Government of Jersey

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made 10 August 2011 regarding:

Decision Reference: MD
Decision Summary Title :	School Exam Results Review (SR6/2011): Response of the ESC Minister		Date of Decision Summary:	05.08.11
Decision Summary Author:	Peter Horsfall, Project Manager – Policy and Planning		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt?	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:	n/a
Written Report Title :	School Suspensions Review (S.R.7/2010): Response of the ESC Minister		Date of Written Report:	03.05.11
Written Report Author:	Department for Education, Sport and Culture		Written Report : Public or Exempt?	Public
Subject: Review of School Exam Results (S.R.06/2011), Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel - response of the ESC Minister
Decision(s): The Minister approved the attached response to the Education and Home Affairs Scrutiny Panel’s Review of School Suspensions (S.R.06/2011), and decided this should be published in the form of a report to the States for the information of States members and the public.
Reason(s) for Decision: This response is being published in accordance with paragraph 2 of the ‘Guidance for Ministers responding to Scrutiny Reports’, published in late 2009, which states that responses to scrutiny reports should ‘be sent to the Chairman of the relevant Scrutiny Panel, copied to the Council of Ministers for information and presented to the States’.
Resource Implications: The publication of this response has no significant financial and manpower implications.
Action required: A copy of the response has already been sent to the Chairman of the Scrutiny Panel. The ESC Department will send a copy of the report to the Council of Ministers for information, and will contact the States Greffe to arrange for the response to be published as a report to the States.
Signature:		Position: Minister for Education, Sport and Culture
Date Signed:		Date of Decision :

School Exam Results - Scrutiny Review (S.R.7/2010): Response of the Minister for Education, Sport and Culture

SCHOOL EXAM RESULTS (SR6/2011):

REVIEW BY EDUCATION AND HOME AFFAIRS SCRUTINY PANEL –

Response of Minister for Education, Sport and Culture

Introduction

The Scrutiny Panel does not appear to have taken sufficient account of the complex nature of the Island’s education system, which includes a high percentage of students enrolled in the fee paying sector and the transfer of students to Hautlieu from the 11-16 States schools. Unfortunately the Panel’s attention tended to be primarily focussed on the publication of exam results, based on a narrow performance indicator, which cannot be said to provide a comprehensive picture of the education system.

It is encouraging that the Panel states in its report that it is not calling for the publication of league tables as it recognises that this would have a damaging effect on schools. This supports the department’s view. The Panel also noted the findings of the House of Commons Children, Families and Schools Select Committee which called upon the UK Government to move away from the use of Achievement and Attainment tables following an enquiry into school accountability in 2009 and 2010.

As part of the scrutiny review, the ESC Department furnished the Panel with a significant amount of performance data. It is disappointing that information contained in this data does not appear to have been taken into account by the Panel in reaching its conclusions The Panel’s report would appear to be largely based on the views expressed by one member of the public who does not have a professional background in the field of education, nor a direct knowledge of the Island’s education system. It is also worth noting in this connection that the Panel elected not to appoint an independent professional adviser, even though this is normal practice in other scrutiny reviews.

Findings

	Findings	Comments

1	Exam statistics for each of the Island’s schools cannot reasonably be withheld from publication.	The overall performance of our secondary schools is already published and additional information is provided to parents by each school. The current policy is being reviewed and as part of that work discussions are taking place with the head teachers of all our secondary schools to ensure there is a uniform approach in the way the information is provided.
2	There is sufficient independence in the collation of Jersey’s exam results data and there is therefore no current need for more direct involvement of the Statistics Unit.	I am pleased that the arrangements for the collation of data have been recognised by the Panel as providing sufficient independence. Jersey’s exam data is collated and presented by an independent agency (EPAS). This is operated in the U.K. by the National Federation of Exam Results, acting on behalf of educational authorities across England and Wales.
3	The Minister’s policy on publishing exam results should ensure that a proper explanation is provided of how Jersey’s results may feasibly be compared with other jurisdictions.	To judge all schools solely against academic performance is flawed as it presumes that all children are equal and all schools are the same. It is fundamentally difficult to compare the performance of individual schools as our education system is highly selective. The only fair comparison is to consider the overall achievements of our students with those in other jurisdictions.
4	Exam statistics are not the only performance measure used by the Department of Education, Sport and Culture.	Agreed. It is department policy not to simply rely on exam statistics but to use a wide range of performance measures to monitor individual school performance. These include the quality of learning, leadership & management, teaching, and relationships.
5	There needs to be a proper debate on the structure and objectives of the Island’s secondary school system.	The ESC consultation paper on ‘Learning for Tomorrow’s World: The Future of Education in Jersey’ provides opportunities for members of the public to express their views on all areas of education. Following on from this, an appropriate policy option paper will be produced identifying changes to the education system as deemed necessary.
6	Work should continue on addressing the apparent gender imbalance in school performance and on determining the impact of socio-economic status and parental contribution/influence on performance.	The department’s aim is to ensure that the educational needs of each child are met, regardless of their ability or background. Schools are required to monitor and address all issues which may affect the success of each child. The issue of gender imbalance in school performance is recognised, and reflects similar patterns of results in other jurisdictions, with the variations in performance falling between that which is statistically expected. The department and schools work together to take appropriate action in addressing this issue, providing support to students in meeting their objectives. School Performance is addressed on a continuous basis by our professional partners. The socio-economic status of each school is taken into account when determining the appropriate allocation of resources (such as SEN and SEBD), and work continues in this area to update and improve information so as to ensure resources are targeted in the most efficient and cost effective manner. The greatest benefit to a child’s development is the engagement of parents in their learning experience, and this is actively encouraged by the department and schools.

Recommendations

	Recommendations	To	Accept/ Reject	Comments	Target date of action/ completion

1	The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture should revise his policy on the publication of exam statistics.		Accept	A review on the publication of exam results was already being undertaken by the department prior to the Scrutiny review. This will soon be completed.	August 2011
2	The Minister for Education, Sport and Culture should develop a reporting structure for school performance that takes into account other performance measures used by his Department (as well as exam results) and through which information should be made publicly available unless in exceptional circumstances.		Accept	Over the last couple of years the department has been developing a reporting structure that takes into account a wide range of performance measurements. Once this work is completed additional information on school performance will be made available to the public in the appropriate format.	August 2012

Conclusion

The Scrutiny Panel’s findings and recommendations for the most part reflect work already being undertaken by the Department, and in this connection I am pleased to note that the Panel has stated in its report that ‘we are not calling upon the Minister to publish league tables’.

Little effort seems to have been made by the Panel to understand the challenges faced by our 11-16 schools whose performance cannot simply be compared with other Island secondary schools.

Our schools are performing well and although we can do better, we should not lose sight of the fact that Jersey has a highly selective education system that cannot be compared easily with other jurisdictions. Improvements are being made and the department is working closely with all partners to ensure that pupils, regardless of their ability, are provided with a good well-rounded education that meets their needs.

The panel has been made aware that the ESC review on the publication of exam results is already in progress. As part of this review, ESC is considering using other types of data that might add to the public’s understanding of our selective system and provide relevant information on a school’s performance.

I am pleased that the Panel supports the need for a proper debate on the structure and objectives of the Island’s secondary school system. The ESC consultation paper on The Future of Education in Jersey provides the framework for that debate, and I look forward to future discussions on this subject with the Scrutiny Panel, States members, and members of the public.