New Secondary Schools for Richmond 3

[BayJay]

Hello and welcome to the Mumsnet thread about Richmond Borough Secondary Schools. The discussion started in February 2011 in two parallel locations here and here.

In November 2011 the most active of those two threads, in Mumsnet Local, reached 1000 messages (the maximum allowed) so we continued the conversation here.

Now its May 2012 and that thread has also filled up, so the conversation will continue here ......

So according to the Standard we should know more about new schools in two weeks or so.

The Parliamentary Recess begins on July 17th, so people are assuming there'll be an annoucement on Free Schools before then.

Heli - Is there a way to find out more details on the quality of teachers at TA. How many oteachers do they have that are rated outstanding and how many of them do you think do not measure up ? What all can schools do to improve teaching standards, if replacement is either not desired or practical in the short term?

I think if the New Free School for Twickenham is having problems finding a site ( and if it gets go ahead) then they should close down Twick Academy and give the site to them!!

My friend who has lived here longer than me said it has had a change of uniform before, change of head and revamping etc more than once but has still been a poor performing school for many many years

JoTwick, the Ofsted inspectors will discuss individual teacher performance with the Principle, but that info won't get into the public domain other than as a summary in the Ofsted report.

Before it was closed down Whitton School's last Ofsted report slammed it for inadequate teaching. A large proportion of those teachers are still there. No doubt there will be lots of training going on. However, the proof will be in the pudding.

I'd prefer to see the full Ofsted inspection report before heads start to roll, as these things take time to turn around. However, progress seems slower than hoped.

I think we should be careful about laying blame on teachers who were at TA and assuming they can't change. The processes that are there for managing the people in any organisation are there for a reason. There are lots of reasons that people may not be performing in a job and many of them can be addressed, by training, improving motivation, making it quite clear what is expected, changing the culture etc. If you change all those things and someone is still not performing then they will have had plenty of interventions, warnings etc and it isn't that difficult to engineer them out be it early retirement, voluntary redundancy (though of course extremely competent people take these routes too!) or dismissal. The whole process may take a while but only because it makes no sense to ditch a person that has had investment in their training and experience.

In my Mum's experience (Deputy Head at a well performing secondary in an area of deprivation, now retired but some problems stay the same) staff in failing schools have often become demotivated and cyncical, they give up on themselves and the children. They are often not bad teachers, it's just in a failing culture it's more comfortable to be cynical than to make the effort and care. I have heard word of mouth that many staff at TA were very cynical about the new Scandinavian teaching methods, that may be because they were in the wrong mindset or maybe they were right and speak from experience and knowledge of their pupils? Weren't the leadership also in place in the school before the changes? When "superheads" go in they tighten up the management processes but crucially they provide the leadership you need to change culture, so that demotivation and cyncism become unacceptable, and they make schools rewarding and exciting places to work, and they do this very quickly. That's why I think that the rating of the leadership as only satisfactory is a real concern especially when the RPA write up suggests they have the leadership qualities that can galvanise change (though of course they also need investment and to be supported and empowered by their governors, Scandinavian sponsors? owners? - not sure what the technical term is etc.)

The Guardian reports: Data released last month by the Department for Education show that while 19% of pupils educated in LEA primary schools and 16% of those in state secondaries are eligible for free school meals, the figures for free schools are much lower. FSM rates in the 24 free schools that opened last year were half those for the LEA sector, at 9% for primaries and 8% for secondaries.

primal - I see difficult how your proposal could work. NLS4T has demand for 150 secondary places and TA does not have so many spare places. We cant have a school with 300 students in every year. So 2 schools are needed.
TA needs to improve and if that means making changes in leadership and teachers, than it should be done - its totally totally unfair to not provide for quality school places. Giving us poor performing schools to choose from makes a mockery of choice and diversity.

The Guardian also reports: 'Some well-known academies are facing an exodus of teachers this summer . . Sheffield Springs academy, run by United Learning Trust, is poised to lose at least 25 teaching staff, . . while the troubled school is on its third principal of the academic year.

This comes after a new permanent head was recently appointed, only to then turn the post down, ULT citing "family circumstances". In February, Ofsted inspectors criticised the "significant instability in leadership and management" since the academy was established in 2006, as it was then on its fifth principal in that time. Now it's on its sixth.

Meanwhile, Kingsdale foundation school, an academy in south London, praised as "brilliant" by David Cameron last year but which has been in the news over an investigation into alleged cheating in GCSEs, will have seen the departure of at least 40 teachers over this academic year, including 15 from science alone. The school started the year with 125 teaching staff.

Finally, we have been told of another high-profile academy where 25 staff are reportedly leaving this term. We hope to keep you posted on that one.'

Primal, JoTwick is right. Twickenham needs NLS4T and TA, not one or the other. There are more than enough children to fill both (and ultimately another new school at Egerton Road), provided they have parental confidence. The best outcome would be for parents to have a choice of good schools, and to have the freedom to choose between them based on the model that best suits their child, rather than quality issues.

p.s. For info, page 60 of this report gives an overview of how Richmond LEA approach school improvement.

