New Secondary Schools for Richmond 2

[BayJay]

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

Gosh, you are agressive LittleMrsMuppet.

Have a read of the oversubscription criteria - the idea is that given that over 200 Catholic children are leaving the borough, and would like to stay a random allocation is fair as there will be less than 150 Catholic places available.

Traveling from Barnes to Twickenham is a direct journey of 7 minutes on the train...

seen but not heard You cannot keep using this pretence that Central Twickenham parents have the option of a local school , the Education Department and Councillor Hodgins are not disputing that Central Twickenham Parents,because of the huge pupil bulge in East Twickenham, will have no choice but to send their children to Sheen to Richmond Park Academy, within 3 years. It is bizarre that as a fellow Christian you never face the issue of whether it is fair.....

Everyone, note b in the VA secondary admission criteria says: Where the number of applicants under criteria 3 or 4 exceeds the number of places available, places will be allocated in the ratio Diocese of Westminster: Diocese of Southwark = 6:4. and if the number still exceeds the places available, they will be ranked by random allocation.

Category 3 and 4 are:
3. Baptised Catholic children from practising Catholic families who are resident in the parishes of Our Lady Queen of Peace, East Sheen; Sacred Heart, Teddington; St Edmund, Whitton; St Elizabeth, Richmond; St Francis de Sales, Hampton; St James, Twickenham; St Margaret, East Twickenham; St Mary Magdalen, Mortlake; St Osmund, Barnes; St Theodore, Hampton; St Thomas Aquinas, Ham and St Winefride, Kew.

4. Baptised Catholic children who are resident in the parishes listed in criterion 3 above.

So seenbutnotheard is right that there is some random allocation, but it is random allocation only among the borough's Catholic population, rather than among the general population.

seenbutnotheard That Catholic child in Barnes will have choices, they could walk to Richmond Park Academy. If it was a girl and Catholic she could also walk to Sacred Heart. If it was a boy she could jump on the tube at Hammersmith to Oratory or take a bus to Gunnersbury (these journeys she or he will share with all their Richmond Parish friends, lets be clear about this, I have never heard my daughters' friends at Oratory and Sacred Heart complain about their journeys which take no longer than my daughters' journeys to Hampton). If he or she chose instead to go to school in Clifden Road (obviously unlikely given the other choices) then they face a walk to the station, a wait for a train that never takes less than 11minutes, and a 10 minute walk, or 8 minute jog at the other end. Within three years the Clifden Road child has no other choices but to walk and get on a train going the other way and then faces a difficult 20 minute walk/walk /bus at the other end to get to Richmond Park Academy. A school wich does not serve his or her community, where his or her friends will live at the other end of the borough. Please explain what is fair about this?

If oversubscription on the link school criterion had been decided by random allocation, it wouldn't have made it any fairer for unlinked schools. like St James's (from which 13 responses favoured abolition. That's because the method for forming links made it impossible for new links to be formed. They now have tbe option of Orleans if they are near to Clifden.

Copthallresident - you seem to be forgetting that there will be another, larger school at the college - 0.3miles away from the Clifden Road site!!

seenbutnotheard Fri 13-Apr-12 11:45:18: From [[http://www.richmondandtwickenhamtimes.co.uk/news/9647290.Humanists_and_Risc_taking_Richmond_Council_to_court_over_Catholic_school/ a comment by James Heather on the RTT report (Apr 13) Humanists and Risc taking Richmond Council to court over Catholic school:
]] ' . . RISC took the advice of several specialist legal teams (all of whom agree on the matter) before contracting their current law firm to take on the case.

The council took the advice of their non-specialist in-house legal team; when Cllr Williams asked at the 28th Feb council meeting if they should take a second opinion, he was informed none would be taken.'

seenbutnotheard "you seem to be forgetting that there will be another, larger school at the college - 0.3miles away from the Clifden Road site!!" IF it is feasible IF there is the money IF it gets built before 2015 when the Council predicts Twickenham Academy will fill up (sooner if it is successful) IF it doesn't fill uo with pupils from over the border it is close to with Hounslow where there is a 40% increase in pupil numbers and no new schools planned to take them (part of the reason the diocese is so keen to take up Lord True's offer) and it won't be at the heart of our community, serving the community as it did when it was Twickenham County School for Girls.

