of the Trust with a
common Board of Directors responsible for the strategic direction and performance of the
Trust, and the shared values and priorities of its schools. The Trust also has an alliance
agreement and works jointly with Dr Thomlinson Middle School, Rothbury. Although Dr
Thomlinson currently sits outside of the Learning Trust, very close co-operative working
practices exist. The Headteacher of Dr Thomlinson, is an Associate Member of the KEVI
School Governance Committee, and is part of a Strategic Leadership Team for the
development of Teaching, Learning, Assessment, and the Curriculum across all four schools.
Increasingly close partnership working is anticipated into the future.
83. From 2013 all young people will be required to continue in some form of education or
training post-16. The minimum age at which young people can leave learning will increase in
two stages: to the end of the academic year in which they turn 17 from 2013; and until their
18th birthday from 2015. Over 80% of the current school population stay at KEVI for Post 16
Provision; indeed, the Sixth Form amounts to more than 450 students – a third of the school.
It is anticipated that this figure will grow close to 500 students following the raising of
the participation age. The school considers increase to be entirely manageable,
although it is currently seeking funding to refurbish and extend its Post-16
accommodation.
28
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
84. A further development in secondary education is the opportunity for students to opt for a
vocational training at a local College of Further Education at age 14. The current curriculum
provides successful outcomes for all cohorts of students and there are very strong Post-16
progression pathways into the Sixth Form or into College. Fewer than 10 students in any
year group of 320 students are likely to access this change. Therefore this development is
unlikely to have a major impact at KEVI.
85. The provision of specialist facilities for children with Additional Educational Needs in
Northumberland is described above at para. 28. Collingwood School and Media Arts College
has the status of a Specialist Media College which enables close working with partnership
schools in the delivery of training in animation and film making to students and staff, and
access to specialist facilities, to improve teaching and learning within their establishments. It
also works closely with other schools to offer advice and guidance, and to support their
students with AEN. Whilst Collingwood admits pupils from a wide area beyond Morpeth,
many students live within the Morpeth catchment and it is very much a part of the Morpeth
Partnership of Schools.
86. Collingwood works particularly closely with KEVI with whom it has formed a “soft
federation” to enable joint development of 6th form provision for pupils who require a
more supportive atmosphere. The school is also currently consulting on a change in
its age range for admissions (to include high-needs two year-olds) and an associated
re-designation of priorities. This, together with NCC’s plans for developing AEN
provision throughout the County and the introduction of the Children and Families
Bill 2013, will have a significant impact upon the core role of the school and its local
community offering a considerable opportunity for this highly specialised local
schools to expand and develop further as a strategic advisor on AEN provision within
the Morpeth Partnership, and beyond.
87. Paragraph 77 explores how the introduction of the new Northern Relief Road could impact
on local first schools. In short, it will make Morpeth more accessible from the North and East
with more families finding themselves within easy range of Morpeth. It seems certain that, as
the Morpeth Partnership is popular within a wide area outside its normal catchment that
more pupils will accrue to Morpeth schools. It is indeterminate how this will spread amongst
the several First Schools in Morpeth, but those additional pupils will concentrate on the two
middle schools and KEVI.
88. A proposal for revised admission arrangements57 to the Three Rivers Learning Trust is
ongoing and this is stimulated by the increasing pressure on the three schools for places.
There is some spare capacity at middle school phase. However, KEVI is already struggling to
accommodate all applications it receives. It would be untenable for the economic success
of the local community (see Education: the Economic and Social Payback below) and
would go against national policy58, for KEVI not to expand capacity if there is a
57
58
Public Consultation on Admission Arrangements to The Three Rivers Learning Trust for the academic year 2014-2015
DfE: The Importance of Teaching - The Schools White Paper, November 2010
29
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
demand. Therefore the Trust should consider the possible consequences of the new
road on its admissions capacity.
Condition of School Buildings
89. Schools within the area of the Neighbourhood Plan vary in age between 10 years and 100
years with most at least 40 years old. The overall quality of the building stock is variable and
although most will remain structurally viable for the foreseeable future given adequate
maintenance, all have suffered from lack of investment for decades. Common deficiencies in
all schools are boilers, roofs, insulation, electrical-infrastructure, and window-frames which
are sometimes failing leading to structural problems.
90. Although overall responsibility has remained throughout with the LA, the introduction of
Local Management of Schools (LMS) in the early 1990s gave local schools their own capital
budget for repairs, maintenance and enhancements and growing degrees of responsibility
for its management. This did not increase relative amounts of capital allocated to buildings,
but from the late 1990s greater funding for repairs, maintenance, and enhancements was
allocated to schools through Devolved Formula Capital59. Nonetheless, a report60 by the Audit
Commission in 2003 commented:
90.1.
Investment in preventive maintenance and improvement of school buildings [has]
been neglected in many local authorities throughout the 1980s and most of the 1990s.
Schools began to pay the price for this situation, as building elements came to the end of
their life cycle and problems with leaking roofs, failing heating systems, deteriorating
temporary buildings and external woodwork accumulated. In some schools these problems
reached crisis level during the 1990s: and
90.2.
There are weaknesses in the quality of local authority property services, with nearly
one-half of these being judged as unsatisfactory or poo”; and
90.3.
….. LEAs need to invest in skilled staff resources. Many ran down their property
services when investment was low and some have still not invested sufficiently in the
necessary staff. The requirement to delegate higher proportions of education resources to
schools has put pressure on the extent to which LEAs can centrally fund property costs.
91. Following the change of government in 2010 the previous administration’s flag-ship capital
investment programme for schools – Building Schools for the Future61 - was curtailed and a
review of the whole system of capital spending on schools was commissioned by the SoS for
Education. The Independent Review on the School Capital System62 was published in April
2011 recommending a more centralised method of controlling capital spend. Capital
59
DfE: Devolved Capital Programmes: 2012-13
Audit Commission: Improving school buildings: Asset management planning in LEAs and schools: 2003
61
DfE: Building Schools for the Future (BSF)
62
DfE: Independent Review on the school capital system: April 2011
60
30
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
investment for schools is now managed through the Priority School Building Programme63
which so far has promised major refurbishment or complete rebuilding of 261 schools in
England, three of which are in Northumberland, but none in Morpeth.
92. Control of what was Devolved Formula Capital has been largely removed from schools and
80% of the money for maintained schools is now allocated from the Priority School Building
Programme and managed by Local Authorities. This is intended to ensure that money is
prioritised, and generally spent on larger projects that would be outside the scope of
individual schools to afford. However, the backlog of repairs and maintenance in
Northumberland in maintained schools is significant, and this money is being used almost
solely for that purpose rather than school enhancements.
93. In Morpeth St. Roberts First has a fairly new building having been developed in co-operation
with the RC Diocese. Abbeyfields First (£995,000), Stobhill First (£407,000), and Pegswood
First (£323,000) are currently having considerable investment from the capital fund
described above64, and this is making some inroads into the large backlog of maintenance
issues.
94. Morpeth First School (Goosehill) is the oldest school building in Morpeth. In a more
amenable financial climate it would be rebuilt and it is likely to be the first school in the
town needing reconstruction. Despite its 100 year life it continues to present a welcoming
and popular learning environment and Governors have worked hard to assure its viability
using capital and running costs budgets effectively in recent years to achieve various
improvements. It is rated Excellent by OFSTED and is the only First School in Morpeth to
have a full role. This report cannot seek to overcome the neglect of capital investment by the
Local Authority over many years and so makes no immediate suggestion as to how the
building can be replaced. However, the responsibility of NCC in this respect is clear and its
lack of action questionable, especially given the School’s popularity, its central situation
within the town, and its manifest position as a crucial element in the Town’s educational
infrastructure. Therefore it is suggested that achieving a new building for the school
becomes a key aspiration within the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan and that NCC be
held to account and obliged to play its full and proper part in finding a suitable way
forward.
95. In the Three Rivers Learning Trust the three schools have been similarly neglected for many
years. In 2010, in anticipation of becoming an Academy, a condition survey was
commissioned from professional buildings surveyors and a 5 year, prioritised preventative
maintenance programme for each school site was created identifying over £6m of health and
safety, buildings condition, electrical, heating, mechanical, buildings appearance and fit-forpurpose works. The Trust’s priorities for new build works has been added to the schedule,
including a 6th Form extension, sports halls at KEVI and Chantry, Chantry science block,
63
64
DfE: Written ministerial statement on the Priority School Building Programme
Ibid.
31
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
music block at KEVI and buildings extension for additional classrooms at Newminster.
96. The Trust’s budget is inadequate for the scale of the works, but the schools have managed
more than 25 classroom refurbishments, solar panels in each school, a planned 6th form
extension, and some ICT infrastructure developments. A joint project to provide a worldclass athletics facility at KEVI has been delivered jointly by NCC, Sport England, Morpeth
Harriers, and KEVI.
97. Academies can bid for capital funding from the Academy Capital Maintenance Fund through
the Education Funding Agency (EFA) and the Trust has applied for grants to begin the
programme. In 2012 nine EFA funded projects were approved and £1.7m of funding agreed.
The projects below will complete by March 2013:
97.1.
Newminster - felt roofs, boiler and electrical infrastructure;
97.2.
Chantry - felt roofs, windows and boiler;
97.3.
KEVI - felt roofs, boilers, and music block.
98. A further 6 applications from the Trust will be assessed by the EFA by the end of March
2013. There remains a significant long-term project to bring the 3 sites up to a proper
standard. It is estimated that the level of investment and planning seen in the past 2 years
must continue for a further 3 to 4 years before reducing to annual maintenance within the
Learning Trust's revenue budgets.
99. NCC has very limited resources for capital projects in its maintained schools and this seems
likely to prevail for some years to come. A fund exists for unforeseen and urgent work and is
used largely to remedy issues of safety and is accessible only to those schools who buy into
the appropriate Service Level Agreement with NCC. Central government can intervene in
extreme circumstances but this is likely only in instances that require major investment
which is both urgent and wholly unforeseen.
100. DfE is currently assessing the state of all 23,000 schools buildings in England following
recommendations in the Independent Review on the School Capital System cited above.
