New Secondary Schools for Richmond 2

[BayJay]

I'm starting this new thread because the other one of the same name has filled up.

Bayjay, exactly the point, succinctly put!

It is asking for special adavantage for one group, all others just get a generic school. If, in anyway at all, one could support an unfair Catholic school, then logically it would mean the state would have to provide a segregated school for each minority group as well !

IF it is accepted there is a real so called 'need' for one type of child eg a Catholic to have a dedicated school, then obviously, logically you are saying there is the same 'need' for all different children !!

ie If you have a need then so do children of Atheists and Jews and Muslims and Yogic Flyers and Pagans to ALL have a school to match exactly their home and church, community centre, enviroment so they can ALL BE THE WHOLE CHILD as well !

<strong>Mir4</strong>   I am genuinely interested how you can agree with this, and if you do, do you think the state could ever afford such diversity of schools?

LottieProsser Wed 04-Apr-12 17:42:03. I agree totally with your posts, but you have got me mixed up. I am against the Catholic school proposal. Think you meant to address Mir4

I still feel that if between 150-200 Catholic pupils are getting places in neighbouring boroughs (depending on what figures are used!), the council needs to have a better forecast of how many Richmond pupils would continue to choose other options. Spare capacity at the school could have been offered in the form of community places.

Otherwise there may be more slack in other boroughs. Hammersmith & Fulham and Kensington & Chelsea are very small boroughs and their faith schools provide about 50% of the available school places in relation to resident pupils there. So there is no provision in RuT, but there may be overprovision nearby. If Wandsworth pupils have priority over local children, that would matter to Richmond once the community schools have filled up, as well as to local parents wanting the choice of a school with that ethos whose children are not baptised Catholics. But if there are also RC schools in Wandsworth and other inner London boroughs that are less popular yet baptised Catholics from Wandsworth, etc. start travelling to Richmond because they are prioritised, that would matter to those communities and boroughs too.

I did expect a bigger compromise from the Diocese on community places, one not linked to the primary school. You could even have admissions that prioritise ?any other children? or at least ?those practising a faith? from the same Richmond parishes from which the Catholic children are drawn.

But we shall see how the council presents the arguments.

Just re-posting this as genuinely interested in looking at the data?

Chris/BayJay - any idea where the stats re "under a third of the 'top achieving children' transfer to Richmond secondary schools" has come from?
I was not aware of any primary school giving specific stats results for children alongside school transfer.

I would respect and have no objection to Mir4 catholic school if it was privately funded . But when we are all competiting for scarce resources , I feel the demand on state funds for exclusive school is not justified . State created academies for all and were promised support from all groups.

Two Cotbeds - was not disagreeing but sort of taking up your theme and saying that I had a similar experience of having a religious upbringing (although my parents didn't really talk about religion at home much) but that a religious school was never considered necessary by home or church. My partner brought up a Catholic had the same experience, so I am not clear why it is now considered absolutely necessary for Catholics to have Catholic schools, as opposed to desirable in the way in which we would all like our state schools to offer things that they don't but accept that that isn't possible and that we have to fill in the gaps. It is really very hard for all of us I think to get our heads around why some local Catholics feel it is so imperative to have a separate school for their children and to keep out all other local children.

The fact that the ruling elite on the Council and those lobbying for the Catholic School are sticking to the line that there is no need for more community secondary school places in the face of primary school expansions and so many variables is extraordinary too. Many posts here such as the one above and Chris' three points a few pages back showing all the things that would need to happen before the Council's figures made any sense absolutely highlighted why Clifden Road shouldn't be given away until there is a proper longterm plan for all our children. The idea that little Jacob and his sister will have a choice of three or four schools even if they can't go to Clifden is just not born out by the current patterns of admissions or projected figures.

My understanding is that both the Libdems and the tories are now saying that it will be 2016 before a community secondary is needed.

Seenbutnotheard even the councils dodgy forecast assumes free schools opening in 2013 . Apart from clifden where can there be that school ?
Forget the passions and preference for type of school, looking at it objectively their forecast could be way off track and lacks robustness.