And your child from Barnes will still have multiple choices denied to non Catholic pupils, a priviledge you have declined to defend.

So, little Sally, who lives close to the Clifden Road site, will have the choice of Orleans Park, the new school, Waldegrave AND all of the the Academies, which her parents would not want her to attend as they are currently not performing as well as they would like.
Her brother, has all of the above, with the exception of Waldegrave.

My son, whose closest school is will be the one at Clifden Road can go and try to get a place out of borough - which will be difficult, given that we are too far away from our closest Catholic secondary (St Marks).

The 'multiple choices' for Catholic children that you talk about, in reality just does not exist! You can try and spin it any way you like but you are wrong.

I would like my children to have the opportunity to continue their education in Richmond, in a Catholic school, and given that more than 200 Catholic families are facing the prospect of leaving the borough this year, as they have done for previous years, faced with the increasing birth rates that you are talking about I do not see that this is too much to ask.

I am sorry but I don't see at secondary level when there is an issue about places (an issue I note that you ignore) that it
Is a priority for catholic secondary school
In borough .

Each of the Academies is undersubscribed.

A Cathoilc school will also free up some places in non-Catholic schools.

There will be a second school on the College site when the Academies fill up.

Catholic children are Richmond children too.

Currently undersubscribed but only for a very short period (I think mrs jay or Chris did figures a while ago saying that as soon as 2015 there would be an over subscription issue at secondary level). At present this site is the only likely resource for Providing extra spaces at this level.

Yes catholic children are Richmond kids but so are the other 90% of non catholic kids. Fine if the entry criteria gives them access but it doesn't.

I think most local residents would would agree that ?a Catholic secondary school in the borough? is ?not too much to ask? but that one on this site at this time when good school places are scarce and about to get much scarcer definitely is. Hence the uproar, the like of which the borough has never seen before.

So the council should mothball the site until 2015 or 2016 because to open anything other than a Catholic school on the site prior to this would be to the detriment of the Academies?

Really?

Ideally there would be funds for all but there isn't. And as the current proposal doesn't allow realistically any space for non catholic children, people are understandably worried about this proposal.

It wouldn't be to the detriment of the academies as much as to all the non catholic kids who will be coming up to secondary age and will lack places.

Now to my mind all this could probably be resolved if the catholic school allowed for non catholic entry for a decent proportion of pupils (50% at least). But it doesn't hence my objections .

We seem to be going round in circles . There is no need for mothballing site. As per councils own projections it could be used for a free school. Egerton could then invite bids for academy that could well be a Catholic academy. This would seem fair and legal to most people .

seenbutnotheard You seem to suffer from selective blindness, and a willful desire to go round in circles!! As I have stated above, by the Councils own figures within three years children from Clifden Road will have no choice of school but Richmond Park Academy. I'm not making this up,my neighbours and I have sat with Councillor Hodgins and gone through the figures. Waldegraves catchment area has already shrunk back from the roads east of Clifden Road (it has two catchment areas to give children from the other side of Richmond a chance of entry) and will be unlikely to take any from these roads for September 2013, Orleans faces a huge pupil bulge in East Twickenham, the biggest in the borough, it's catchment will shrink to East Twickenham and Richmond Hill, Vineyard parents are already banking on swamping it and transforming it into a senior Vineyard! Twickenham Academy is forecast to fill by 2015, at which point as the Council freely admit they will be giving Clifden road parents no choice but to travel across the borough. Councillor Hodgins and the Education Department are planning to use non Catholic children as commodities to fill up spaces in Richmond Park Academy. Our children will be denied the chance of a local school, and Catholics priviledged with additional choices, for the pragmatic reason that short term the Council is not prepared to risk it's Academies Strategy. Public opinion is being mobilised by that unfairness, parents are concerned for their children and those of us forced in the past to go private are furious that this Council isn't just perpetuating it's decades old strategy of relying on parents being forced to move away or into the private sector but actually giving the priviledge of extra choices to one section of our community (who have long enjoyed that priviledge at primary level). If you have any enotional intelligence / empathy perhaps you can appreciate why so many people therefore support RISC

I have no problem with you being given the choice of a Catholic School within the borough, as well as your local school, but only once everyone has a choice of a local school. That will be delivered to Central Twickenham by a Free School on the Clifden site.

