New Secondary Schools for Richmond 4

[BayJay2]

Welcome. This is the fourth (or perhaps fifth) in a series of threads about Richmond Secondary Schools.

The discussion was originally triggered by Richmond council's publication of its Education White Paper in February 2011. It started with two parallel threads here and here.

In November 2011 the most active of the original two threads reached 1000 messages (the maximum allowed) so we continued the conversation here.

That thread filled up in May 2012, and was continued here.

It's now November 2012, and once again we're at the start of a new thread ....

Gumley House had a similar low 5 GCSE pass rate for middle attainers as Teddington, 45% (same English exam board?). In fact, it was second to bottom of Hounslow schools for that measure. But a comparatively high Ebacc score of 25% for this ability range, about half of those entered. The Heathland School entered 60% of its middle attainers for Ebacc (84% of high attainers) but only just over a third of them passed all the required subjects.

In Richmond Grey Court entered the most middle attainers for all Ebacc subjects - 42% (only 10% at RPA, 27% at Teddington) of which about half achieved passes in the complete set. Good GCSE pass rate for middle attainers too.

From what i have seen and heard of Teddington School so far they have not had a tradition of entering most students into a language GCSE in the past and I think this affects their Ebacc scores. I saw a student poll where the students were asked whether a language at GCSE should be compulsory and there was a large "NO" vote so possibly this will continue!

It would be interesting to know whether all the exam boards marked down the children who did English GCSE exam in June. I'm really surprised that different borough secondary schools don't use the same exam board.

That story about the murdered woman in Kingston is horrific. I am a bit unsure that contracting the whole of children's services out will help though.

All, for info, Richmond Council has published its Children and Young People's plan 2013 - 2017 for consultation here, so take a look if you want to have a say.

Yes, also not sure if contacting out is a good idea, but that Kingston story explains why Richmond staff have been involved in Kingston's children services recently and I don't think I saw the Ofsted report story back in July.

www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/

Interesting advice re school league tables...

www.independent.co.uk/voices/commentators/

Here's the exact link: Paul Vallely: Political tinkering is the enemy of education (Jan 27)

Nick Clegg in his son's school dilemma is falling into the politician's trap of using the labels 'good' and 'best' for state and private schools, when he means 'socially and/or academically selective'.

Right now there is a great rift in our education system between our best schools, most of which are private, and the schools ordinary families rely on.

His nearest schools would be Elliott/Ark Putney, Ashcroft or of course RPA.

It is a rift he is widening if he thinks the Ebacc will be an acceptable single exam assessment. The majority of children are middle attainers, having reached what used to be the target standard by the end of primary school. More than half of them will fail the proposed Ebacc and get a 'certificate of achievement - only 15.5% of middle attainers were even entered in 2012 and only 7.1% passed all subjects.

The 'best' state schools will not guarantee success either. Even in grammar schools such as Wallington and Nonsuch a third of their lucky-to-get-in middle attainers (10 girls) failed to pass all Ebacc subjects (7 out of 10 were entered, 5 passed).

Neither will social advantages. If his son is not bright enough for the selective private schools his chance of failure is still high unless the LibDems do something about the Ebacc:

Hampton: 91% passed Ebacc of the 91% entered
Hampton Court House: 52% passed Ebacc of the 90% entered

To be fair I think the Libdems negotiated furiously to water down Goves proposals. www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b6c7774e-fffb-11e1-831d-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2JBo6EVqm I also understand that behind the scenes they have stopped some of his more ridiculous proposals on the History curriculum cllrlesterholloway.wordpress.com/2013/01/15/clegg-seacole-stays/?utm_source=supporter_message&utm_medium=email

Paul Vallely is right, Gove is seemingly immune to almost universal opposition to his proposals. My daughter's Head has been very vocal in their criticism, of the GCSE, A level and History Curriculum reforms, though on a parent website so I don't feel it would be right to cut and paste it here.