However, this is not due to be completed until autumn 2013 and the outcome, timescale and
subsequent investment are uncertain, although the DfE states the purpose of the Survey as:
“to ensure future capital maintenance funding is targeted to meet the most urgent condition
needs of the education estate”.
101. It can be seen that the most optimistic outcome to funding requirements for school
buildings seems to emanate from the Academy Capital Maintenance Fund available through
the Education Funding Agency (EFA), but only to Academies. It is suggested that Morpeth
schools have regard to this in assessing how best to fulfil the future capital
requirements for repairs, maintenance and development of their buildings.
32
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Geographical Situation of Morpeth Schools
102. It is inevitable that the positioning of schools first erected between 40 and 100 years ago
are unlikely to relate perfectly to current demographic demands. This is true in Morpeth and
there is no doubt that in positioning our schools we would “not start from here”. Whilst
developing a pattern of closer working between schools such as within the (now unified)
Three Rivers Trust may exploit limited opportunities for alternative use of land and
buildings, there is little prospect of this happening elsewhere in the Morpeth Pyramid. An
exception may be Goosehill, as explored above (para. 94), but otherwise the costs involved in
re-siting schools is prohibitive.
103. A major difficulty arising is the flow of traffic through the town centre at school start and
finishing times, and especially locally in the vicinity of First Schools. If our schools cannot
physically move, then other solutions to traffic density and control are needed. Possible
approaches to general traffic management within the Town are explored elsewhere in the
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan.
104. However, localised difficulties of traffic flow from and to arterial routes within the Town,
concentrated traffic activity at schools gates (which are usually in residential areas with
restricted opportunities for traffic flow at the best of times), and drop-off and short-term
parking issues, blight almost all of our schools sites. There is no panacea to resolve these
problems, which sadly are becoming worse year-on-year. Each school is dealing with this
situation as best it can but as they have no jurisdiction outside of their school grounds, what
schools can achieve on their own is limited.
105. This report offers no suggestions as solutions to this growing problem, but
acknowledges that schools must continue to work with the wider community, law
enforcement, and planning authorities to seek some amelioration of what is an
entrenched and growing problem.
Pupil Travel To and From Local Schools
106. Government policy is to promote opportunities for “Good” schools to expand. In Morpeth
this inevitably requires that additional students be drawn mainly from outside the Morpeth
catchment. However, for some pupils the logistics of transport to those schools can be
problematic. Bus companies receive no subsidy for dedicated services which conform to the
school-day. Consequently Arriva and others are (unsurprisingly) withdrawing some school
services where these are not financially viable (e.g. recently, the service from Cresswell,
Ellington, Ashington, Lynemouth, and Pegswood). A further fragility is a dependency on the
good will of the Rugby Club in accommodating buses and other transport for delivering and
collecting students at our two Middle Schools.
107. At KEVI there is a major issue in the inadequacy of Cottingwood Lane as the only
approach road for both pedestrian and motorised access. And there is the additional
33
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
problem of 6th form students parking near the school. Both problems would be ameliorated
if a link road from the imminent Northern By-pass can be provided, either funded directly
through the By-Pass project, or through a Community Infrastructure Levy65 as a quid pro
quo for the development of housing on the proposed St Georges site. (NCC advises that:
“within the current system (broadly) contributions for education facilities can only reasonably
be requested if the scale of development within a residential scheme is directly requiring the
provision of additional school capacity/spaces which cannot be met by the existing school
system…..monies cannot be secured from developments……for the maintenance of school
buildings.”)
108. If we are to fulfil Government policy, and gain the associated benefits for the
community as whole that will come from expanded schools (see Education: the
Economic and Social Payback at para. 117 ) then solutions to these issues need to be
found.
Other Infrastructure Issues
Broadband
109. Fast Broadband is arriving in some parts of Morpeth town. This is a crucial service for
both commercial and domestic activity and no less so for schools. As education becomes an
increasingly heavy user of Broadband in the homes of students within Morpeth and its
surrounding districts, particularly as “virtual learning environments” become more common
and access to them more of a requirement than an aspiration, to support directly provided
educational resources, including homework. And as curriculum demands become ever
broader in First Schools, access to broadband is also essential. As an aside, one way of
increasing employment in the Morpeth area would be to encourage internet-based
businesses. So, schools’ are only one of a burgeoning set of users who are both
dependent on, and demanding of, good quality Broadband services as a normal
infrastructure element akin to power and water.
Sport and Leisure
110. A direct benefit for Morpeth as a community stems from the recent development of
enhanced and excellent athletics facilities at KEVI, materially assisted by the erstwhile Castle
Morpeth District Council and by the efforts of Morpeth Harriers and Blyth Valley Sport &
Leisure who have been instrumental in securing financial support from Sport England. KEVI
also provides performance space for community drama/musicals/pantomime, a dance
studio, and (shortly) a new rehearsal space and music department which inter alia will
support the Morpeth Community Orchestra. These are community facilities, brought
about by an active community and hosted, to mutual benefit, in one of our schools.
65
DCLG: The Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010
34
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Adult Education
111. Morpeth Adult Association has been hosted in Morpeth schools for many years. Whilst
not subsidised by the schools themselves, this community facility is only available because
schools can and do make their facilities available. Consequently any development of our
schools (their placement, access, facilities, non-school usage, etc) needs to take into
account this vital and jealously defended community amenity.
Combining to Achieve Certainty and Excellence
112. Two commonly held axioms sum-up presently-accepted wisdom regarding schools in
England:
112.1.
their management is more independent of outside bureaucratic control than ever
before; and
112.2.
no-matter the nature of future governments this independence will continue and
most likely it will expand.
113. This process began with the Education Reform Act 1988 with delegation of budgets to
individual schools (Local Management of Schools) with commensurate extension of the
responsibilities of Headteachers and governing bodies. It was reinforced under different
governments through various attempts to tempt schools to elect to move out of the control
of LAs by establishing Trusts or other forms of independent operational structures. Today,
the structure of education in England is changing more radically and rapidly than ever
before: the pace of change is hectic to say the least. Schools that have always been subject to
the overriding management agenda of their LA and associated local political drivers, now
have managerial, economic and pedagogical freedoms that were inconceivable just 5 years
ago and are actively encouraged – indeed, required – to maximise the opportunities these
new freedoms offer to promote excellence and to ensure that good schools expand and
flourish.
114. As of 1 February 2013 there are 25,444 schools in England of which 2686 (>10%) are or
will shortly become academies66. Most of these academies are secondary schools and almost
40% of secondaries have converted. And, the pace of transition to academies is growing
rapidly: it is estimated that this figure will treble in the next 12 months. (Interestingly the
secondary schools which have converted so far have free school meal eligibility rates around
one third below the national average.)
115. Northumberland has 180 schools of which 8 (<4%) are academies. Of 6592 secondary
schools in England 1542 (23%) are already Academies. In Northumberland there are 14
High or All Age schools of which 5 (36%) are academies. Of 29 middle schools in
66
UK Parliament Website: entry on Schools for 01.02.2013
35
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Northumberland, 3 are academies. There are 20,568 Primary schools in England of which
794 (<4%) are academies. Of 1593 Special schools in England, 56 (<4%) are academies.
There are no First/Primary or Special school academies in Northumberland. Overall,
Northumberland is well behind the rest of England in converting schools to academy status.
Although the Morpeth Partnership, with 3 (19%) academies among 16 schools is well on
stream (but on a statistically small sample).
116. In England, there are an estimated 138 Free Schools67; and it has recently been
announced that financial provision has been made for a further 180 to open in 2015/1668.
Their evolution has been slower than that of academies. However, there is every indication
that the pace of development is hastening. In Northumberland there is one Free School, in
Cramlington69, planning to admit up 210 primary age children over 5 years from 2012. The
establishment of such a school in an area already well subscribed with pupil places following
recent major development funding from the LA, is a strong indication that Free Schools may
arise in any location where there is simply a will to make it happen. Place-need is clearly not
the same overriding criterion as it is for maintained schools. Rather, the emphasis is on
creating increased local choice and it cannot be assumed that the existence of sufficient local
provision will preclude such a development. Local schools need to be aware of this when
considering the security of their position within any locality. The recently enacted
National Planning Policy Framework70 institutes a presumption by LAs in favour of the
development of state-funded schools, including Free Schools, to promote wider local choice
of schools. Inter alia, this will allow new schools the option of considerable freedom in
considering existing buildings in a wide range of possible locations.
117. The early part of this report sets out current government policy on generating a stepchange in the manner in which schools are managed at local level. The quickening pace and
direction of travel is towards a network of local schools working co-operatively to achieve
higher standards and better, more secure outcomes for pupils. Although this approach is
openly likened to a marketplace, schools are enjoined to act in concert and not in
competition, to maximise available hard resources (money, staff, buildings, etc.) and soft
resources (skills, capability, aptitude, etc). In particular, it is envisaged that better schools
will actively aid and support those that are less successful. In short, schools are positively
encouraged to free themselves from control by LAs, to realise their potential through
networking together, and to understand that government expects good schools to
thrive and expand and others to wither and close.
118. The pressure for change is sustained also from a wider group of education
commentators. A recent example is the Report of the Academies Commission, January 201371
sponsored by the RSA in combination with the Pearson Group independent think-tank on
education. The report considers the implications of a largely or wholly academised system
67
DfE: Open Free Schools
Oral statement to Parliament, 26 June 2013, by the Chancellor of the Exchequer: Spending Round 2013
69
Cramlington Village High School: http://www.villageprimary.org/#!
70
Department for Communities and Local Government; August 2011
71
RSA: Unleashing greatness - Getting the best from an academised system, January 2013
68
36
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
and having taken evidence from an impressively large, comprehensive, and authoritative
range of education specialists, it is thought-provoking. One of many possible emblematic
quotes is:
118.1.
The Commission believes that a fully academised system is best seen as a community
of schools, each independent but working best if connected to the rest of the system.
Schools work in a competitive environment and have done so for many years. It is not
contradictory to argue for more powerful and effective collaboration to sit side by side with
this. While there is a tension between collaboration and competition, it can also be an
energising one. The evidence considered by the Commission suggests a more intensive drive
to develop professional connections, collaborative activity, and learning – both within and
across schools – will generate fundamental change across the school system. This is a
model of autonomous schools working in partnership to improve teaching and learning for
them all. It is a model that not only shares and improves practice across the system but also
has the potential for creating new and innovative practice.