As for the libdems they are saying priority is for a community school but practically given the lead time involved ( inc at RuTC ) it will be earliest 2016

There are a no of complex issues, not helped by some dirty party politics and personal preferences of council leaders . To restore confidence and credebility, I feel that an independent non party political entity should be brought into to audit the councils strategy and school places projections . Would both parties and Catholic and RISC groups welcome this independence and then respect the recommendations and outcome of such an audit ?

Another issue is the RC primary school. If both proposals go through now it won't put an end to the concern felt by parents in community primaries which are being asked to expand. It would be ideal for tbe new primary to be a 100% inclusive free school. There are so few small, single-form community primaries here and yet interminable expansions leading to massive three- and four-form entry schools. It would be wrong to ask existing schools to expand ever more if the RC primary also gets approval.

seenbutnotheard: my guess is that the author of the Lib Dem paper, Cllr Malcolm Eady, was drawing on data that he had access to when he was Lib Dem cabinet member for education (2006-10) but which have never been published. He was writing primarily for the officials in the education department who of course also know these figures.

BayJay asked 'What would the Lib Dems do to make our local secondaries more attractive to this group?' I think the answer is 'not much', as they will all be academies by 20104 (election year) and the council will have virtually no say in our secondary schools.

Chris, that paper on sixth forms may have valid questions on funding but what is the evidence on poor performance by small sixth forms? I accept that for 11-16 where there are differing ability levels but for A-level, for those wanting a limited number of options leading to degree entry, small can be good. Hounslow Manor School seems to get good results with less than 90 pupils. The courses offered are here. My sixth form was smaller than that and I thrived there.

LottoeProsser Totally agree and well put.

I think there is a really important principle at stake here with this school.

By alllowing a group to keep 100& or 96% of places at a school for their own group only is crazy if the school is state funded in the usual way.

I agree with Bayjay, if the Catholic church want their school at Clifden then they should really be the ones applying for a 'Free School' !!
As it is a special interest group, not a generic good school for all.

If the local concil fund a new school it should be an inclusive one. Just in the same way as, if they set up a new Library or Hospital it would be for all locally.

Historical faith schools who have always been owned by religions pre-the introduction of state schools for all, are very different than setting a new one up. in these modern anit-discriminatory times.

I fully support the New School for Twickenham free school as it is fair and would give the area a school based on sound inclusive principles.

If there was really plenty of extra school places and every child did really have "4 local options" to choose from, then there would not be such oppostion to the Catholic school. In the current situation it is indefensible selfishness !

I wish the other side could see that for every child of Catholic parents they could 'save' from travelling far to school...... they are merely forcing another child to travel in the opposite direction, say from near Clifden to Richmond Park, or when its Full too, to who knows where. They will have no choice and overall children will still have to travel.

All Ricmond Primaries have been totally overloaded and expanded to burst so clearly, very soon, there will not be enough places at secondary to indulge special interest groups.

It is very very sad and so incorrect when those opposing this unfair school are called discrimnatory when it is the VERY IDEA of a school which picks pupils based exlusively on the families activity on sunday morning that Discriminates.

We are not suggesting we exclude any children from any new school but some people want a brand new school to do do just that, in 2012 !!

akhan That is a very sensible and helpful suggestion.

I am very pessimistic that the council consultation, the council itself and concil leader Lord True are going to be truly unbiased and decide fairly on this issue

(It seems to me like asking a council leader to decide fairly on the building of a new train station when he just happens to be head of a train company)

Surely conflict of interest should apply at local level as well as at Westminster?

Just in case anyone is still under the mistaken impression that the proposal for a Catholic school is a new, or just Conservative idea - take a look at this...
Go to section 15, members question (j) amd the response from the (then) Cabinet Member for Children?s Services and Education - Cllr Eady

www.richmond.gov.uk/home/council_government_and_democracy/democratic_processes_and_events/search_committee_documents.htm?mgl=ieListDocuments.aspx&CId=173&MID=1710#AI13309

The Catholic community have been patient, for many years, out patience is perhaps wearing a little thin.

Seenbutnotheard waiting patiently for something does not mean that thing is any more right obviously.