BayJay but perhaps its worth considering pressing the Reset button on TA. Bring in a new sponsor and management team

Jo, ultimately the government has the power to do that with any academy that doesn't perform. There's a clearly defined process which leads up to that (sorry, I'd find a link to it but I'm at work and aa bit pushed). However, the first monitoring inspection is way too soon for it to kick in.

I note that the 'Executive Summary' of the report cited by BayJay (which has the snappy title Action research into the evolving role of the local authority in education: The final report for the Ministerial Advisory Group ISOS Partnership by Natalie Parish, Andrew Baxter and Leigh Sandals, June 2012) is itself more than 7,000 words long.

Hmmm . . where is the 'Executive Summary' of the 'Executive Summary'?

"There's a clearly defined process which leads up to that"

Actually, that's not quite true. There is a clearly defined process that leads up to a school being defined as "inadequate", and its just about to get tougher. However, the steps that lead from there to the Secretary of State intervening to remove the sponsor are less clear, as in this example. I suppose that makes sense. Every case is going to be different, and in many cases the increased monitoring and intervention that comes with being in Special Measures will be the catalyst for turning a school around.

A relative of mine worked in a private prep school iwhere morale was so low that a third of the staff left in one year, due to weak management. All schools are affected by poor leadership but at least an LA school - or one where unions are respected and governors encourage open communication with parents and staff (perhaps the NFS4T would have this culture) have avenues for complaint.

The fact is that TA is improving, just not as quickly as the community would like. They're predicting a significant improvement in their next crop of GCSE results, and feedback I hear from parents in the younger year groups is generally satisfactory. However, satisfactory needs to become good, and soon.

"perhaps the N[L]S4T would have this culture"

Can't think of any reason why it wouldn't.

RISC have today put out a press release, not yet on their website:

?Richmond Inclusive Schools Campaign (RISC) is continuing with its legal challenge to the Council?s decision to use Twickenham?s Clifden Road site for exclusive Voluntary Aided Catholic schools.

RISC first wrote to the Council in February pointing out that the new Education Act requires Councils that need a new school first to seek proposals for a new Academy/Free School. The Council have not done that, so RISC believes they are acting unlawfully by pressing ahead with the Voluntary Aided schools. This is important because new faith-based Academies/Free Schools are limited to a maximum of 50% faith-based places, but Voluntary Aided schools can go up to 100%.

In April RISC announced a formal legal challenge, mounted jointly with the British Humanist Association, which is concerned about the national implications of the Council?s approach. The Council replied that the challenge was premature, as no decision had been taken at that stage. So the action was put on hold. But it was resumed after the Council formally decided on 24th May to go ahead with the Catholic schools. RISC?s lawyers are now taking the next steps towards a Judicial Review of the Council?s decision.

Speaking on behalf of RISC, Jeremy Rodell said ?We warned the Council back in February that they were acting unlawfully, but they ploughed on, and then told us any formal challenge had to wait till after their decision on 24th May. Unfortunately, this delay may create uncertainty for Catholic parents, who will want to know this coming September whether or not there will be places available at a new Catholic VA school in September 2013. In order to try to reduce the period of uncertainty we have asked the Council - and our lawyers will ask the court - to do whatever they can to speed up the proceedings, though we have to recognise that we?re heading into the holiday period, so the timing may not be ideal.

We also asked the Council to agree to a reasonable limit on the legal costs that either side can claim from the other if it wins. We had expected them to agree, so both sides would have an incentive to keep costs to a minimum and they could limit the amount of public money at risk. But so far they have refused, and have instead tried to intimidate us on costs, presumably because they have plenty of taxpayer funds available. If a court concludes that the Council is acting unlawfully, they will then need to decide what to do to put it right.

It would be a real shame if the Council does not co-operate to have this legal case completed this summer in a cost effective manner.

Not much seems to have happened in the 6 weeks that have elapsed since May 24. So I think we should read this statement as a warning that the case will not be settled in time for the autumn admission process., which starts on September 01 - only 8 weeks from Saturday - and closes on January 15 2013, so parents will be able to defer putting in their forms until the case is settled.

Chris - does that mean that even if the Council lost the case, and offered Clifden Road to some other school ( like NLS4T), they will not be able to open in 2013. Are you saying that earliest any school can now open at Clifden Road willbe 2014 ?

Jo, it doesn't mean that. Schools can be up and running very quickly - especially when they only have one cohort and a site that is essentially already a school. However it does mean that any school wanting to open there in 2013 (including the Catholic one) might need to consider running its admissions outside of the pan-London scheme to reduce uncertainty for parents.

What BayJay writes is encouraging but the fact remains that these delays increase the risk of no new school in 2013 if something else goes amiss.

As a borough politico (editor of twickenhamlibdems.co.uk/en/) I note that in February 2013 when places are allocated we will be only 15 months away from the next borough election: the last thing the council Tories want is to have to face angry parents on the doorstep in April 2014 demanding to know why there aren?t enough places at 11 for their dcs. So in their shoes I would have co-operated with RISC to get a judgement in time for September. Time is not a renewable resource, particularly in politics.