119. In this starkly different world Morpeth schools have an unprecedented
opportunity to broaden their present success in achieving high standards for their
pupils, deepen their foundations, and expand their footprint within and beyond the
town. Current national policy all but demands that good schools lead the charge on
improving standards by expanding their influence within and beyond their local
community of schools. There is, then, an obligation on our Schools to work together to
achieve mutual security and success.
120. The Three Rivers Learning Trust has already set a lead in this direction, by combining
our two middle schools and high school in a federation sharing a common strategic direction
set by a shared Board of Directors, supported by a common infrastructure of administrative
support. KEVI delivers training to other schools and is already supporting other schools
outwith the Partnership.
121.
The Report of the Academies Commission72 also recommends that:
121.1.
Both local and central government should encourage the federation of primary
schools without an immediate emphasis on academy status.
122. Among first schools in Morpeth Stobhillgate and Abbeyfields First Schools are actively
evaluating a possible path towards greater integration. This report urges that this continue
and expands to incorporate other first schools within the town.
123. Declared government policy as detailed throughout this report and supported by
considerable weight of academic research and opinion73, supports the closer working of local
groups of schools as the optimum route to higher standards, and efficiencies based on
72
73
RSA: Unleashing greatness - Getting the best from an academised system, January 2013
Bibliography: Appendix I
37
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
sharing and judiciously deploying expensive resources. 74. Morpeth schools are well placed
through geographical proximity, existing levels of respect and co-operation, and long
established community ties, to consider what arrangements could, at an appropriate
time in the future, afford a comprehensive organisational structure to maximise
opportunities within the burgeoning education marketplace by assimilating all pupils
of school age (2 years to 19 years) within a single managerial unit.
124. Schools leaders may find an exchange between Michael Gove (SoS for Education) at his
appearance in front the Education Select Committee on 31 January 2012, interesting: he said:
124.1.
I think that Sir Michael [Wishaw, Head of OFSTED] is asking, "Who is going to
provide [an intervening person/structure/commission between the school and the DfE in
the future]? Academy chains may provide it in certain circumstances. Local authorities
might provide it in certain circumstances. His argument is that we may well need school
commissioners, perhaps working out of the Office of the Schools Commissioner in the
Department, operating on a regional level. It is important that, having stripped back
bureaucracy at the centre and locally, we do not re-impose it, but I think he is right……to
say that we need to think hard as structures evolve about what the best way is of
supporting the beneficial changes that have occurred.75
125. Our local schools need to anticipate such changes. Experience has shown that rapid
change – and experiment - within education in England is likely to continue.
Education: the Economic and Social Payback
126. A well-known politician once said that his three priorities in Government were
“….education, education and education”, encapsulating crisply the overriding benefits of
knowledge and skills to our society. It is axiomatic that Schools in Morpeth fulfil a vital role
in preparing our young people for the world of society and work: we all benefit from
ensuring young people gain knowledge, together with the critical and analytical abilities to
put it to good use, together with a commitment to use those skills constructively. But beyond
that is the potential for schools to be magnets drawing into the town families and their
accompanying economic activity.
127. Political parties across the spectrum have demonstrated empirically their commitment to
education as a marketplace where the best will succeed and the rest will decline (this is
explored fully at paragraph 52). For towns like Morpeth this is both a challenge and an
opportunity. If we fail in the challenge, we are letting down future generations. Thankfully
there is much evidence that we are fulfilling that opportunity and educating our young
people well. But we should not regard that as the entirety of success: a successful business
does not refuse potential customers, nor does it limit its opportunities for expansion.
74
DfE; Action research into the evolving role of the local authority in education: The final report for the Ministerial
Advisory Group
75
Oral evidence to the Education Select Committee by SoS, Tuesday 31 January 2012 - Q54
38
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Likewise, Morpeth has an excellent and readily marketable commodity – its schools. By
maximising their potential Morpeth’s schools can draw families into the town who will
require housing and jobs, who will support other local markets and pay local taxes so
helping to develop our infrastructure, including schools, in a virtuous, self-sustaining
cycle.
128. DfE projects that schools rolls in England overall will increase over the next few years as
result of an increased birth rate and the likelihood of increased net migration76. So although
Northumberland as a whole and Morpeth in particular are hosting an aging population and a
decline in pupil numbers it can be extrapolated that there may be inward migration into
Northumberland, including Morpeth, in future years that may reverse this trend.
129. A classical pattern of local investment is one of EMPLOYMENT, which creates a demand
for HOUSING, which brings a requirement for INFRASTRUCTURE/SCHOOLS. But this also
works in reverse: where there are good SCHOOLS families will seek them out and so require
HOUSING locally, which in turn will attract EMPLOYMENT, especially if schools draw in
families who value education and so are likely to be well educated themselves so
representing an attractive potential workforce which in turn will sustain itself through
achieving good education for their children.
130. More direct and immediate benefits also accrue to Morpeth from its schools. The 16
schools encompassed in the Neighbourhood Plan employ directly in excess of 400 people
making it one of the largest employers in the town with a combined salary bill in excess of
£13m. Those adults sustain the education of well in excess of 4000 pupils. Of those, at least
3000 attend Middle and High schools and so can be regarded as having some independent
economic presence of their own. Taken together, the economic activity stimulated by this
group of adults and children is enormous, supporting as it does employment in services by
both the passing day-to-day trade from pupils and staff, and the wider stable community of
their families, most of whom live within the town and together support its economic
infrastructure. Investment is also made through school capital development which has
begun to recover recently. In the last year nearly £3.5m of capital has been spent by schools
from Morpeth town alone.
131. The sustainability of the economy within a town like Morpeth depends on it remaining a
good location for existing families as well as an attractive destination for other families
moving into the area. The fact that Morpeth families can rely on excellent educational
provision promotes the idea of Morpeth as a desirable place to live. Rather than simply
thinking of schools as just another element in a town’s infrastructure, it is important to see
the quality of education as one of its main competitive attributes. The quality of its schools,
leading through first, then middle and on to King Edward VI High School which is one of the
top schools in the country, supports this competitive advantage. The further and higher
educational and employment destinations of Morpeth students reinforce the confidence of
parents. Morpeth schools represent a real economic asset to be ranked alongside its
76
DfE: National pupil projections: future trends in pupil numbers - December 2011
39
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
other successful economic sectors.
132.
So:
132.1.
Morpeth schools’ reputation for quality and for providing the opportunities a
good education can offer, help to attract and sustain hundreds and perhaps thousands of
economically active families in the town;
132.2.
in turn this provides direct employment for several hundred adults in education
and related support activities in those schools, in a range of full and part-time,
professional and non-professional rolls;
132.3.
schools require the support of many ancillary and supporting trades that are
needed to keep school facilities running so indirectly sustaining many other local jobs;
132.4.
at least 3000 pupils are, to some extent, economically active in supporting shops
and other services within the town;
132.5.
the families of those 3000 pupils contribute enormously to economic activity
within Morpeth;
132.6.
supporting such a large and stable economic group sustains investment in other
infrastructure and so benefits the entire community.
133. Overall, our schools create one of the largest economic groupings within the town.
As a community we should recognise and celebrate this value, and exploit it
vigorously.
40
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Where do we go from here?
134. Perhaps surprisingly, when other parts of England are seeing a sharp increase in demand
for Primary Schools places77, Morpeth is projecting a decline in pupil numbers despite
projections of increased housing in the town. More striking is the extent to which schools in
Morpeth are servicing – and therefore depend upon for their present and future viability –
pupils from outwith the normal Morpeth schools’ catchment. If we are to sustain, let alone
expand our schools, we must acknowledge this fact and work to maximise the opportunities
that ensue.
135. The Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan is “the community’s opportunity to shape and guide
development that will take place in our area and make sure that it is appropriate to our needs
and aspirations”78. This report has attempted to set out for that Plan the challenges and
opportunities facing our schools. These are inescapable and so an overriding message is that
there is no do-nothing option. However, the commensurate opportunities are considerable
and can be summed up in the (selected) words of The Case for Change79, the government’s
supporting analysis to its Schools White Paper. Whilst the arguments are inevitably political,
they are the basis for a radical change in the organisation of education in England; and they
usefully distil the intentions behind subsequent policy which defines what schools are now
able to do, and required to do, and why:
135.1.
…. the evidence is clear. It is possible to have an education system in which many
more young people achieve highly than in the past or the present. It is possible to have an
education system in which the gap between the achievements of the richest and the poorest
is narrower. And there is no trade-off between the two: it is possible to achieve both at
once;
135.2.
The evidence is clear on another point…..Never has the quality of a nation’s
education system been more important than it is today…. Education draws out our gifts,
strengths, and potential, makes life intrinsically more fulfilling, enables us to realise our
goals and gives us greater control of our lives. Those who are better educated earn more
and are less likely to be unemployed, are healthier and live longer;
135.3.
Reform should seek to…… increase both autonomy and accountability of schools, and
ensure that resources are distributed and used fairly and effectively to incentivise
improvement and improve equity.
136. It is difficult to refute these tenets. In any event, whatever the political environment,
what government expects of the nation’s schools is abundantly clear - to take charge of their
77
Capital funding for new school places: NAO: HC 1042: 15 March 2013
Opening paragraph of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan website.
79
DfE: The Case for Change: November 2010
78
41
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
own destiny.
137. This leaves, quite deliberately, schools to look to themselves and each other to maximise
their potential. Many schools will welcome this and have already embraced the
opportunities provided. Our own Three Rivers Trust is a prime example of what this changed
environment can offer.
138. Morpeth has a better opportunity than most to fulfil the rhetoric and specific demands of
government because we start from a high base – our schools are perhaps the best in
Northumberland and amongst the best in the country. And the case for sustaining this
quality, to the benefit of the entire local community, is unarguable. We must maximise our
schools’ potential because it provides a basis for the economic success of our town and
all that flows from that. The opportunities are there for the taking.
