New school being started

The LA will be paying the wages of the staff and probably advising if their services are purchased by the academy chain. They will also have done all the work to establish a new site and establish a new school is needed. Unless it’s a school promoted by parents who don’t want local schools and the places offered are surplus to local needs. Fewer of these are set up now. New schools often use the admission procedures of the LA which is sensible.

I am not politically opposed to how schools are set up. Secondary schools are all academies anyway, and have been for years, but I’m really not bothered about that and my comments are not remotely based on who organises the school!

Any school set up by any organisation will find they cannot provide everything children should have. Therefore I do stand by my comments regarding the difficulties because anyone can see they are common sense. Whether you are bothered by it is up to you.

Yes, they also attract parents who want a more sheltered secondary education and feel their DC won’t cope elsewhere. Again, that’s personal choice. Small village primary schools attract the same parents. However if they didn’t boost numbers some village schools would have barely 20 children from their catchment. But it can lead to an over representation of SEN children within some schools. So as long as you evaluate what you want and then make the choice knowing the pros and cons, then you will be happy. Pretending the cons don’t exist is not sensible. Discounting them might suit some but not all.

Ours was too, op, so that's a good sign.

As I work for a LA I have seen the issues

Issues with new schools in general, or just new schools not set up by the LA?

I ask because some people are politically opposed to new schools these days - they don't like the fact that LA's aren't allowed much involvement. Some LA's have actively opposed them or been obstructive/unhelpful. But other LA's have engaged in the process and worked with school trusts to help set them up. Hopefully the op's school is in that category.

As I work for a LA I have seen the issues.

Another factor near us was that at one school a lot of parents opted for it as they were worried about a 'big school' for their first borns who were shy / nervous / struggled at school / had SEN. Whilst it might have helped them short term, I'm not sure it helps long term. And the school had very high SEN % the first 2 years & wasn't really resourced for it. But that was prob a one off.

I find it hard to understand why some of you are undermining schools you have no direct experience of. Your reasons for not choosing new schools in your area may be perfectly justifiable to your circumstances, but they are suppositions rather than direct experiences and you seem over-invested in persuading the op to think the same way.

@Upwardtrajectory
The lack of older pupils is a big one. See my comment above! Of course you can shine (if that’s a measure of success?) but your child never sees anything where older DC really shine! My DDs were inspired by great acting by senior DC, they aspired to be Head of House, to gaining privileges they saw older pupils getting, to be part of senior choirs that performed, to having art displayed at exam time etc. They looked forward to joining senior clubs like debating and MUN. There’s an ethos that goes with senior pupils being present that cannot be replaced. There’s also something to be said for DC waiting their turn for privileges and leadership but knowing what it looks like is worth knowing.

I feel like the first intakes of the one nearest us have both been some how not exposed to the full experience. I know kids in three new schools & a teacher in one 4 years old. The kids in the oldest year defo have a bubble existence which isn't a bad thing for some. It's all lovely and small & friendly etc but fights and bullying can still happen too. The teacher said he felt like the oldest year were all over confident and had no idea about the real world as they'd always been the oldest. He said they were even over confident about their ability to pass GCSEs etc Was fascinating

But the shining is limited to a very narrow spectrum. They don’t see anything of a higher calibre. I’m sure some parents are cheerleaders for their DC but school should be broader then that. However each to their own but I prefer a rounded experience and I don’t really expect DC to shine. It’s rather false and more like primary school.

It will almost certainly not have the depth of talent a whole school can muster so it’s a diminished opportunity

It's not a diminished opportunity for the individual participants. Some parents may turn their noses up at the output, but most are proud of the achievement. I think students who participate have more opportunity to develop their skills and shine, not fewer.

New schools are only set up in areas where more places are needed so it stands to reason that many families won't have the luxury of being able to choose between several schools.

We had this opportunity and dismissed it BUT there was an established good school locally too

No established clubs with older children
Limited trips
No building until yr 9
no older pupils to pave the way / inspire
No sports facilities
Teachers teaching 3 subjects (not all their specialisms)
Limited funding

@catgotmatung
I think you and I have different standards and expectations. 8 DC isn’t an orchestra. It’s an ensemble. If will almost certainly not have the depth of talent a whole school can muster so it’s a diminished opportunity. But it depends what you are comparing to and what you want. None of what a new school offers from your description would appeal to me unless the alternative was awful.

TizerorFizz that's not our experience. Music and drama have been very good from the outset at our school. The orchestra probably only had about 8 kids in it in the opening year but they still pulled off fantastic Christmas and Summer concerts and there was a band too. Some of the teachers also played instruments, so they joined in.

the same PE teacher might be running year 7 football, rugby and hockey club

Yep, exactly.
In its first year our school had one (male) Head of PE and another (female) teacher who was head of department in her main subject, but also taught PE as a second subject (its very common for teachers to have more than one subject). Some of the other subject teachers ran things like dance, table tennis etc. They were a multi-talented bunch!

Yes but there are no senior players to look up to. It’s very year specific. In my view music and drama really suffer. There might be enough for a junior orchestra after 3 years but it’s virtually impossible with one year group. Drama needs older pupils to flourish. No A level or even gcse art displays either so you definitely suffer from a lack of stimulation from seeing older DCs work or influence. Also there’s nothing to aspire to. Nothing is visible.

Most sports teams are year-specific, so there shouldn't be a difference there. In fact, there might be more to start with, as instead of running a year 7, 8 and 9 football club, the same PE teacher might be running year 7 football, rugby and hockey clubs. You'd probably get enough for a choir from one year group - instrumental ensembles might be a bit more pot luck - but again, the music teacher might have more flexibility to run whatever suits the players they do have.

If the alternatives are dire, take it. If the other schools are decent and well established, don’t.

A new school I know has a new education factory building of low quality. Areas surrounding it are still weed infested. The sports playing areas are minimal and after 6 years it still has no decent outside pitches. A rugby pitch is shared with the town and the new pitches will be across a main A road opposite the school.

A family member has been to concerts there and reported they were not great! Definitely missed older pupils in the early years of opening. If felt like a middle school not a secondary school. No pupil leadership and I think you go without an established ethos when a school is new and it’s a disadvantage. No cheering on the first team or seeing great music performances. It seems hollow. But if the alternatives are awful, it could be better!

Ours had a (small) orchestra, band, choir and football teams (girls and boys), plus many other sports teams in year 7. We didn't win a lot, but enough to hold our heads high. Participation levels in sport were good because they encouraged kids to take part who might not have been selected in other schools.

unknownstory a few of us did wonder about that effect at the start, but it hasn't been a noticeable negative. The 'top of the school' have had closer relationship with senior staff and have probably looked to them as role models more - and because the staff didn't view them so much as 'the little ones' they were stretched appropriately and given some responsibilities a little earlier - for example lead roles in school plays, or prefecting duties.

Several new schools have opened in our city and near by. I know quite a few who have gone to them. Upsides are small community feel & very invested staff and parents.
Downside they don't see so much is the massive upside I've seen with my own DC joining a big high with great community feel.
Sports / teams often mix age groups.
Clubs for all ages before school, lunch times & afterschool.
Mixed age drama, choirs, bands, orchestra, backstage group, arts.
Yr7 looking up to older years.
Older kids being mentors & sports leaders to Yr7
Not having all those experiences and developing those interactions would put me off. I see it as life skills for college & beyond