Agenda item

The Education Strategy Commissioning and Intelligence Lead and the Chief Executive of Barking and Dagenham School Improvement Partnership (BDSIP) presented an update on how the Council, BDSIP and schools in the Borough were incorporating Race and Social Justice work into their education programmes. The Culture and Wellbeing Lead also detailed the Borough’s Cultural Education Partnership (CEP) initiative known as ‘Inspiring Futures’, which worked to nurture links between cultural organisations and the Borough’s schools, embedding cultural leadership and strengthening pathways for training and employment for the Borough’s young people, into the cultural creative industries. Overall, the presentation outlined:

·  The context behind the Race and Social Justice programme, and its three key themes of student experience and inclusion; staff experience, including recruitment and progression; and curriculum;

·  The key features of the programme, such as the Race and Social Justice Charter, which set out the tangible commitments made by schools, and the programme leadership;

·  Programme highlights; such as a Facilitators’ Network which shared best practice amongst schools, provided external training and identified challenges and priorities;

·  The Inspiring Futures Conference, which had taken place in November 2022;

·  Case studies from schools, who had shared their practice through the Facilitators’ Network;

·  The context behind the Cultural Education Partnership, its priorities and how these would be achieved; and

·  Some of the work and initiatives achieved through the Cultural Education Partnership, such as the INIVA workshops, the Young Creators Makerspace, and close partnership working with Film Barking and Dagenham, to encourage young people to consider careers in film, and to diversify the industry at point of entry.

In response to questions from the Committee’s co-opted Members, officers stated that:

·  45 out of the Borough’s 60 schools were actively engaged in the Race and Social Justice programme. All schools had been approached to join, with the programme also having been promoted through events such as the Annual Headteachers’ Conference, the Annual CEP Conference and the Governors’ Conference; however, schools needed to want to participate of their own volition and could not be forced to take part. The 45 participating schools had also created a very close and collaborative network; it was suggested that forcing other schools to join this when they did not wish to, could potentially jeopardize some of this already close partnership working.

·  Officers were grateful for current funding received, which could help to enhance the programme such as through enabling guest speakers to attend workshops; however, the most important aspect was that schools gave their time and energy to the programme, and were passionate about the project.

·  The Facilitator Networks enabled schools to share case studies of their work; sometimes, this would revolve around the curriculum and other times this would detail broader issues, such as around staff survey feedback in relation to race and social justice issues, and actions to address this. Training was also provided around the curriculum, such as around diversifying learning opportunities.

·  Officers had deliberately avoided setting monitoring and success criteria, as they were keen to ensure that as many schools as possible joined the programme and could begin from their own starting points. This approach had also been agreed with headteachers and those helping to lead the programme. It was key that the programme was viewed as an ongoing journey, rather than as a tickbox exercise. Officers regularly reported back to the Council as to key highlights and case studies from the programme; case studies were also a great way of encouraging other schools to consider their own approach and what else they could implement as part of their work.

·  The one key metric to be highlighted was around engagement in schools, with work being done to increase further uptake.

The Young Mayor and the Barking and Dagenham Youth Forum representatives expressed their concern that only 15 schools (only 2 of which were secondaries) had signed up to the Leeds Beckett anti-racism award, noting their own experiences with racism within schools and the importance of addressing this in children’s school years, which were such a pivotal time in young peoples’ lives. In response to questions, officers stated that:

·  Every school had been invited to sign up to the Leeds Beckett anti-racism award. Paramijt Roopra, the Headteacher of Northbury Primary School and a lead for the Race and Social Justice Programme, had been instrumental in promoting the programme to other schools; the fact that this message had come from another headteacher had been particularly impactful. Lead facilitators had been fundamental in promoting the programme, which also featured in a regular newsletter that was sent out to the Borough’s schools.

·  It was understood that this programme would not necessarily be the right tool for all schools, and so officers had deliberatively avoided being prescriptive.

·  Some schools had not joined the Leeds Beckett Award, such as All Saints Catholic School, as they had already put in place an award with another body, for example, to undertake an anti-racism equality charter.

·  Officers were open to any suggestions from young people, their peers and colleagues in their schools as to how to expand the programme in schools.

·  The Borough’s special education schools, such as Trinity and Riverside Bridge, had been very engaged in the programme, with Trinity having also contributed best practice case studies as to their work at the programme’s launch conference. This work had been particularly inspirational to other schools, as to how they could adapt their own work.

·  In terms of encouraging young people to explore creative industry opportunities outside of the workshops, consistency of messaging and ensuring that the correct messaging was going out to schools, was vital. There were also continued professional development (CPD) opportunities for staff, such as to enable them to better understand these industries and then pass these messages down to pupils. The creative industry was one of the fastest growing in the country and was unlikely to be as hit by artificial intelligence (AI) as other industries in the future, meaning a greater robustness. Messaging also needed to support young people to find out information, as well as to empower their parents to feel confident about the opportunities in the industry.

In response to further questions from Members, officers stated that:

·  There were lots of future opportunities for young people in the Borough, with the London food markets moving to Dagenham Dock and pathways being developed into the food and hospitality industries. It was therefore important to ensure that these opportunities were accessible to all schools and young people in the Borough.

·  Lots of work was undertaken with cultural organisations on a strategic level, to ensure that Barking and Dagenham was seen as an attractive place to work, deliver programmes and be a partner organisation. As such, many of the initiatives offered to schools were free.

·  Whilst not every young person would be interested in the film industry, it was important to recognise that there would be a need for related careers as part of this, such as for film and media law and film and media accountancy, as well as for skilled trades such as electricians, carpenters and metal workers. It was essential to help young people to best know their own pathways and progression routes and to support parents in this.

·  Funding could prove a challenge, as the creative industry was often seen as a nicety rather than an essential. It was also important to talk to senior leaders in schools and explain how creative work linked to the wider strategic agenda, such as around its impact on the lives and the mobility of young people in their care.

·  Where schools had not joined the programme, they were included in race and social justice work through events such as Headteachers’ Conferences, where race and social justice speakers were part of the agenda, to enable them to learn and to further encourage their interest.

·  Schools had done great work around diversifying their curriculums, such as through incorporating more diverse books into these, and through hosting race and social justice talks for their children and young people. Members praised this work undertaken so far and highlighted the importance of amending the curriculum to include more information around race and social justice where possible.

Members, the Young Mayor and the BAD Youth Forum representatives emphasised the importance of children and young people learning about each other’s cultures and experiences; whilst it was understood that there was a desire for each school to join the programme at its own pace, the diversity of the local community meant that there was a great need for schools to join, and that an opt-in voluntary approach, rather than a mandatory approach, meant that many young people were missing out on crucial learning and inclusion opportunities. The Young Mayor and the BAD Youth Forum encouraged officers to approach young people to hear their opinions and enable them to hold their schools to account; whilst officers had worked with groups such as the Peer Support Group (PSG) and Flipside in the context of ‘Inspiring Futures’, they had not yet engaged with the BAD Youth Forum around the Race & Social Justice programme and agreed to attend a session to seek the perspectives of its young people.

Officers, along with the Cabinet Member for Educational Attainment and School Improvement, urged Members to disseminate information about the programmes to schools (especially to those where they were parent governors), to encourage programme uptake and to further promote the importance of race and social justice work, as well as cultural education opportunities for young people. Officers also noted that the programme was not intended to be a “quick fix”; whilst lots of positive work and engagement had been undertaken over the past two years, more work was still to be done and officers requested that they return in a year to report back on progress, by which point it was hoped that further schools would have signed up to the programme.