42
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
80.
Appendices
(All statistical data courtesy of Northumberland County Council)
43
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix A
Structure of the Morpeth Partnership of Schools
Morpeth Partnership of Schools
First
Middle
Abbeyfields
Morpeth
Goosehill
St Roberts RC
Morpeth All Saints C of E
Morpeth Stobhillgate
Tritlington C of E
St Roberts RC
Longhorsely St
Helen's C of E
Cambo
Stannington
Netherton Northside
Rothbury
Harbottle C of E
Thropton Village
High
Newminster
County
Morpeth
Chantry
King Edward VI
Dr. Thomlinson
C of E
St Roberts RC is within the RC Diocese partnership, but in practice many children transfer from the school into the
Morpeth Partnership at Middle school phase.
Schools shown in Green are within the Morpeth Partnership of Schools, but outwith the Morpeth Neighbourhood
Plan
Situation of Pegswood County First School within the Ashington Partnership of Schools
Ashington Partnership of Schools
First
Middle
Pegswood County First School
Bothal
High
Ashington High
School Sports
College
Although Pegswood School is within the Ashington Partnership of Schools it is incorporated within the Morpeth
Neighbourhood Plan
44
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
45
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix B1
Morpeth Partnership of Schools: Pupil Count, Capacity, Pupil Admission Numbers and Surplus
Places
Schools grouped First
Schools: grouped
First
Middle
School
roll80
Net
Capacity
Middle
PAN82
81
Surplus
83
%
Surplus
Abbeyfields First School
Morpeth First School
Newminster County Middle
School
255
291
512
300
300
512
60
60
128
45
9
0
15
3
0
Cambo First School
Longhorsely St Helen's C of E First
Stannington First School
Morpeth All Saints C of E First
Tritlington C of E First School
Morpeth Stobhillgate First School
St Roberts RC First School
Morpeth Chantry Middle School
34
63
62
143
36
147
137
472
40
87
75
224
60
187
150
593
8
19
15
45
12
30
30
128
6
24
13
81
24
40
13
121
15
28
17
36
40
21
9
20
Netherton Northside First School
Rothbury First School
Harbottle C of E First School
Thropton Village First School
Dr. Thomlinson C of E Middle
6
98
17
51
192
25
103
37
50
258
5
20
6
10
60
19
5
20
-1
66
76
5
54
0
26
The King Edward VI High School
1481
1499
320
18
1
Totals
3997
4500
956
503
11
140
216
40
76
36
Pegswood County First School
Schools shown in Green are within the Morpeth Partnership of Schools, but outwith the Morpeth Neighbourhood
Plan.
St Roberts RC First is within the RC Diocese partnership, but in practice many children transfer from the school into
the Morpeth Partnership at Middle school phase.
Pegswood County First is within the Ashington Partnership of Schools, but within the Morpeth Neighbourhood
Plan.
80
Total number of pupils
Max possible number of pupils calculated according to DfE guidelines - Assessing the net capacity of schools - Schools
82
Max Pupil Admission Number possible each year to remain within Net Capacity
83
Unused school places
81
46
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix B2
Morpeth Partnership of Schools: Pupil Count, Capacity, Pupil Admission Number and Surplus
Places
Schools grouped in phases, within and without scope of Neighbourhood Plan
Schools grouped in phases, within
and without scope of
Neighbourhood Plan
Abbeyfields First
Morpeth First
Tritlington C of E First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Morpeth All Saints C of E First
St Roberts RC First School
Pegswood County First School
Totals
Cambo First School
Longhorsely St Helen's C of E First
Stannington First
Netherton Northside First
Rothbury First
Harbottle C of E First
Thropton Village First
School
roll84
Net
Capacity
PAN86
Surplus87
%
Surplus
85
255
291
36
147
143
137
140
300
300
60
187
224
150
216
60
60
12
30
45
30
40
45
9
24
40
81
13
76
15
3
40
21
36
9
36
1149
1437
277
288
20
34
63
40
87
8
19
6
24
15
28
62
6
98
17
51
75
25
103
37
50
15
5
20
6
10
13
19
5
20
-1
17
76
5
54
0
331
417
83
86
21
472
512
192
593
512
258
128
128
60
121
0
66
20
0
26
1176
1363
316
187
14
1481
1499
320
18
1
3997
4500
956
503
11
Totals
Morpeth Chantry Middle School
Newminster County Middle School
Dr. Thomlinson C of E Middle
Totals
The King Edward VI High School
Totals
417
St Roberts RC is within the RC Diocese partnership, but in practice many children transfer from the school into the
Morpeth Partnership at Middle school phase
Schools shown in Green are within the Morpeth Partnership of Schools, but outwith the Morpeth Neighbourhood
Plan
Pegswood County First is within the Ashington Partnership of Schools, but within the Morpeth Neighbourhood
Plan.
84
Total number of pupils
Max possible number of pupils calculated according to DfE guidelines - Assessing the net capacity of schools
86
Max Pupil Admission Number possible each year to remain within Net Capacity
87
Unused school places
85
47
83
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix C
Appendix C/1
Schools within the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Abbeyfields First School (feeding into Newminster Middle)
Morpeth (Goosehill) First School (feeding into Newminster Middle)
Morpeth All Saints CE First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Morpeth Stobhillgate First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Tritlington CE First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
St Robert’s RC First School (feeding into St Benedict's Roman Catholic Voluntary
Aided Middle School, Ashington)
Morpeth Chantry Middle School
Morpeth Newminster Middle School
King Edward VI School (excluding 6th form)
Appendix C/2
Schools within the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan but outwith the Morpeth
Partnership of Schools
Pegswood First School (feeding into Bothal Middle School in the Ashington
Partnership)
Appendix C/3
Schools within the Morpeth Partnership, but outwith the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood
Plan
Cambo First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Harbottle CE VA First School (feeding into Dr Thomlinson Middle, Rothbury)
Longhorsely St Helen’s CE First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Rothbury First School (feeding into Dr Thomlinson Middle)
Stannington First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Thropton Village First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Dr Thomlinson CE Middle School, Rothbury
48
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix C/1
Schools within the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Abbeyfields First School (feeding into Newminster Middle)
Abbeyfields First School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (254 total)
60
59
40
42
53
Attending – Abbeyfields First School
TOTAL
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Y0
21
0
1
1
1
0
8
2
2
0
0
19
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
3
Y1
30
1
1
0
0
1
7
0
1
0
0
13
2
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
Y2
8
1
0
0
0
1
5
2
1
0
1
7
4
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
0
Y3
21
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
0
0
0
10
2
0
0
0
2
0
3
0
0
Y4
27
2
0
0
0
3
4
1
0
1
0
11
2
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
107
4
2
1
1
6
26
6
4
1
1
60
11
2
5
3
3
1
6
1
3
Abbeyfields First
Out of County
Longhorsely St Helen’s First
Ellington First
Bedlington Whitley Mem First
Grange View First
Pegswood First
Ashington Wansbeck First
Bedlington West End First
Hareside Primary
Ponteland First
Morpeth First
Stobhillgate First
Linton First
Morpeth All Saints First
Stannington First
Tritlington CE First
Stakeford First
Northumberland CE Academy
Thropton Village
Choppington First
60
59
40
42
53
254
TOTAL
Abbeyfields First School (Catchment Pupils)
(Total 145)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
21
30
8
21
27
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
3
2
2
6
2
3
0
0
0
1
0
2
2
3
3
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
27
35
19
30
TOTAL
34
49
Where attending
107
1
7
15
1
11
1
1
1
Abbeyfields First
Longhorsley St Helen’s First
Morpeth All Saints CE First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
St Robert’s RC VA First
Stannington First
Tritlington CE First
Whalton CE First
145
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Morpeth (Goosehill) First School (feeding into Newminster Middle)
Morpeth First School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (291 total)
59
54
59
58
61
Attending – Morpeth First School
Y0
34
0
0
0
15
2
3
2
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
59
Y1
20
1
0
0
15
2
7
1
1
1
1
2
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
54
Y2
24
0
0
3
14
0
5
2
0
0
0
4
0
6
0
0
0
0
1
59
Y3
33
0
1
0
13
0
4
1
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
1
0
58
TOTAL
Y4
26
0
1
0
16
1
5
3
0
1
3
0
0
3
1
0
1
0
0
61
137
1
2
3
73
5
24
9
1
3
5
6
1
15
1
1
1
2
1
291
Morpeth First School (Catchment Pupils) (Total
270)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
19
13
7
10
11
0
0
1
0
0
5
4
4
3
3
34
20
24
33
26
1
0
0
2
2
0
0
1
0
1
4
7
7
8
10
1
1
2
0
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
2
0
64
46
48
58
54
50
Total
