New Secondary schools for Richmond!

[BayJay]

Richmond Council recently published a White Paper outlining plans for Secondary education in the borough (cabnet.richmond.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=23719). They want new 6th forms in every school, and would need to decrease current Yr7 intakes to accomodate that. To offset those decreases they are talking about creating two new secondary schools. One of those new schools would be a Roman Catholic school.

The Roman Catholic community in the borough are currently disadvantaged by the "link" system (www.st-marys.richmond.sch.uk/Newsletter%20Link%20letter%20for%202011%20links%20(2).pdf). Because the Catholic primaries are not linked to any secondaries in the borough, their children tend to go to a combination of out-of-borough Catholic secondaries (which are mostly rated as Outstanding), grammar schools and private schools, though some of the girls do go to Waldegrave, which is not part of the link system. Note that there is no reason, in principle, why the Catholic Secondaries couldn't be linked to local community schools, but because many of their children have other options, they simply don't meet the "25% rule" required to form a link. (See an example set of transfer figures at www.st-james.richmond.sch.uk/Admin/Uploads/Docs/StJamesSchool_Parents_NewsLetter_270910.pdf).

This raises several questions in my mind:

1. Does the problem necessarily need to be solved by providing a Catholic Secondary, or are there alternative solutions that would benefit the community as a whole (e.g. reforming the link system)?
2. Does the majority of the Catholic community specifically want to be educated separately from the rest of us, or is it the case that, like everyone else, they simply want an outstanding education for their children, and find that the Catholic route is often the best way of achieving that?
3. If Catholics had more options for transferring to outstanding community schools locally (as many already do, to Waldegrave), would they choose those options over travelling to a single-faith school in a neighbouring borough?
4. I accept that there will always be very religious people who want to segregate themselves, but would I be right in asserting that there are also large numbers of Catholics who would be happy to attend community schools, provided that gave them the same level of academic excellence that can be found in many Catholic options?
5. If a new Catholic secondary school is created, it is likely to have an entrance policy that requires a priest's reference (as per the majority of existing Catholic schools). How do people feel about that?
6. If a state-funded Catholic School is created in the borough, would non-Catholic parents also like the option of sending their children there, provided they weren't barred by the admission system?

I'd be interested to hear your opinions!

This kind of hypocrisy is commonplace in the Anglican community, where it serves, from the school?s point of view, as a way of identifying the really keen parents whose children are likely to be an asset and, even more important, of excluding the troubled families which may be a liability to the school.

Disgust at this hypocrisy has led the C of E in recent years to move towards open admission, a return to the Church?s original role as the state religion open to all.

Human nature is the same everywhere and at all times: parents will always do whatever they have to do to further their children?s interests; so it would be very surprising to be told that Catholics are different.

Everyone, I too know many people who went to church, both Catholic and Anglican, to get their children into a certain school. My local church, which is linked to my children's school, had to introduce a register for prospective school applicants to sign at each church attendance so the vicar can keep track of them all. (I have even heard tales of people nipping in and signing the register, then leaving after the first few minutes of the service).

However, I don't blame the parents. I blame the system, and that's why I want to see it change. I don't think those parents are 'faking' anything. They are cultural Christians who are comfortable with attending church. They attend for weddings, and baptisms, and see the pre-school 'process' as an extension of that. They just want access to their local schools, and don't see why religion should be a barrier to that. I agree with them, but think the privelege should be extended to people who aren't cultural Christians too, through more open admissions.

florist - I don't think it was me who said that the headteacher of a faith school should not necessarily be of that faith. I didn't really take part in that bit of discussion. I'm fine with the idea of key staff like headteachers being of a particular faith. However, I don't think the principle should be extended to the maths teacher, pe teacher etc. I realise faith schools don't necessarily use their opt-out from equalities legislation, but I still don't like the fact that they have an opt-out (and neither do many teachers, which is why one of the teaching unions is a member of Accord).