Although our schools don't yet have sixth forms, this post on the Local Schools Network site 'Shock, horror! Schools do badly at measure that nobody cares about', discussed the retrospective measure in the A-level league tables of 'three facilitating subjects at AAB'. Those are pure sciences, languages, History/Geography, Maths or English lit. I don't think even Music or Art are included, let alone Photography, Law, Economics, etc.

The danger is that students will be pushed into subjects that don't intetest them, or they fail at, and arts, social sciences, technology subjects are further devalued. Coupled with abolition of AS levels, choosing the wrong option could demotivate students over two years of study not just one. The madness is that Russell Group universities, while they do prefer certain subjects and combinations, would still allow one subject not considered hardcore academic from that narrow list. Interested to hear your views on that Heathclif.

What is Nick Clegg is up to? How can he be so vague when it seems that his son Antonio is already in Year 6? Either they have applied to various state schools in the normal way, possibly without NC going to the open evenings as the headmaster of the Ark Putney hasn't seen him and probably would have noticed him but perhaps Miriam took Antonio, so they will get offered a place somewhere in the state system. Or as seems more likely they have applied to lots of private schools and have possibly just filled in the form for state schools just in case Antonio is unable to pass any entrance exams. Personally I think any politician who sends their child to a private school unless there is a very good reason, eg. a disability that can't be supported well in the state sector, is a total hyprocrite. All this fake agonising about having to weigh up what is best for the individual child is crap if the child is just a fairly standard 11 year old. Surely he is just putting off the evil day if Antonio is heading to Westminster/St. Pauls or similar!?

"How can he be so vague when it seems that his son Antonio is already in Year 6?"

Possibly he's hoping for a place at the Oratory.

Had just found the link to the Catholic Herald on Nick Clegg's interest in the Oratory!

Good for Peter Hain for sending his children to Elliott (as was). As Nick Clegg's three closest schools are academies run by three different sponsors, he may offend more than parents and teachers if he ignores the local schools.

Parent fears about local state school although understandable sometimes can be so unfounded. My cousin had to leave Latymer and go to Elliott as was, much to my Aunt's horror. He got great A Levels, went on to a very good University, and his close friends made there include successful musicians, actors and generally lovely young men. No idea if things have changed much since it became an academy but it certainly annoyed me when I read that Clegg may not even have visited it!

And thanks to previous post have realised why he was at a wedding hosted by Peter Hain at Stormont a few years ago!

muminlondon You can add Philosophy and Ethics and Psychology, both extremely popular A level and uni choices to that list of devalued A levels. Frankly it's complete idiocy, I somehow don't think Westminster (38% achieving AAB in facilitating subjects ), St Paul's Girls' (70%), St Paul's (63%), LEH (57%), Hampton (40%) or KGS (32%) will be stressing that they are failing their pupils in ensuring they study the right subjects to ensure they get the best chances of success in their chosen unis/ art schools/ drama schools/ music schools etc etc.

There is a problem with the way some sixth forms are advising pupils on A level courses but the unis have been very clear about what are acceptable combinations, and Gove's latest measure based on his own scholastic success isn't the gold standard!!

To be fair in that list Westminster and KGS to my knowledge do pre U in some of the facilitating subjects so they would not count, but Hampton and LEH do not (although Hampton offering it in History for this Year 12).

The Russell Group advice is from P26 here www.russellgroup.ac.uk/media/informed-choices/InformedChoices-latest.pdf They define facilitating subjects as those which would be a requirement for certain degree courses, but make it clear that other subjects like Philosophy, Religious Studies, Economics are good preparation for university life, even though you can pursue degrees in those subjects without having done the A level (mainly because not all schools will offer them at A level), whilst more vocational subjects like media studies and photography might not be so well regarded. However one such soft subject should not be a problem. It is just another example of Gove's 50s Grammar School blinkers.

I have no idea how it is going to work when the school leaving age is raised to 18. Who will police that? It's indeed no more realistic an aspiration for the majority than appearing on the X-Factor. A bunch of Classics graduates will hardly kick-start the economy - how many Gove-cloned politicians and journalists do we really need?!