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Morpeth First
Bedlington Whitley Memorial First
Bedlington West End First
Choppington First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Morpeth All Saints First
Pegswood First
Tritlington CE First
Stakeford First
Grange View First
Stannington First
Northumberland CE Academy
Seghill First
Abbeyfields First
Cambo First
Cambois Primary
Thropton Village First
Wansbeck First
Felton First
TOTAL
Where attending
60
1
19
137
5
2
36
5
2
3
Abbeyfields First
Longhorsely St Helen’s First
Morpeth All Saints First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Pegswood First
St Robert’s First
Stannington First
Northumberland CE Academy
Whalton CE First
270
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Morpeth All Saints CE First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Morpeth All Saints CE First
School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (143 total)
28
32
31
21
31
Attending – Morpeth All Saints First School
TOTAL
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Y0
8
0
1
2
2
0
3
1
5
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
Y1
15
0
1
0
1
1
1
3
4
1
1
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
Y2
9
1
1
1
2
0
3
5
4
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
Y3
9
0
0
0
0
0
2
1
3
1
0
1
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
Y4
11
1
1
0
1
0
3
3
3
3
1
0
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
52
2
4
3
6
1
12
13
19
7
6
4
1
4
2
1
2
1
3
Morpeth All Saints First
Swarland First
Felton First
Longhorsely St Helen’s First
Grange View First
Ellington First
Tritlington CE First
Pegswood First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Abbeyfields First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Stannington First
Bedlington Whitley Memorial First
Ashington Wansbeck
Northumberland CE Academy
Red Row First
Rothbury First
Bedlington West End First
Choppington First
28
32
31
21
31
143
TOTAL
Morpeth All Saints CE First School (Catchment
Pupils) (Total 98)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
8
15
9
9
11
2
2
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
1
2
0
2
2
1
0
1
1
0
3
3
4
2
1
19
25
19
17
TOTAL
18
51
Where attending
1
5
4
5
1
52
5
2
7
3
13
Out of County
Abbeyfields First
Belsay First
Cambo First
Longhorsely St Helen’s First
Morpeth All Saints First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
St Robert’s RC First
Northumberland CE Academy
Whalton CE First
98
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
52
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Morpeth Stobhillgate First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (147 total)
36
26
33
26
26
Attending – Morpeth Stobhillgate First School
Total
Pupils – appropriate catchment area
(resident in)
Y0
31
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
Y1
23
0
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Y2
29
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
Y3
16
0
0
0
0
1
2
1
1
2
1
1
1
0
Y4
20
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
1
119
1
4
2
3
2
2
2
1
5
1
1
2
2
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Grange View CE First
Pegswood First
Morpeth All Saints First
Stannington First
Bedlington West End First
Bedlington Stead Lane First
Choppington First
Morpeth Abbeyfields First
Morpeth First
Bedlington The Station First
Mowbray First
Stakeford First
Tritlington CE First
36
26
33
26
26
147
TOTAL
Morpeth Stobhillgate First School (Catchment
Pupils) (Total 248)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
0
0
1
0
0
1
2
4
2
2
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
3
1
1
0
1
15
15
14
13
16
31
23
29
16
20
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
9
9
2
5
2
1
1
0
1
0
60
52
54
39
Total
43
53
Where attending
1
11
2
2
1
6
73
119
2
1
27
3
Out of County
Abbeyfields First
Bedlington Whitley Mem CE First
Cambois Primary
Cragside CE First
Morpeth All Saints
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Northumberland CE Academy
Pegswood First
St Robert’s RC First
Stannington First
248
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Tritlington CE First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Tritlington CE First School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (36 total)
6
7
8
9
6
Attending – Tritlington CE First School
TOTAL
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Y0
0
0
0
1
2
2
0
1
0
0
Y1
0
0
0
0
0
4
1
2
0
0
Y2
0
0
0
3
0
1
1
0
2
1
Y3
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
0
0
Y4
1
0
0
1
2
2
0
0
0
0
2
1
1
6
6
10
3
4
2
1
Amble First
Abbeyfields First
Felton CE First
Red Row First
Grange View CE First
Pegswood First
Swarland First
Tritlington CE First
Wansbeck First
Out of County
6
7
8
9
6
36
TOTAL
Tritlington CE First School (Catchment Pupils)
(Total 38)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
0
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
3
2
3
2
1
2
1
3
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
0
1
0
9
6
7
7
TOTAL
9
54
Where attending
3
1
12
9
2
1
6
4
Abbeyfields First
Collingwood School & Media
Morpeth All Saints First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Pegswood
St Robert’s RC First
Tritlington CE First
38
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
St Robert’s RC First School (feeding into St Benedict's Roman Catholic Voluntary Aided Middle
School, Ashington)
St Robert’s RC First School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (136 total)
28
29
23
29
27
Attending – St Robert’s RC First School
TOTAL
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Y0
0
0
0
0
2
4
0
2
0
2
1
0
0
9
4
2
1
0
0
1
Y1
0
1
0
1
1
3
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
9
7
2
2
0
1
0
Y2
0
0
2
1
1
2
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
7
3
0
1
0
1
Y3
0
1
0
0
1
3
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
5
8
3
2
0
0
4
Y4
1
0
1
0
1
5
0
0
2
1
0
1
0
2
10
1
2
0
0
0
1
2
3
2
6
17
1
3
2
4
4
1
1
27
36
11
7
1
1
6
Felton CE First
Longhorsely St Helens First
Grange View First
Ellington First
Tritlington CE First
Pegswood First
Ashington Wansbeck First
Northumberland CE Academy
Ashington Central First
Mowbray First
Choppington First
Bedlington West End First
Bedlington Whitley Memorial
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Morpeth First
Abbeyfields First
Morpeth All Saints First
Cambo First
Rothbury First
Stannington First
28
29
23
29
27
136
TOTAL
55
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Dr Thomlinson CE Middle School, Rothbury
Dr Thomlinson CE Middle
School
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
Pupils Attending (192 total)
51
44
48
49
Attending - Dr Thomlinson CE
Middle School (192)
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
43
34
40
38
0
0
0
1
8
6
7
9
0
3
1
1
0
1
0
0
51
44
48
49
Dr Thomlinson CE Middle School
(Catchment Pupils) (Total 172)
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
1
43
34
40
38
0
0
0
1
0
2
1
0
0
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
45
38
45
44
TOTAL
%
155
1
30
5
1
81
16
192
TOTAL
1
2
1
2
155
1
3
4
3
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Dr Thomlinson Middle
JCSC, South Avenue
Morpeth Chantry Middle
Lindisfarne Middle
Out of County
TOTAL
%
Where attending
90
Alnwick Lindisfarne Middle
Alnwick The Dukes Middle
Barndale House
Bellingham Middle
Dr Thomlinson CE Middle
Home Education
Glendale Middle
Morpeth Chantry Middle
Morpeth Newminster Middle
172
TOTAL
56
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Morpeth Chantry Middle School
Morpeth Chantry Middle School
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
Attending – Chantry Middle
School (468)
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
0
2
1
0
58
65
63
56
0
2
1
1
2
1
2
2
4
4
6
10
20
18
22
18
5
3
1
3
4
16
15
25
8
7
5
10
2
0
1
0
0
1
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
103
120
117
128
Morpeth Chantry Middle School
(Catchment Pupils) (Total 438)
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
2
1
0
0
8
6
7
9
1
0
2
0
58
65
63
56
30
31
37
22
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
4
2
2
1
5
1
3
2
0
0
1
2
5
6
4
104
118
118
98
Pupils Attending (468 total)
103
120
117
128
TOTAL
3
242
4
7
24
78
12
60
30
3
3
1
1
%
52
5
17
3
13
6
468
TOTAL
3
30
3
242
120
1
1
8
10
3
17
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Out of County
Chantry Middle
Dr Thomlinson Middle
Lindisfarne Middle
JCSC, South Avenue
Bothal Middle
Northumberland CE Academy
Newminster Middle
Meadowdale Academy
Richard Coates CE Middle
Bedlington High Years 7 & 8
Guide Post Middle
Cramlington Learning Village
TOTAL
%
7
55
27
2
2
4
438
Where attending
Out of County
Dr Thomlinson CE Middle
Meadowdale Academy
Morpeth Chantry Middle
Morpeth Newminster Middle
Northburn Primary
Ponteland Middle
Richard Coates CE Middle
St Benedict’s RC Middle
Northumberland CE Academy
Alternative provision88
TOTAL
88
Pupils on “Alternative Provision” are accessing education at other establishments, such as special schools, independent
special schools or the Pupil Referral Unit; some are Excluded and provided education through Education Other Than at
School (EOTAS); some are home educated.