Anyway, according to section 4.4.5 of this report there may be a clue that some negotiation is taking place on faith versus community places for the Clifden School. I hope so.

"Disgust at this hypocrisy has led the C of E in recent years to move towards open admission"

ChrisSquire, I would rephrase that. I would say that recognition that their schools appeal to, and have the potential to benefit, a wide range of people, including non-practising Christians, has led the CofE in recent years to move towards open admissions. They want more people to benefit from their schools' ethos. That is why they are opening more and more schools, and that is why their new schools are tending towards open admissions.

I wouldn't call anyone wanting to access faith schools a hypocrite or cynical, or anything else unpleasant. That just drives the problem underground and prevents people from talking openly about their experiences. Many such people are letting their voices be heard by signing the RISC petition, because although they have benefitted from the practice they don't like it.

New poster here - I've been watching this debate for some time, but I'd like to add something to the discussion about parents' motivation for sending their kids to catholic schools. Yes there are some who may not be completely committed to their faith, but as a member of St James's Parish I think these people are probably in the minority. The church is full all year round (not just in the term before applications to schools are submitted), to the extent that it is at times overflowing and has been expanded over the last year to accommodate the growing congregation. Most years there about 60 children taking their First Holy Communion (mostly attending St James's school - but not all children in the parish are able to get a place there now, so some are from other schools), and baptisms take place on a weekly basis. Sending your child to a catholic school is quite a commitment as you are encouraged as a parent to become involved in the religious life of the school, through discussing RE topics with your child, supporting them in learning about their faith and attending masses throughout the year at school. There are people who use their faith as an entry to school, but imho not to the extent that many people on this discussion board seem to think.

Hester ,Littlemissmuppet you imply that a 'lot', 'many' of Catholics are only attending church to get their children into school, this i have argument with. I stand by my very good reasons for being very offended by those comments as they create a false picture of the majority.
Thank you Wimpykid for your description of life in your parish , my parish and my friends parishes are also full at weekends with many people who have been extremely upset by this kind of comment.
In your desire for a new school choice in Twickenham you may well decide to turn away from the needs of others in your church community , even your school community but it is clear too that in pursuing your aims you are surely selling out on the rest of the borough too! I'm sorry but I don't respect that and I am sure that neither will those non Catholics whose only choice is an Twickenham academy and RPA and will continue to only to be those schools as they will have little hope of getting into your new community school. For those schools (the ones you don't want as a choice) your plans also seriously jeopardize their future . A new community school in Twickenham will only take away pupils and funds from them which will seriously affect their continued improvement. How is that fair to the children in those schools? How is that fair to the catholic children who have no choice in their own borough? I am sorry to speak so plainly but this makes me very angry !

I don't really care too much whether it's "a lot" or "a few" people who attend church to get their children into a good school. We don't have access to that data, and the time has passed for a sensitive local study of it (the results would now be skewed by the debate). I think that, in principle, everyone who wants access to a Catholic school has a right to that aspiration. If that means having 10 new Catholic schools spread around the borough, then I'd be fine with that, so long as they have a proportion of open admissions. What I don't like is the idea of one new Catholic school with some people judged more worthy of attendance than others. Anyone who signs up to the ethos should be able to choose it. I see that as sharing the Catholic faith, rather than ring-fencing it for those who have proved themselves most worthy.

That is the principle behind the opening up of CE schools. It's about proudly sharing an ethos, rather than being protectionist and building walls around it.

Mir4, you seriously don't appreciate that a new Catholic secondary will be a serious diversion of the council's funds?

But I have no plans. I just know this one in its current form is fundamentally flawed.

I was waiting to be attacked for letting down my community.

Clearly there are some people who fake a belief and practice just to get their children in to a Catholic school. The schools have tried to tighten up admission arrangements but have been confounded in doing so by the admissions code and by the school's adjudicator - they can't win.

