Press release: Teachers say parents need help to resist off-rolling pressure

first_imgRead the research on off-rolling. The study, based on survey responses from over 1000 teachers, paints a concerning picture of the extent of off-rolling in England’s schools. Teachers believe that parents with less understanding of the education system and their rights are most likely to be pressured into taking their child out of school.Some spoke of “fear-mongering”, with school management giving parents a “worst case scenario” for their child’s future if they remained in the school. Teachers said that they want to see better support for parents, so they understand their rights and options.The YouGov survey for Ofsted looks at teachers’ awareness of, and views about off-rolling.It also finds that: there is mixed understanding among teachers of what off-rolling is, but many teachers are aware that it is happening and believe that it is on the increase teachers agree that it usually happens before GCSEs, either during years 10 to 11 before results are collected, or in year 9 before exam teaching begins vulnerable students with special educational needs (SEN) or other needs are more likely to be affected many teachers think there is an overlap between off-rolling and other, sometimes legitimate, practices These are troubling findings. While not every school is off-rolling, teachers tell us that some are clearly pushing vulnerable pupils out through the back door with little thought to their next steps and best interests. Ofsted takes a dim view of off-rolling. When inspectors uncover evidence of this happening we make it clear in our inspection reports. And under our new inspection regime, taking effect in September, schools found to be off-rolling are likely to be rated inadequate for their leadership and management. Teachers believe that academic achievement is central to schools’ decision-making when pupils are off-rolled. Half of those that responded to the survey said the main reason for schools to off-roll a pupil is to manipulate league tables. Some teachers felt that it was easier to justify off-rolling when there are behavioural concerns, and that behavioural issues are “dressed up” to support the pupils’ removal.The vast majority of teachers taking part in the research opposed off-rolling, but some thought it was understandable when there are underlying issues at play. Teachers also thought that schools needed more support to address special educational needs and other behaviours that are linked to off-rolling.Only a third of teachers that had experienced off-rolling believed that off-rolled pupils went on to other mainstream schools, while just a fifth of those with experience of off-rolling said that there was any follow-up to check what had happened to pupils.Amanda Spielman, Ofsted’s Chief Inspector, said: Teachers want to see more support for parents to help them resist the practice of ‘off-rolling’. New research for Ofsted finds that a quarter of teachers have seen off-rolling – when a child is removed from the school roll for the school’s benefit, rather than in the child’s best interests – happen in their schools. Two-thirds of these teachers believe the practice is on the rise. The researchers surveyed more than 1,000 teachers from primary and secondary schools across England and interviewed teachers and senior leaders who had direct experience of off-rolling, either through teaching pupils who have been taken off the schools’ roll, or by being involved in decisions around off-rolling. Professionals were chosen from a range of roles and school types.Off-rolling and exclusionsOff-rolling is the practice of removing a pupil from the school roll without a formal, permanent exclusion or by encouraging a parent to remove their child from the school roll, when the removal is primarily in the interests of the school rather than in the best interests of the pupil.Exclusions can be temporary or permanent and are carried out formally within the Department for Education’s statutory guidance on school exclusion. They are a legitimate means of managing behavioural issues.last_img read more

Statoil says meets climate change goals ahead of schedule

first_imgNorwegian oil major Statoil has already achieved its 2015 target of reducing the CO2 emissions from the Norwegian continental shelf by 1.2 million tonnes annually from 2008 to 2020 – two years ahead of schedule.According to Statoil, the reduction equals the emissions from some 600,000 private cars annually or almost every fourth car on Norwegian roads.Arne Sigve Nylund, executive VP of Development and Production Norway (DPN), said: “It is essential that we take strong and effective actions to meet the challenges associated with man-made climate change and to realize the important goals set in the Paris Agreement. Targeted efforts are therefore underway throughout our business.“The results show that it is possible to achieve ambitious emission reduction targets. Skills, technology and hard work over time pay off, and confirm that the transformation we need must be achieved in cooperation with, not in opposition to the petroleum industry.”In 2008, the petroleum industry, under the direction of Konkraft, set a collective energy efficiency goal equivalent to 1 million tonnes of CO2 per year between 2008 and 2020. Statoil’s share of this was 800,000 tonnes.In 2015, four years ahead of schedule, Statoil achieved this goal, and therefore the company raised its target by 50 percent to 1.2 million tonnes the same year.“We did not know how to achieve the targets set in 2008, but we did get there. And the emission reductions have been both quicker and bigger than we defined as our original ambition. This gives us important inspiration and motivation when we now go for our 2030 target,” Nylund added.In nine years until September this year, Statoil has implemented 228 energy improvement measures within the categories flaring, production processes, gas compressors, and gas turbines.In August 2016, the petroleum industry, under the direction of the Norwegian Oil and Gas Association, launched an ambition of introducing carbon reduction measures equivalent to 2.5 million tonnes on the NCS by 2030, compared with 2020. Statoil’s share of this is 2 million tonnes.Nylund said: “We aim to reduce CO2 emissions from the NCS by another 2 million tonnes by 2030, i.e., a total of 3.2 million per year. We do not have all of the answers to how to achieve this, but the results we have achieved show that we can find solutions that make this possible. Our goal is to maintain our industry leadership in producing oil and gas with lower emissions.” CO2 emission reduction examplesStatoil implemented several measures to ensure reduction of CO2 emissions. As a result, the company reduced emissions from gas to flare by 140,000 tonnes of CO2 since 2007.On the Statfjord A offshore platform, Statoil changed the way it produces drinking water, reducing CO2 emissions by around 4,800 tonnes per year while on Åsgard A in the Norwegian Sea, modification on two gas compressors saved 8,200 tonnes of CO2 emissions per year.By using gravity pressure from the sea instead of a water injection pump on the Kristin field the Norwegian oil firm reduced CO2 emissions by 7,375 tonnes per year. On Oseberg South, an upgrade of two main power turbines reduced annual CO2 emissions by around 10,000 tonnes.The Kristin field also reduced emissions by installing a new check valve to reduce pressure drop in the inlet manifold. As a result, CO2 emissions went down by 10,000 tonnes per year.last_img read more