I think its is unfair that there is so little real choice given to any parents locally, or other parts of London, due to any schools that are decent and not failing being full and hard to get into.

If there was a genuine choice of more than one school for most of us then a lot of us would not be-grudge a Catholic school for their kids only, so much. I have nothing against other groups per se. Diversity is often good .

The link system was unfair to some, so now it has gone, I feel many, many many parents are now due a decent choice or even one decent school that their child can get into. We have waited way too long for that too.

What about our fellow residents in Richmond borough, who are Muslim, Jewish, agnostic, Pagan, etc How long will they have to wait for a primary OR a 2ndry school dedicated to them ? Or those residents who want a C of E school which is 100% for C of E children with no others allowed in??

I am genuinely interested what others supporting the planned school view their 'wants' or 'needs'.

I was trying to point out that this has been a cross-party aim for years - you have been implying that this is just the wish of Lord True.

Have a read through the debate that has been going on here for ages - many of your questions have been answered already.
I am not aware of any other minority in Richmond that would have the numbers required to sustain a secondary school.
Christ's is undersubscribed for its faith places.

The exception to this (and not exactly a minority!), would of course be if the council decided to create a boys school on the site.

Again, with the exception of those who are anti-faith (who I am repeatedly told are in the minority in RISC) I really do not think that we would be having this conversation if all of the borough's schools were deemed to be 'outstanding'.

seenbutnotheard sorry I have joined this late and may not be completely up to date. so may ask questions aldready answered. Don't know all the facts.

I think you are right if other schools had space, and people could have chance to get in them and they were good or outstanding then there would not be so mnuch oppostion to the proposed unfair school. But Catchment area;s are tiny, and are due to shrink more so naturally most people are concerned.

When they see one particular group, (amongst this desperation for school places, ) clamouring for another option exclusively for them alone, because the extra choices they have already, are too far away, then we complain.

From what you say......Does the fact there are fewer people in one minority in Richmond, say Pagans or Muslims mean their in a need is not valid but if you in a large minority then your need is MORE valid ??

I agree with you a boys school on the site would be fairer, more sensible, and welcomed by me. Please lets have this instead of a catholic school, fantastic.

Also I am not anti-faith. I support RISC but am not part of them. If there was enough proper decent provision for our children already then I would not care so much if the council wasted money on a new faith school. Faith charities do a lot of good in the world I'm not against that, but don't ask for special priviledge due to your family's faith!

BUT I would love to ask you why other C of E schools are happy with 50% approx faith places why does another Faith ask for 100% approx ??
HAS anyone already addressed that on the Thread cos I don't understand.
I think a lot of the resistence to a proposed Catholic school is caused by this number. C of E schools with fairer % admissions do not anger people in the same way.

It is SAD that parents are set against each other by crazy admission rules and a shortage of school places in decent schools locally. We all want the best for our children.

muminlondon re small sixth forms: I know no more than what is in the Lib Dem paper, which just cites 'Data from Ofsted'. No doubt Cllr Eady can supply a full reference on request.

I would have preferred to have had a full list of references in the paper but that's not how it came to me.

TwoCotbeds: the Catholics want a 100 % faith school so that they can give as many of their children as they can a proper Catholic education untainted by secularism. If they only had 50 %, the other 50 % would be chosen on distance only; the more distant Catholics would be excluded and the ethos of the school would be more secular. This is quite natural from their point of view .

muminlondon re small sixth forms: a Google on "small sixth form" "large sixth form" academic performance led me straight to:

. . Having disproportionately large sixth-forms may benefit the performance of students in these particular schools. Research evidence shows that a larger sixth-form is associated with better results while a small sixth-form appears to have a negative effect. All the case study schools had a sixth-form within or above the optimum size range highlighted by this particular research (three of the schools were particularly ?top heavy? due to a considerable influx into the sixth-form of students from other schools).

. . Size of sixth-form: The importance of size of sixth form needs to be taken into account in any future arrangements for post-16 education. In relation to the particular issues with which this report is concerned, a further proliferation of small sixth-forms would seem undesirable.^

Primed for Success? The characteristics and practices of state schools with good track records of entry into prestigious UK universities: A report on research carried out for the Sutton Trust, July 2008

Someone give a copy to Lord True!