Great post copthall

seenbutnotheard "My son, whose closest school is will be the one at Clifden Road can go and try to get a place out of borough - which will be difficult, given that we are too far away from our closest Catholic secondary (St Marks)."

This is at best disingenuous, assuming you are a practising Catholic, the diocese has enough places for the children of every practising Catholic. Your Parish has places at Catholic Schools in neighbouring boroughs allocated to it. Not opening a school at Clifden Road will not deprive any Catholic child a place at a Catholic School. The Diocese has a problem, soaring pupil numbers in Ealing and Hounslow, opening a school in Clifden Road will enable them to reallocate the places currently allocated to Richmond children. Don't try and pretend that this is about anything but the length of journeys, which arise because of the choices you make, rather than having no choice as Clifden Road parents will have, and how nice it would be for Catholic children to take part in borough sports and other activities.

Ok, I am not wishing to shout - but we could have TWO schools by 2015!

The first could be a Catholic school so as not to be detrimental to any existing school, and may free up places taken by Catholic children in other schools and the second, for when it is actually needed could be the LARGER school on the College site.

Go back and look through the council documents from the last 10 years - we have been very patiently waiting for this school, it is needed, now. The very fact that Risc are now in bed with the BHA tells me everything I need to know.

There is no additional school choices for me and my neighbours now because we live too far away from our closest Catholic secondary school. We have no local school and never have done. Can you at least try to understand?

As for your quip about primary schools. Richmond is blessed with fantastic primary schools. Catholic Primary Schools in Richmond are heavily over-subscribed; given the outstanding nature of all of the primary schools in the borough, I don?t feel that it can be argued that this is down to anything other than faith based reasons.

With that I bid you farewell for a while as I feel like I am banging my head against a wall that is not willing to budge.

I do understand not having a school place but fail to see why it's worse for catholic than non catholic pupils. You will say what about free places if have catholic school. It's not going to be enough for the projected need for places.

And I thought second school is just an idea- the only likely school is what is being discussed now so I don't buy the jam tomorrow argument.

Seenbutnotheard what documents are you referring to - the ones I have seen like the Choice and Diversity Paper acknowledge need for 2 secondary schools always - one community and one RC.
But no where does the Council acknowledge that the RC school is the No 1 priority and should come at the cost of a community school.
Also the Councils and Diocese consultation documents show that hardly 20 odd spaces will be freed from catholics who currently attend community schools.
Your last point about excellence in our schools, true the Catholic primaries are good but we have excellence across all types of our primaries, faith or community. Two of community secondaries are outstanding - it is disingenuous to suggest that only faith schools can be outstanding. Also as we have discussed here before - the FSM is Catholic primaries is just 3% that is significantly below the the 12-15% we find in other schools, who experience a different set of challenges. Apples and pears!

Akhan, are you determined to misread every one of my posts on purpose just to give yourself an opportunity to get back on your soap box?

I said..."given the outstanding nature of all of the primary schools in the borough"
I think that I have said a couple of times previously that my children attend the primary attached to our church which is good, rather than the outstanding school which is yards from my front door.

We have had the FSM debate before. I have said I believe that, at least in part, this may be a consequence of the fact that it is incredibly difficult to be eligable for FSM if you are a two parent family, working for more than about 16 hours per week. There are statistically fewer single parent families in Catholic primary schools than in community schools. Perhaps this is down to faith, perhaps not. I am making no judgement here by the way, before you go off reading things into my post that are not written again.

In terms of documents - do a search on the council website of Cllr Eady's statements when the Libdems were last in administration and his answers to questions put to him about the council's plans for a Catholic school - he answers, on more than one occasion that they are merely waiting for a site and/or govt funds.

In 2005 and in 2006 the Lib Dems asked the diocese to apply to the Govt for funding to open a Catholic VA school.

This is not just something that Lord True has conjoured up.

But I really am going to leave you all for a few days now. I have had enough of trying to defend myself and going around in circles.

Enjoy what is left of your weekend everyone and I will be back when I can no longer resist the urge to put in my 'two penny worth'

Seenbutnotheard - I am sorry if I misinterpreted yr post and the sentence "don?t feel that it can be argued that this is down to anything other than faith based reasons"
Perhaps like you I need to take a few days off and come back with a fresh pair of eyes!

Good luck to all the Richmond Free School applicants as 50% free schools still negotiating sites for autumn openingwww.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/apr/13/half-free-schools-negotiating-premises