57
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Morpeth Newminster Middle School
Morpeth Newminster Middle
School
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
Attending – Morpeth
Newminster Middle School
(513)
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
1
0
0
0
2
1
0
0
2
2
7
5
29
31
37
22
65
70
56
80
1
0
1
1
2
0
0
0
22
16
19
15
0
1
3
1
4
0
2
3
0
0
1
1
2
5
1
1
0
1
0
0
130
127
127
129
Morpeth Newminster Middle
School (Catchment Pupils) (Total
339)
Y5
Y6
Y7
Y8
4
16
15
25
0
0
0
1
65
70
56
80
2
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
72
87
73
107
Pupils Attending (513 total)
130
127
127
129
TOTAL
1
3
16
119
271
3
2
72
5
9
2
9
1
%
3
23
53
14
2
2
513
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Glendale Middle
Richard Coates Middle
JCSC, Acklington Road
Morpeth Chantry Middle
Morpeth Newminster Middle
Dr Thomlinson Middle
Out of County
Bothal Middle
Northumberland CE Academy
Meadowdale Academy
Bedlington High Yrs 7 & 8
Guide Post Middle
The Blyth School
TOTAL
Total
%
Where attending
60
1
271
5
1
1
18
Morpeth Chantry Middle
Collingwood School & Media
Morpeth Newminster Middle
St Benedict’s RC Middle
The Blyth School
Northumberland CE Academy
80
339
TOTAL
58
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
King Edward VI School (excluding 6th form)
KING EDWARD VI SCHOOL
Pupils Attending (990 total)
Y9
Y10
Y11
Y12
Y13
332
330
328
273
222
TOTAL (inc 6th form)
1485
Attending - KING EDWARD VI SCHOOL
(990)
Y9
Y10
Y11
289
266
264
9
8
10
4
3
6
0
1
1
0
1
0
9
13
7
0
6
1
0
1
0
16
26
33
4
5
6
1
0
0
332
330
328
KING EDWARD VI SCHOOL (Catchment
Pupils) (907)
Y9
Y10
Y11
2
2
0
1
5
4
1
0
0
1
1
2
4
5
2
1
3
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
2
0
1
1
3
2
7
4
5
0
0
1
2
2
6
289
266
264
0
0
5
2
2
3
315
293
299
Pupils – appropriate catchment area
(resident in)
TOTAL
819
27
13
2
1
29
7
1
75
15
1
990
King Edward VI School
JCSC, Acklington Road
The Duchess’s High
Haydon Bridge High
Bede Academy
Bedlingtonshire High
Ponteland High
QE High School
Ashington High School
Northumberland CE Academy
Out of County
TOTAL
School Attending
TOTAL
4
10
1
4
11
5
1
1
2
1
3
6
16
1
10
819
5
7
907
59
Out of County
Ashington High School
Atkinson House
Bedlingtonshire High
Collingwood School & Media
Cramlington Learning Village
ESLAC
Get You Started
Haydon Bridge High
Home Education
Nunnykirk
Ponteland Community High
St Benet Biscop RC High
The Blyth School
The Duchess’s High
King Edward VI School
Northumberland CE Academy
Traveller Children
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix C/2
Schools within the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan but outwith the Morpeth
Partnership of Schools
Pegswood First School (feeding into Bothal Middle School in the Ashington Partnership)
Pegswood First School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (140 total)
27
28
26
30
39
Attending – Pegswood First School
(140)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
0
0
0
1
0
25
27
22
26
27
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
27
28
26
30
TOTAL
29
1
127
2
2
3
1
2
1
1
Out of County
Pegswood First
Ashington Central First
Morpeth First
Ashington Wansbeck First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Northumberland CE Academy
Choppington First
Tritlington CE First
140
TOTAL
Pegswood First School (Catchment Pupils) (Total
TOTAL
233)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
1
0
0
0
0
1
8
7
5
2
4
26
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
2
4
1
0
0
2
0
3
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
3
5
1
3
13
2
7
5
4
5
23
0
2
2
0
0
4
25
27
22
28
27
129
4
3
2
3
5
17
0
0
1
0
0
1
2
4
1
1
2
10
46
53
45
41
48
233
60
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Where attending
Out of County
Abbeyfields First
Warkworth First
Ashington Wansbeck First
Ellington First
Longhorsely CE First
Morpeth All Saints First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Pegswood First
St Roberts RC First
Northumberland CE Academy
Tritlington CE First
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix C/3
Schools within the Morpeth Partnership, but outwith the scope of the Morpeth Neighbourhood
Plan
Cambo First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Cambo First School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (34 total)
7
3
8
7
9
Attending – Cambo First School
TOTAL
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Y0
3
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
Y1
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
Y2
3
1
0
1
1
1
0
1
Y3
3
2
0
1
1
0
0
0
Y4
5
0
1
0
0
1
2
0
15
5
2
4
2
3
2
1
Cambo First
Morpeth All Saints First
Rothbury First
Belsay First
Whalton CE First
Otterburn First
Felton First
Stannington First
7
3
8
7
9
34
TOTAL
Cambo First School (Catchment Pupils) (Total
18)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
3
3
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
4
3
7
61
TOTAL
Where attending
1
15
1
1
Belsay First
Cambo First
St Robert’s RC First
Morpeth First
18
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Harbottle CE VA First School (feeding into Dr Thomlinson Middle, Rothbury)
Harbottle CE VA First School
Pupils Attending (17 total)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
4
3
4
4
2
TOTAL
17
Attending – Harbottle CE VA First School
TOTAL
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Y0
2
1
1
Y1
2
0
1
Y2
3
1
0
Y3
4
0
0
Y4
2
0
0
13
2
2
Harbottle CE VA First
Netherton Northside First
Rothbury First
4
3
4
4
2
17
TOTAL
Harbottle CE VA First School (Catchment Pupils)
(Total 16)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
2
2
3
4
2
0
0
1
1
1
2
2
4
5
3
Where attending
TOTAL
13
3
16
62
Harbottle CE VA First
Otterburn First
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Longhorsely St Helen’s CE First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Longhorsely St Helen’s CE First
School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (63 total)
14
7
12
16
14
Attending – Longhorsely St Helen’s First School
TOTAL
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Y0
11
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
Y1
6
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Y2
10
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
Y3
13
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
Y4
11
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
51
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
Longhorsely St Helen’s CE First
Alnwick South First
Rothbury First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Abbeyfields First
Felton First
Red Row First
Pegswood First
Morpeth All Saints First
Bedlington West End First
14
7
12
16
14
63
TOTAL
Longhorsely St Helen’s CE First School
(Catchment Pupils) (Total 63)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
11
6
10
13
11
2
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
15
8
11
14
TOTAL
15
63
Where attending
2
2
51
3
2
2
1
Abbeyfields First
Belsay First
Longhorsely St Helen’s CE First
Morpeth All Saints First
St Robert’s First
Whalton CE First
Whittingham CE First
63
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Rothbury First School (feeding into Dr Thomlinson Middle)
Rothbury First School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (97 total)
12
18
25
20
22
Attending – Rothbury First School
TOTAL
Pupils – appropriate
catchment area
(resident in)
Y0
12
0
0
0
0
0
Y1
17
0
1
0
0
0
Y2
24
0
0
0
1
0
Y3
18
0
1
1
0
0
Y4
18
2
1
0
0
1
89
2
3
1
1
1
Rothbury First
Thropton Village First
Swarland First
Netherton Northside First
New Delaval Primary
Out of County
12
18
25
20
22
97
TOTAL
Rothbury First School (Catchment Pupils) (Total
120)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
12
17
24
18
18
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
5
3
0
6
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
18
26
29
21
26
64
TOTAL
Where attending
2
1
2
1
2
89
1
1
1
2
15
1
2
Cambo First
Ellington First
Harbottle CE First
Longhorsely CE First
Morpeth All Saints First
Rothbury First
St Michael’s CE First
St Robert’s RC First
Stannington First
Swarland First
Thropton Village First
Whittingham CE First
Out of County
120
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Stannington First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Stannington First School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (62 total)
11
11
11
20
9
Attending – Stannington First School
TOTAL
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Y0
5
0
1
1
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
Y1
8
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Y2
5
0
2
0
3
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
Y3
11
1
0
1
2
2
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
Y4
4
0
1
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
33
1
5
3
8
3
1
2
2
1
1
1
1
Stannington First
Abbeyfields First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Bedlington West End First
Bedlington Whitley Memorial First
Morpeth Road Primary
Northburn Primary
Beaconhill Primary
Ponteland First
Whalton CE First
Rothbury First
Burnside Primary
11
11
11
20
9
62
TOTAL
Stannington First School (Catchment Pupils)
(Total 73)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
1
0
1
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
1
0
1
3
0
0
1
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
1
0
1
4
0
5
8
5
11
4
1
0
0
0
2
1
2
1
1
1
10
15
13
20
TOTAL
15
65
Where attending
3
3
1
1
3
1
4
5
3
1
6
33
3
6
Out of County
Abbeyfields First
Cambo First
Cramlington Shanklea Primary
Guide Post Ringway First
Horton Grange First
Morpeth All Saints First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Northburn Primary
St Robert’s RC First
Stannington First
Traveller Children
Whalton CE First
73
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
66
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Thropton Village First School (feeding into Chantry Middle)
Thropton Village First School
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Pupils Attending (51 total)
11
12
8
9
11
Attending – Thropton Village First School
Y0
7
1
1
2
11
Y1
7
0
5
0
12
Y2
4
1
3
0
8
Y3
7
1
0
1
9
TOTAL
Y4
5
0
6
0
11
30
3
15
3
51
Thropton Village First School (Catchment
Pupils) (Total 34)
Y0
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
7
7
4
7
5
0
0
0
0
1
7
7
5
7
TOTAL
8
67
Pupils – appropriate catchment
area (resident in)
Thropton Village First
Whittingham CE First
Rothbury First
Netherton Northside First
TOTAL
Where attending
1
2
30
1
Abbeyfields First
Rothbury First
Thropton Village First
Morpeth First
34
TOTAL
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix D
Nursery Provision in Morpeth
Provider Name
Care Scheme type
Bolland Hall Day Nursery
Private Day Nursery
30
Goosehill Private Nursery
Private Day Nursery
43
Bambinos Nursery, Hepscott Park
Private Day Nursery
93
St Roberts RC First School
Private Day Nursery
32
Morpeth First School
Maintained Nursery
School
52
Morpeth Stobhillgate First School
Maintained Nursery
School
78
Abbeyfields First school (Morpeth)
Maintained Nursery
School
52
Tritlington C of E First School
Maintained Nursery
School
26
Morpeth All Saints C of E Aided First School
Maintained Nursery
School
52
Pegswood First School
Maintained Nursery
School
26
Total
68
Places
484
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
69
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix E
Morpeth Partnership – GP Data in Catchment (2012)
GP data is based upon the number of children registered with doctor’s surgeries residing in the catchment area of a school.