Bayjay would like everyone to have access to faith schools inc those with absolutely no faith. I can see why she says this (some are faking it and this is destructive of the Church and the schools) - but doesn't such a move exacerbate, not ameliorate, the impact faith schools can have on community schools.
There are another group of people who rediscover their faith when they have children - eg Cherie Booth - and should be distinguished from the first.

"doesn't such a move exacerbate, not ameliorate, the impact faith schools can have on community schools"
I don't think so. I don't see it as a faith schools versus community schools competition for attracting aspirational families. In the future there are going to be all kinds of different schools; Christian Faith schools, other faith schools, vanilla community schools, specialist community schools (like the Kunskapsskolan academies), Free Schools, a few old Grammar schools. That provides choice, and good schools with a strong ethos will always attract people.

I'm not worried about the Kunskapsskolan Academies. I think they will be oversubscribed in the future. The ethos just needs time to bed in (and they need to finish the building work).

But the funds will be invested for Richmond children who curently have no secondary provision. We are not talking about a small minority who do not have a hope of filling a school.

If the school was undersubscibed with practising Catholic children (and that is what we are talking about - no other 'prove yourself worthy' criteria) then the debate about opening the school up to non-Catholics, who share the ethos would be more valid.

The school, in it's current site is almost a no-win situation all around if it is not a faith school. If it happens to be 'outstanding' then it draws children away from Twickenham Academy and negatively impacts on the progress that everyone hopes it is making; if it is a school that is not seen as 'outstanding' parents in the local vacinity ignore it, knowing that they will get into Orleans Park or Waldegrave anyway.

BayJay - if only 75 places per year are to be set aside for catholic children in a Faith Academy, that still leaves a fair number of children from the 6 catholic primaries in Richmond borough unable to obtain a place in a catholic secondary school in the borough, (total places 240 according to Richmond borough Primary School Admissions brochure) who would have to travel out of the borough to attend a catholic secondary school. I think the difficulties that these children face have been touched on earlier in this thread, but are not fully appreciated by those who don't have to deal with them.

There seems to be some terrible fear of the infidel clinging to the school gate trying to destroy everything behind it.

Incidentally, the main point that the people against the Catholic secondary school are trying to get across is that it is looking likely that Twickenham & Hampton academies will be oversubscribed in only a few years' time because of the massive expansion in the community (and CofE) primary schools. The only reason that they might not be oversubscribed is because they've failed to improve.

But it's okay because if we get to that situation, then the council can easily find a random site and chuck a few portacabins on it until it can sort out building a new school, can't it?

"But the funds will be invested for Richmond children who curently have no secondary provision"
Seenbutnotheard, we fundamentally disagree on that point. I think they do have secondary provision, because they can choose the Academies too. Plus, they will have even more community provision if the Linked School Policy goes. They may prefer a Catholic school, but unfortunately we can't all have what we want.

"The school, in it's current site is almost a no-win situation"
I disagree. I don't think that a faith school would necessarily impact Twickenham Academy in the way you suggest, because many people aren't interested in faith schools. Twickenham Academy now has a strong, and highly attractive, ethos of its own, and once it is rebuilt it will start to draw in more children on its own merits. I wouldn't be surprised if some Catholic families start to choose it too, even if they do have access to Clifden. Christs doesn't impact Orleans Park, so there is no reason to think that a Clifden Catholic school would necessarily impact TA.

"that still leaves a fair number of children .... unable to obtain a place in a catholic secondary school in the borough"
Wimpykid, welcome to the thread. Again, its unfortunate that we can't all have what we want. Did you read the earlier discussion about the idea of a Catholic chaplaincy service in some of our community schools? RPA in particular would like to attract children from its local Catholic primaries, so perhaps that might be something they could consider. Or else there may need to be an ongoing campaign for another Catholic school at the north end of the borough.