I wonder if he's read it already. The RC school proposes a sixth form of 300. Twickenham Academy's will be 150. Will TA therefore be disadvantaged before they even start? I would hope not, because the main argument for the Catholic school that I have some sympathy with is its more lmited effect on TA's capacity to attract pupils by the time the building work is finished. Although I'm not sure Egerton Road is the best site for an 11-16 school as it's even closer.

ChrisSquire I can understand they'd prefer that but C of E schools don't have or seek 100% dominated intake do they? Why does one faith accept half mix but another does not ?

Could it be argued that if they did ask for a 50% mix, they would be more likely to be accepted by the rest of us ?

I guess C of E schools are seen as less extreme, I don't know, ? so more non-members of that faith actually want to send their kids there. after all technically we live in a country with C of E the 'official' religion.

It still seems unbalanced to me, that even if you accept Faith schools as iherently a fine idea in 2012, that..... one Faith gets way more % of school places than another. Why is it not also "natural from their point of view" for C of E schools to want 100% admissions?

Also,
Does anyone else think there is a huge difference between allowing a Faith school with Land and buildings owned by a Faith to carry on operating in the state system as they have owned that school for hundreds of years ....and setting up a new Faith school with an asset of land and buildings given to them free from the rest of the community/local council ?

Seenbutnotheard we know this is not just the wish of Lord True . In fact I have no problem in him being a supporter of Catholic school . The problem here about his objectivity and independence in taking a key decision, if one considers his words and actions in the last yr
1)Actively blocking a potential compromise
2)Treating with total disdain any alternative views from members of public or opposition . Thanks to the web cast we can all judge how the local politicians conduct themselves
3) Accepting a dodgy school forecast that is biased towards showing catholic va school as the only option.
Does anyone including the Tory councillors really believe that this consultation is genuine or that the merit of the arguments could change a pre decided result?
Lord True seems to have tossed a coin and called heads, but the coin has heads on both sides !
Hence I believe it needs an independent review

Twocotbeds, its definitely worth reading back through the thread to get up to speed. It's been a very informative discussion and you'll learn a lot about the background to the issues.

The CofE have only recently started opening up their admissions. The RC's are so far digging their heels in. However the law has now changed. The intention of that change was to make academies or free schools the first choice for councils, rather than VA schools. Unfortunately there's a loophole in the new law, and the Diocese are testing it. They know its their last chance to hold on to the privelege of exclusive admissions. If they don't get this VA school they are unlikely to get one anywhere else.

TwoCotbeds Thu 05-Apr-12 19:24:44 ChrisSquire I can understand they'd prefer that . .
I am not the person to explain this to you as I am a RISC supporter - indeed an exasperated post by me in part 1 of this forum was used by Lord True in a council debate as evidence of the moral degeneracy of his Liberal Democrat opponents (I edit the website of the borough Liberal Democrats).

Briefly, the Church of England is a church which ministers to every residents - that is its role as national church established by act of Parliament. So its schools are in the main open to all. When they were set up 150 - 100 years ago they were intended to compete for pupils with free schools set up by the then flourishing nonconformists, Methodists, Baptists, Congregationalists, etc. which later became ?state? i.e. county-run schools.

The Catholic church has defined its mission as being to its own flock, who have a duty, taken very seriously by some and completely ignored by others, to provide a Catholic education for their children to protect them from secularism and heresy.

Successive Acts of Parliament have defined the roles of church and state and the categories such as ?voluntary aided? and ?voluntary controlled? church schools. You can read up on this via part 1 of this forum and wikipedia:

Nonconformists were further angered by the 1902 Education Act which integrated denominational schools into the state system and provided for their support from taxes. John Clifford formed the National Passive Resistance Committee and by 1906 over 170 Nonconformists had gone to prison for refusing to pay their school taxes . .

BayJay 825 above sums up the current state of play and explains the exasperation felt by you, me and many many residents of the borough.