Children who entered reception class in September 2012
Age 0
Age 1
Age 2
Age 3
Age 4
Age 5
Age 6
Age 7
Age 8
01.09.11 01.09.10 01.09.09 01.09.08 01.09.07 01.09.06 01.09.05 01.09.04 01.09.03
To
To
To
To
To
To
To
To
To
31.08.12 31.08.11 31.08.10 31.08.09 31.08.08 31.08.07 31.08.06 31.08.05 31.08.04
Total
School & Phase
The King Edward VI
High
179
166
189
193
218
207
213
221
213
1799
27
37
48
45
42
43
46
40
42
370
68
64
82
71
103
100
101
100
94
783
84
65
59
77
73
64
66
81
77
646
179
166
189
193
218
207
213
221
213
1799
Total
33
21
28
19
26
25
22
32
31
237
9
4
11
9
18
22
17
17
19
126
Abbeyfields First
Morpeth All Saints CE
First
70
Dr Thomlinson CE
Middle
Morpeth Chantry
Middle
Morpeth Newminster
Middle
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
51
44
32
58
48
40
45
50
46
414
35
36
40
32
47
51
52
41
42
376
128
105
111
118
139
138
136
140
138
1153
71
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate
First
Total
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix F
Morpeth Partnership Pupil Forecast
Pupil Data Input
Year Group/Jan
Census Year
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Population
Totals
0
1
2
3
R
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
206
196
210
176
167
160
218
206
196
210
176
167
188
218
206
196
210
176
197
188
218
206
196
210
225
228
222
211
233
229
235
240
230
227
222
231
245
241
244
234
232
223
283
253
240
247
241
234
274
302
259
242
251
233
315
324
322
290
284
290
280
321
331
333
304
284
313
289
321
334
334
301
298
322
294
319
337
337
340
320
321
318
335
331
Retention
0-1
1-2
2-3
3-R
R-1
Ratios
2007-08
100% 100% 100% 116% 107%
2008-09
95% 94% 116% 113% 102%
2009-10
107% 95% 94% 112% 100%
2010-11
84% 107% 95% 107% 100%
2011-12
95% 84% 107% 111% 109%
Weighted Retention
Ratio 94% 94% 103% 111% 105%
2007-08:2008-09:2009-10:2010-11.2011-12 = 3:2:1:1:1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
10
325
337
325
325
320
332
9-10
11
320
320
340
324
322
317
12
252
257
256
284
253
256
13
177
207
203
216
229
213
Total
1,262
1,264
1,195
1,161
1,179
1,150
1,206
1,256
1,268
1,276
1,259
1,212
Y9Y11
985
977
986
967
977
980
Totals
First
1,150
1,157
1,135
1,101
1,041
1,010
977
973
984
Middle
1,212
1,143
1,099
1,062
1,031
1,035
1,046
1,031
984
Y9Y11
980
983
983
960
952
908
881
838
831
First Middle
16-19
High
429
464
459
500
482
469
1,414
1,441
1,445
1,467
1,459
1,449
16-19
469
460
465
474
467
467
456
446
427
Total
High
1,449
1,442
1,448
1,434
1,419
1,375
1,338
1,284
1,258
10-11 11-12 12-13
103% 103% 107% 118% 102% 103% 103% 107% 99% 98%
104% 98% 92% 118% 105% 115% 94% 108% 96% 105%
98% 102% 96% 96% 103% 104% 110% 99% 102% 96%
101% 99% 105% 110% 94% 101% 105% 114% 100% 99%
98% 100% 94% 120% 98% 90% 101% 104% 104% 98%
80%
80%
89%
74%
79%
82%
81%
84%
89%
75%
100% 100%
98% 114%
99%
99% 102% 107% 101%
99%
79%
81%
11
12
13
Pupil Forecasts
Year Group/
PLASC Year
Actual Jan 2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
0
1
2
3
R
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
160
167
151
176
158
142
210
181
162
146
229
233
201
180
163
201
201
196
190
231
240
244
210
188
170
210
210
205
223
231
240
244
210
188
170
210
210
234
223
231
240
244
210
189
170
211
233
230
219
227
236
240
207
185
167
290
265
262
250
259
268
273
235
211
284
287
263
259
247
256
266
271
233
301
282
285
261
258
246
255
264
269
337
308
289
292
267
264
252
261
271
331
320
329
308
312
285
281
269
278
See para. 0 for a digest of these figures.
72
10
332
335
324
333
312
315
288
285
272
317
328
330
319
328
308
311
285
281
256
252
260
262
254
261
244
247
226
213
208
205
212
213
206
212
199
201
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix F (Contd.)
Morpeth Partnership Pupil Forecast (Contd.)
Housing Developments
Primary Child Yield
Secondary Child Yield
No of Primary age groups
No of Secondary age groups
Calculated Primary Yield
Calculated Secondary Yield
PLASC Year
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
0.190
0.160
7
7
MORPETH SCHOOLS - PARTNERSHIP
0.02714
Abbeyfields First
Cambo First
Harbottle C of E VA First
Longhorsley St Helen’s C of E First
Morpeth All Saints C of E First
Morpeth First
Morpeth Stobhillgate First
Netherton Northside First
Rothbury First
Stannington First
Thropton Village First
Tritlington C of E First
0.02286
New 2004 2005 2006
House
125
3
3
3
125
3
3
3
125
3
3
3
125
3
3
3
125
3
3
3
125
3
3
3
100
3
3
3
100
3
3
3
100
3
3
3
100
3
3
3
100
3
3
3
100
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Individual Yield
2007 2008 2009
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
0
0
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
2010
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
2011
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
2012
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
2013
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
2014
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
2015
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
0
0
0
0
Dr Thomlinson C of E Middle
Morpeth Chantry Middle
Morpeth Newminster Middle
The King Edward VI
Final Forecasts
Year Group/
Form 7 Year
Actual Jan 2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
R
229
236
203
183
165
204
204
196
190
0
1
231
242
247
213
191
173
213
210
205
0
2
223
234
242
247
213
191
173
210
210
0
3
234
226
234
243
247
213
191
170
211
0
4
233
233
222
230
239
243
209
185
167
0
5
290
267
264
252
261
271
276
235
211
0
6
284
290
265
261
250
259
268
271
233
0
Totals
First Middle
7
301
284
288
263
260
248
257
264
269
0
8
337
311
291
295
270
266
254
261
271
0
9
331
322
331
311
314
288
284
269
278
0
10
332
337
326
335
314
318
291
285
272
0
11
317
330
333
322
331
310
314
285
281
0
12
256
252
260
262
254
261
244
247
226
0
13
213
208
205
212
213
206
212
199
201
0
See para. 0 for a digest of these figures.
73
1,150
1,171
1,149
1,115
1,055
1,023
990
973
984
0
1,212
1,152
1,108
1,072
1,040
1,044
1,055
1,031
984
0
Y9Y11
980
989
990
967
959
915
888
838
831
0
Total
Net Capacity
Percent Surplus
Total 16-19 High Overal
First Middle High Overall First Middle High Overall
Exclud
l
3,342 469 1,449 3,811 1,488 1,269 1,449
4206 22.7% 4.5% 0.0% 9.4%
3,312 460 1,449 3,772 1,488 1,269 1,449
4206 21.3% 9.2% 0.0% 10.3%
3,247 465 1,455 3,711 1,488 1,269 1,449
4206 22.8% 12.7% -0.4% 11.8%
3,154 474 1,441 3,628 1,488 1,269 1,449
4206 25.1% 15.6% 0.5% 13.8%
3,054 467 1,426 3,521 1,488 1,269 1,449
4206 29.1% 18.0% 1.6% 16.3%
2,982 467 1,382 3,449 1,488 1,269 1,449
4206 31.2% 17.7% 4.6% 18.0%
2,933 456 1,344 3,390 1,488 1,269 1,449
4206 33.4% 16.9% 7.2% 19.4%
2,842 446 1,284 3,288 1,488 1,269 1,449
4206 34.6% 18.7% 11.4% 21.8%
2,799 427 1,258 3,226 1,488 1,269 1,449
4206 33.9% 22.5% 13.2% 23.3%
0
0
0
0
##### ##### #####
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix G
Glossary
Term
Meaning
Academy
A publicly-funded independent school
ADCS
Association of Directors of Children's Services Ltd
Additional Educational
Needs (AEN)
See: Special Educational Needs (SEN)
DfE
Department for Education
Education Funding
Agency
Federations
Free School
Funding Formula
Government Agency providing: revenue and capital funding for the
education for learners between the ages of 3 and 19; the ages of 3 and
25 for those with learning difficulties and disabilities; and funding for
delivery of building and maintenance programmes for schools,
academies, Free Schools and sixth-form colleges.
Provisions under the Education Act 2002 allowing governing bodies of
maintained schools to collaborate in different ways, ranging from joint
committees and joint governing body meetings to sharing a single
governing body.
All-ability state-funded school set up by local communities for children
within their community, but independent of LA control
Basis by which national government determines the share of education
running costs funding to individual LAs; and by which LAs determine the
share of that running costs funding for individual schools
ICT
Information and Communications Technology
LA
Local Authority
Mainstream Schools
Maintained School
Minimum Funding
Guarantee
NCC
Net Capacity
OFSTED
PVI
RSA
Schools Forum
Soft Federation
Special Educational
Needs (SEN);
sometimes known as:
Additional Educational
Needs (AEN)
Special Schools
A schools without a dedicated SEN provision, where children with SEN
can be educated along with other pupils
A school funded by central government via the local authority, and not
charging fees to students
A limit on the reduction in a school’s budget following a change in the
appropriate funding formula
Northumberland County Council
The number of pupil places available in a school determined by common
factors such as space.
Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills
Private, Voluntary and Independent
Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and
Commerce
A body created by Regulation that performs a consultative role within
local authorities in relation to the distribution of school funding
A legal definition describing learning difficulties or disabilities which
make it harder for a young person to learn than the majority of
children of their own age
A school dedicated to the education of pupils with SEN/AEN
74
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Special Units
A unit within a mainstream school that shares with the rest of the school
the education of pupils with SEN/AEN
Sponsored Academy
An Academy where an independent body supports and is accountable
for progressive and sustainable improvements to the performance of the
school
Surplus Places
A place within the Net Capacity of a school that is not filled
Trust Schools
A school with a foundation that holds land in trust for one or more
schools and may appoint foundation governors where the school’s
instrument of government so provides
Virtual Learning
Environment
Voluntary Aided School
Maintained schools (often of a religious character) where the governing
body pays at least ten per cent of the costs of capital work. The LA has
responsibility for the playing fields and the governing body are liable for
all other capital expenditure
75
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix H
Access to Sources Quoted
Department for Education
DfE Action research into the evolving role of the local authority in education: Final
report for the Ministerial Advisory Group, June 2012
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DFERR224
DfE Building Schools for the Future
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/adminandfinance/schoolscapital/funding/bsf
DfE Children and Families Bill 2013:
http://www.education.gov.uk/aboutdfe/departmentalinformation/childrenandfamiliesbill/
a00221161/children-families-bill
DfE Devolved Capital Programmes: 2012-13
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/adminandfinance/schoolscapital/funding/a00202
906/devolved-capital12-13
DfE Early education for two-year-olds:
http://www.education.gov.uk/childrenandyoungpeople/earlylearningandchildcare/deliv
ery/free%20entitlement%20to%20early%20education/b0070114/eefortwoyearolds
DfE Establishing a new school: advice for LAs and proposers -:
http://www.education.gov.uk/aboutdfe/advice/f00209212/establishing-new-school
DfE How can we encourage good schools to expand? September 2012
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/RSG/AllRsgPublications/Page4/CUBEC11-2012
DfE: Independent Review on the school capital system: April 2011
http://www.education.gov.uk/inthenews/inthenews/a0076572/independent-review-onthe-school-capital-system-is-published
DfE: National pupil projections: future trends in pupil numbers - December 2011
http://www.education.gov.uk/researchandstatistics/datasets/a00201305/pupilprojections-future-trends-in-pupil-number-dec2011
DfE Open Free Schools Local Statistics – North East Region
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/freeschools/a0022217
5/open
DfE Other changes to a school and expansions
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/schoolorganisation/b0075166/otherchanges-to-a-school-and-expansions
DfE: Property Data Survey Programme
76
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/adminandfinance/schoolscapital/a00204970/pds
p
DfE: School and Local Statistics:
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/performance/geo/england_all.html
DfE: Support and Aspiration: A new approach to special educational needs and
disability - progress and next steps
http://www.education.gov.uk/childrenandyoungpeople/strategy/laupdates/a00209060/
support-and-aspiration-a-new-approach-to-special-educational-needs-and-disabilityprogress-and-next-steps
DfE Percentage of Pupils with Special Educational Needs:
http://www.education.gov.uk/inyourarea/results/lea_929_las_4.shtml
DfE Priority School Building Programme
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/adminandfinance/schoolscapital/a00209336/prio
rity-school-building-programme
DfE Property Data Survey Programme
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/adminandfinance/schoolscapital/a00204970/pds
p
DfE: Written ministerial statement on the Priority School Building Programme
http://www.education.gov.uk/inthenews/inthenews/a00209480/psbp
DfE School and Local Statistics:
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/performance/geo/england_all.html
DfE School Funding Reform: DfE General Article, 5 December 2012
http://www.education.gov.uk/aboutdfe/executiveagencies/efa/fundingallocations/a002
15225/school-funding-reform
DfE School funding reform: Next steps towards a fairer system; March 2012 http://www.education.gov.uk/aboutdfe/executiveagencies/efa/fundingallocations/a002
15225/school-funding-reform
DfE Schools and
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/performance/geo/regionA_all.html
DfE The Case for Change: November 2010
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DFE00564-2010
DfE web site:
https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/RSG/AllRsgPublications/Page4/CUBEC11-2012
DfE Written ministerial statement on the Priority School Building Programme
http://www.education.gov.uk/inthenews/inthenews/a00209480/psbp
77
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
DfE; Independent Review on the school capital system: April 2011
http://www.education.gov.uk/inthenews/inthenews/a0076572/independent-review-onthe-school-capital-system-is-published
Northumberland County Council
NCC Children's Centres (also known as: Sure Start);
http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=1928
NCC Early Years and Schools Business Planning Framework 2011-2014 Refresh,
October 2012
http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=290
NCC Footnote to page 107 of Northumberland Local Development Plan: Core
Strategy Issues and Options Consultation Document: May 2012
http://northumberland.limehouse.co.uk/portal/planning/core_strategy/
NCC Letter TD/JA/L311.08 to Headteachers and Chairs of Governors of all Schools
in Northumberland
[Copy available on request]
NCC Northumberland Local Development Plan: Core Strategy Preferred Options
Consultation Document, February 2013
http://northumberland.limehouse.co.uk/portal/planning/core_strategy/
NCC Northumberland Special Educational Needs: Cambridge Associates, on behalf
of NCC
http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=417#policy
NCC Northumberland Special Schools and Special Units: Consultation – Autumn
2012
http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=4156
NCC Policy Statement on Children and Young People with Special Educational
Needs
http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=417#policy
Other Sources
Audit Commission: Improving school buildings: Asset management planning in LEAs
and schools: 2003
http://archive.auditcommission.gov.uk/auditcommission/sitecollectiondocuments/AuditCommissionRepor
ts/NationalStudies/Asset-Man_report.pdf
Cramlington Village School
http://www.villageprimary.org/#!
78
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Department for Communities and Local Government: Policy statement - planning for
schools development
http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20120919132719/http://www.communities.g
ov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/planningschoolsstatement
Department for Communities and Local Government: Community Infrastructure Levy
Regulations 2010
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan website
http://www.themorpethneighbourhoodplan.org.uk/
National Archives: Town and Country Planning Act 1990
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/8/section/106
Ofsted: The report of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Education, Children's Services
and Skills: Schools
http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/report-of-her-majestys-chief-inspector-ofeducation-childrens-services-and-skills-schools
Oral evidence to the Education Select Committee by SoS, Tuesday 31 January 2012
- Q54:
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmeduc/uc1786i/uc178601.htm
Public Consultation on Admission Arrangements to The Three Rivers Learning Trust
for the academic year 2014-2015
Putting the Learner First: A Strategic Plan for the Provision of Education in
Northumberland (2005)
RSA: Unleashing greatness - Getting the best from an academised system, January
2013
http://www.academiescommission.org/
Stronger Together: Leading Northumberland to a Greater Future, The Corporate
Strategy for Northumberland County Council, December 2010
Support and aspiration: A new approach to special educational needs and disability progress and next steps:
http://www.education.gov.uk/childrenandyoungpeople/strategy/laupdates/a00209060/
support-and-aspiration-a-new-approach-to-special-educational-needs-and-disabilityprogress-and-next-steps
UK Parliament Website: entry on Schools for 01.02.2013
http://www.parliament.uk/topics/SchoolsArchive.htm
79
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix I
Select Bibliography
In addition to sources cited as footnotes (Appendix H) the following have also been taken into
account in preparing this report:
Academies - House of Commons Library Standard Note: SN/SP/6484, 23 November 2012
Briefing - Managing the expansion of the academies programme (NAO report): Local
Government Information Unit/Children’s Services Network
Competition Meets Collaboration - Policy Exchange
http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/publications/category/item/competition-meetscollaboration
Equalities Impact Assessment (for The Importance of Teaching White Paper): DfE 2010
http://publications.education.gov.uk/
Expanding a Maintained Mainstream School by Enlargement or Adding a Sixth Form: DfE
http://publications.education.gov.uk/
Free Schools - House of Commons Library Standard Note: SN/SP/6058 17 August 2012
Growth of Academy Chains – National College for School Leadership Report (March 2012)
Managing the expansion of the Academies Programme: National Audit Office:
http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/1213/academies_expansion.aspx
Narrowing the Gap: A Review of Education and Learning in Northumberland Dec 2008:
NCC
New Formula for Funding Schools and PVI Settings from April 2013: Consultation Paper:
NCC
Northumberland First and Primary School Admissions Handbook 2013-14: NCC
Northumberland Joint Strategic Needs Assessment Executive Summary: February 2012:
NCC
Northumberland Middle, High & Secondary School Admissions Handbook 2013-14: NCC
Northumberland Schools Capital Programme 2011-2013: NCC
80
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Northumberland Schools’ Forum paper: Schools Capital Investment Programme 2012/13
May 2012
Report of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Education, Children's Services and Skills: Early
Years
School capacity academic year 2010 to 2011: DfE
http://publications.education.gov.uk/
School Organisation Guidance: Making Changes To Maintained Schools: A Guide For Local
Authorities And Governing Bodies: The Local Government Information Unit
http://www.lgiu.org.uk/briefing/the-growth-of-academy-chains-national-college-forschool-leadership-report/
Statutory Guidance for Local Authorities on the Delivery of Free Early Education for Three
and Four Year Olds and Securing Sufficient Childcare: September 2012: DfE
http://publications.education.gov.uk/
The Missing Middle: The Case For School Commissioners: Developing A System Of Great
Schools In England, July 2012: Royal Society for the encouragement of Arts, Manufactures
and Commerce
http://www.thersa.org/action-research-centre/education/reports-andevents/reports/the-missing-middle-the-case-for-school-commissioners
Unleashing greatness: Getting the best from an academised system: Royal Society for the
encouragement of Arts, Manufactures and Commerce: http://www.thersa.org/actionresearch-centre/education/reports-and-events/reports/unleashing-greatness
Written ministerial statement on the Priority School Building Programme: DfE
81
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix J
Summary of public comments on Education in Morpeth, from the MNP Launch Event,
October 2012
Capacity
Can existing schools cope with increased housing?
Difficulty getting places for families moving into Morpeth
Secure places for Morpeth children
Location
Are schools in the most appropriate locations?
High School Academy at Loansdean; 6th form college at Mitford Rd; sell off KEVI site
Protect KEVI’s grounds (comment about Headmaster’s Lawn proposed sell-off)
Traffic:
Can car journeys be reduced?
Close locality to parent traffic (e.g. Mitford Rd/Goosehill)
More double yellow lines
Need for adequate parking near schools
Restrict KEVI student cars to more manageable numbers; e.g. ballot each term
Buildings
Poor quality, especially Goosehill
Disabilities – review current provision within mainstream schools
Schools Phasing
Retain 3 tiers
Move to 2 tiers
Adult education provision:
Not as good it was
Use gym at KEVI
Classes too expensive for older people
82
Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan
Report of the Education Topic Group
Appendix K
Terms of Reference
To prepare a baseline report on the pattern of education provision in Morpeth and the various
communities within the adjoining parishes of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan Area that
identifies how this will inform and influence nay future development proposals.
You are the “champion” of the Education cross cutting Theme Group, though the Steering Group
can advise you of others who may be willing and able to assist you with this task.
Plans and proposals within the Neighbourhood Plan must be based on objectively assessed
needs or reflect policy priorities. Current patterns of service provision may constrain or
influence future development patterns and there may be existing issues that need to be
addressed through the Plan. In order to produce a sound and robust plan that the local
community – and the LPA and Examiner - can support it is necessary to have an accurate and up
to date understanding of education provision across the plan area.
The baseline report will
- Outline the current pattern of education provision in the town and current issues
relating to location of facilities; school catchment areas; school capacities, building
conditions
- consider the need to identify and allocate any new school sites within the plan having
regard to any plans that the Education Authority (and any other provider) may have;
and any residential development proposals, including alternative growth patterns,
that may be brought forward through the Plan
- be based on current information and knowledge of the Education Authority; any new
proposals for education provision ultimately brought forward through the Plan must
be shared with, and in principle be supported by, the Education Authority
- consider how any new facility might be funded and who would be providing the
facility
The Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan is community-led. The report will be prepared having regard
to feedback on education provision procured through the Launch Event programme and any
other subsequent consultation exercise that the Steering Group may hold.
You may be required to present and share the findings of your report with the Neighbourhood
Plan Steering Group and other Topic Groups and Parish Panels as may be appropriate or
otherwise required.
Your report will form a key part of the evidence base for the preparation of the Neighbourhood
Plan. When approved it will be published on the Plan website and submitted for scrutiny
through the independent examination process.
83