"The schools have tried to tighten up admission arrangements"
Florist, that is at the heart of the problem, as it causes resentment on the part of people who can't get in. Last year St James' RC school in Twickenham sent 5 children to the London Oratory, and yet Catholic parents at the north end of the borough, closest to the Oratory are complaining that they can't get their children in there. That sort of 'leapfrogging' happens because the Oratory has a complicated points system for measuring Catholicity, taking into account baptism date (under 6 months preferred), worshipping frequency (most points for weekly attendance plus holy days of obligation), and additional service (readings, flower arranging etc). That leads to a culture of competitive worship which I think reflects badly on the church and leaves those left out in the cold feeling aggrieved.

I'd like to share a story. I went to a Catholic Secondary school myself, back in the eighties. A friend of mine had 9 siblings. Her mum was pregnant with the tenth when she discovered she had breast cancer. Her strong Catholic faith led her to reject chemotherapy, as it would have damaged her unborn child and necessitated an abortion. Instead, she gave birth to the child and died shortly afterwards. That father, a committed Catholic, was left with 11 children to care for. If he had had to go through the sort of "commitment requirements" needed to access a school like the Oratory, his children would never have had the chance to attend a Catholic school. I don't suppose they all made it to church once a month, never mind weekly.

That is an extreme example, but there are many other families who aren't "measurably Catholic" enough to access Catholic VA secondary schools. Open admissions policies give them greater opportunity for access. If open admissions means that there is still excess demand for Catholic schools, then let's have more of them. Keep campaigning for them until the demand is satisfied!

precisely the schools can't win - if they have very weak entry criteria all the so-called "cultural catholics" as some people here describe them or as I do non-Catholics get in; if schools tighten up criteria then the complaint that you make is made.
The problem again is the quality of provision generally availabe which leads parents to engage in such behaviour. Having said that I don't think the solution is to effectively abolish Catholic schools by giving no priority in over subscription circumstances to membership and practice of the faith.

ps I am not sure posting the newsletter with alot of personal data on this site is appropriate

Bayjay, a more recent example is a friend of mine with a one child at a catholic primary (two older ones having been and left) then last child applied and was turned down on the basis they they only attended 3 of 4 sunday masses. This was because the husband worked shifts (often weekends) and she did respite care for a severely disabled child once a month.

They did eventually get child 4 admitted through the appeals process but it wasn't a pleasant experience. They have chosen a CofE secondary for child 3 and I don't think under any circumstances would choose a Catholic secondary for child 4 now. Of course I can't be sure that was influenced by the primary admissions process but I know it made her reassess her views privately even if she doesn't broadcast that publically.

Catholic children in the borough have more choice of secondaries than my child does as they also get priority (and avail themselves of it) at Christs. Complaining that you are being ignored doesn't wash with me or the hundreds of children at unlinked primaries.

You chose to live and have children in a borough that has no state catholic secondary, I'm sure it would be nicer for you have one but the priority should be to provide adequate secondary schooling for all the boroughs children.

There is no evidence that the council can turn around the failing secondaries and they are currently planning to use the only site anyone can identify in the borough. So what happens if one or both of the failing secondaries fail to turn around?

My issue is that no-one on the catholic "side" seems to acknowledge that a catholic education is a privilege not a right and they treat everyone campaigning for fair treatment for everyone (yes even catholics) like we are trying to murder their puppy.

"The problem again is the quality of provision generally availabe" - that isn't entirely true florist. There is a problem with two specific secondary schools. Additionally there is a prediction of increasing number of places required regardless of whether those schools are turend around.

Until the council has credible plans to address the need for additional places, I don't beleive that a new school with an exclusively minority intake should be their priority.

I would feel the same way if the new school proposed was for muslims, buddhists, jews or even devout atheists. Schools which exclude children should not be a priority at this point. I am quite happy for the council to address any minority groups desires once they have sufficient secondary places in schools at least acheiving a similar level to the boroughs primary schools.