Perhaps Gove thinks he is indeed the answer to the country's problems, and is willing to walk all over all over the next generation to get there....www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/27/michael-gove-headline-tory-leader-education

Richmond Council have begun their consultation on the future of Richmond College. See here for more details.

Thanks BayJay a bit scanty on detail! Especially given an in depth feasibility study, presumably they have looked into the issues in a little more depth than this! It reads like an opening salvo in an anticipated planning / union conflict, rather than a consultation on the school proposal. In particular I was under the impression all school funding by the D of E was committed to the Free School Programme, but doesn't that incur a parcel of other processes that have to be gone through? or are they going to dress this up as an expansion / rebuild of an existing school/college, hence the involvement of the skills agency?

Having got on to A level offerings (in the Gove programme anyway) I have had a look at what the schools are proposing at sixth form. It raises again the issue of developing schools that offer a particular educational approach that serves a niche of children as the only option for parents. This is a brief outline of Twickenham Academy's sixth form offering www.twickenhamacademy.org.uk/download/18.1b45ac46139e9d6ff0d800020897/Twickenham+Academy+Sixth+Form+Opens.pdf. There is obviously further detail in the prospectus etc. online. A continuation of the individualised learning approach but also an emphasis on vocational courses. It actually looks as if they have put together an excellent offering building on the vocational qualifications available in their Sport, IT and Health strands. However compared to what Waldegrave www.waldegrave.richmond.sch.uk/Sixth-Form and Orleans (PP presentation here www.orleanspark.richmond.sch.uk/parents-carers are planning, it is a narrow offering for the academic pupils eg no MFL, no Philosophy. The two other academies haven't determined their vocational offering, or finalised the academic one but it looks as if you have by sixth form got academies serving different niches.

It is of course chicken and egg, since TA may well be serving the needs of their pupil body (though I can't find anything on any sort of consultation / rationale). However if LBRUT is hoping TA will win the confidence of middle class parents whose children are high attainers then this is going to be another issue they have with the school.

Of course all pupils now move at 16 so they will have more options but Sixth Forms were supposed to provide continuity at existing schools with more personal attention, and a focus for developing excellence in teaching. This will influence new parents and also bring into question whether subjects like MFLs and Religion and Ethics (which is the precursor to the Philosophy course) are going to be taken seriously and taught well in comparison to the other academies.

Also what happens if, as at 11, the places at schools offering wider academic offerings are oversubscribed, so options for moving are limited? (Although a lot of the more academic pupils are going for Esher College, where incidentally, just to demonstrate the popularity, a couple of years ago there were 21 tutorial groups studying A level Psychology and 18 Philosophy)

Of course we have no idea how sixth form provision is going to be organised at Egerton Road, and whether the students progress into a college environment. Another take it or leave it variation in the school offering?

Sorry, hadn't looked at Teddington which has fullest details of the sixth form proposals and the fact that there is to be a partnership between Waldegrave, Orleans and Teddington to allow them to offer the full range of 24 subjects at A level. www.teddington.richmond.sch.uk/Sixth-Form developed

Using the post 16 choices of previous years' Teddington students, current national trends and surveys of our current Year 11 students

"I was under the impression all school funding by the D of E was committed to the Free School Programme"

It is at the moment. The consultation does say the school would be an Academy, and by definition a newly established Academy is a Free School under current legislation. However, by the time this school is due to be funded we may have a new Government with a new model for creating new schools, so I guess it makes sense for them to be a bit vague about the model in the short term. Especially after the North Kingston experience.

The redevelopment of Egerton Road to provide all these different things (and housing to help fund it!?) sounds like a huge project that will require money from Central Government, LB Richmond and other sources. I expect they are planning to sell the existing Clarendon site, which is in quite a nice residential location in Hampton, aswell. I'm not very familiar with the current Egerton Road site but presumably they will have to build on the existing playing fields at the front of the site on the main road in order to keep the college open whilst they are re-building?