I am personally unaffected by the Clifden site - whether the school is Catholic VA, Academy or non-religious. My best bet is for standards at RPA to improve and/or Christs to expand and offer more open places. The council has a duty to find adequate places for all the children in the borough before starting to consider the particular requirements of smaller gorups.

They are a long way at present from fulfilling this responsibility and therefore the provision of a catholic secondary is inevitably going to be contentious.

If a non faith academy, community school or free school opened on the Clifden Road site what admissions criteria should it have: simply distance, after children in care?

"if they have very weak entry criteria all the so-called "cultural catholics" as some people here describe them or as I do non-Catholics get in"

Well, perhaps they are the ones that would benefit most from a Catholic school. After all, if a child is fulfilling the sort of entry requirements that the Oratory demands then their faith will probably survive the experience of attending a community school.

florist I have no idea. I think it should be open to more then 10-15% of the comunity, I think there should be proper consultation. Which there should have been before the council decided to commit millions of pounds to a site.

Kewcumber I am sure the councils plans are mentioned clearly in the scrutiny report inclucding the expansion of Christs to include another form (see p.5 , 4.8). They have also stated that they have places till beyond 2016 and then for several years after that as at the present there are so many out of borough children in some of the schools that have not yet made their basic quota of richmond residents. If Richmond residents were to apply from what they have stated they displace a good number of these out of borough children on distance(see p2 point 4.3) . This is in addition to the 209 spare places that are still available now in the academies (p1-2 , 4.2 and 4.3). The report also discusses the potential of a new kingston school in 2015(see p2 4.5)that eventually should release more places at Christa and Greycourt. In addtion it is mentioned about the prospect of 3 Free schools to be established in 2013 P7 , 4.13 which would each include secondary provision (150 places). In additon to this school building projects in adjacent boroughs are expected to release more places in Richmond borough schools.

So personally I don't think they are a long way from 'fulfilling their responsibility' as it looks like there are clear plans both to improve our existing academies and create more capacity. So perfect time for creating a new catholic school to provide provision for the 6 Catholic primary schools that do not have any school at present in the borough. At the ned of the day new catholic VA school addresses a need, to provide education in the borough to the 6 schools. It is a fantastic opportunity for a school incorprating the children from all of our local communities across the borough not just one small area (which is already served by 3 other schools) . It also does not in any way interfere with the improvement programmes of our academies or take much needed students away from them.

The question is are you going to object to it on a 'principal' that will mean there are children still without a school and where other children in the borough and other schools will suffer?

"There is no evidence that the council can turn around the failing secondaries and they are currently planning to use the only site anyone can identify in the borough. So what happens if one or both of the failing secondaries fail to turn around?"
I don't think it's true to say that the Academies are "failing schools" any longer. I understand that Hampton Academy was oversubscribed this year (but they have their own link system, so no Catholics are allowed in there either), and if Twickenham Academy continues to improve its results, then I think parents will start to consider the Academies as first choices. I recommend checking out their websites to have a look at the building plans - soon we will have 2 state of the art new secondary schools in the borough. It's a shame this has not been as well publicised as it could have.
We do not know for sure if the link system will be abolished - what then? Until I know the outcome of the consultation I will continue to support the bid for a Catholic secondary school in Richmond borough. The annual scramble for a secondary school place every year at my child's school has to be seen to be believed.

Mir4, the numerical modelling in the scrutiny report that you refer to has only just been published. It is subject to scrutiny. It hasn't even been presented to the cabinet yet because that scrutiny has not yet taken place, so I suggest you don't talk it up as proving the case for a Catholic Secondary. The policy to create the Catholic secondary existed long before that numerical analysis was done, and if there are holes in the numbers then its the Scrutiny Committee's job to find them.

wimpykid, I agree that the Linked School Policy consultation should be completed before the Clifden Road consultation. The outcome of that could have a huge impact on the results.

Great idea Bayjay - the community schools should be full of Catholics and the Catholic schools full of non-Catholics of various kinds inc cultural Catholics.