Richmond Borough Schools Chat 5

[BayJay2]

Welcome! This is the latest in a series of threads about Richmond schools, which was first triggered by the council's publication of its Education White Paper in February 2011.

Please do join in the chat. There’s a bunch of us who’ve been following the thread for a long time, and we sometimes get a bit forensic, but new contributions are always welcome, and if it’s something that’s been covered before we can always direct you to that part of the thread.

We generally talk about local education policy, the impact of national policy, the performance of the borough’s schools, and admissions-related issues. We began by talking about Secondaries, but tend to talk a lot about primaries too, so the title of the thread has evolved this time to take that into account.

If you have a few hours to spare and want to catch up on 2 years of local education history, then below are the links to the old threads. We have to keep starting new threads because each only hold 1000 posts. The first two threads run in parallel, as one was started on the national Mumsnet site, and another on the local one:

1a) New Secondaries for Richmond Borough?: Mumsnet Secondary Education (Feb 2011 – Nov 2011)
1b) New Secondary schools for Richmond!: Mumsnet Local (Feb 2011 – Nov 2011)

1. New Secondary Schools for Richmond 2: Mumsnet Local (Nov 2011 – May 2012)

1. New Secondary Schools for Richmond 3: Mumsnet Local (May 2012 – Nov 2012)

1. New Secondary Schools for Richmond 4: Mumsnet Local (Nov 2012 – Oct 2013)

1. This thread: Richmond Borough Schools Chat 5: Mumsnet Local (Oct 2013 - ????)

Finally, to find out how to add links, as well as smilies and emphasis, see these Mumsnet guidelines.

I am sorry, my ipad sometimes makes inappropriate use of exclamation marks, though I think the Planning Officer did make the point that traffic noise on the surrounding main roads would drown out any noise children might make......

Also, the NPPF states that the Government attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet need and that local planning authorities should take a proactive, positive and collaborative approach to meeting this requirement and give great weight to the need to create, expand or alter schools (paragraph 72).

Worth noting that there are two other secondary school proposals that are currently being promoted on MOL land:

Oasis Academy Arena proposal for an Academy Secondary School in South Norwood, Croydon; and

Gladstone Free School's proposal for a secondary school, Gladstone Park, nr Wembley.

Both proposals are currently at the pre-application planning stage.

I've just browsed for the secondary offer statistics and they are being published later than usual, in June (after council elections?), along with primary stats.

Everything, it seems, is happening at the last minute: capital funding announcements, decisions on free schools premises. Brent has three free schools that are meant to be opening in September, including Gladstone Park, but there are still question marks over sites. The borough appears to have enough places even if they don't open. I'm not sure if any decision has been made about deferring opening as with Turing House.

Talking about things happening at the last minute...I noticed the consultation on Sheen Mount Primary is due to end on Friday 11th April, school offers for primary will be out on Wednesday 16th April. Presumably they are banking on a successful consultation to be able to offer the 90 places.

I feel terribly sorry for the parents of older children re Turing...

Gove's considered the Harperbury free school and the appeal by local MPs to allow it open in temporary premises in 2014 and 'cannot see a way this for this to happen'

www.watfordobserver.co.uk/news/11091514.Harperbury_Free_School_opening_delayed_until_September_2015/

Yes, Don they sound very angry from the Facebook pages. If the school does not open several are talking about moving, and even home schooling. They sound very disillusioned by the attitude of Paul Hodgins and Matthew Paul at the meeting held last night to discuss the situation, who seem to have manifested their usual complacency, that all will be accommodated in existing schools. Clearly from the numbers, only as a result of many families making those difficult decisions, and dropping off the waiting lists of less popular schools. We had a prospective conservative councillor round who gave us the spin that the Conservatives are deeply disappointed by the Turing decision, which was one taken nationally. I am not sure they have given that impression to parents, who feel they are not doing enough to support them.

I think everyone was shocked and disappointed by the decision, including the LA who have been supporting us all along, and very much need the places TH will provide. I think recent events have highlighted the strength of feeling among parents, which maybe not everyone was aware of. However, that is at least helping to bring everyone together to work towards the common goal of getting the school open.

I think I've said before how struck I was by the cross-party consensus that launched the North Kingston Free School initiative, to such positive effect. Councillors here in Richmond don't agree on much, but it was good to see representatives of both sides at last night's meeting, with everyone supporting the school. I think local parents appreciate that, because they don't want education to be a political football. It's too important.

I totally agree, I don't think there can be many parents impressed by the sniping on the pages of the RTT, they would much rather see them getting together to resolve the issues that cause them so much stress.

Just saw the Facebook page aswell. I feel extremely sorry for all the parents, including those setting up the school like Bay Jay, and agree about the very complacent attitude of the LB Richmond Tory councillors and officers. If Paul Hodgins and his colleagues had prioritised ensuring there was a site for the next inclusive secondary school alongside or ahead of giving Clifden Road to the Catholic Church this would not be happening. The Lib Dems and many parents were also a bit complacent two years ago. Everyone supporting RISC always knew it would be extremely difficult to find alternative secondary school sites which was the main point of the RISC campaign and judicial review so far as I was concerned. I feel trying to hide behind the D of E is evading the real issue as I can see that from its perspective it is risky to allow the school to open when there is not sufficient sign of a permanent site. The Council should have been busting a gut to secure land at Fulwell golf course or Egerton Road for the next secondary school for the last few years. Of course councillors of both parties are worried now because for Tories there is no sign of a solution and next year there will be even more children so it is translating into bad headlines just before an election, and for Lib Dems if they win the election they will inherit this terrible mess. I wouldn't blame RET for pulling out of LB Richmond now.

RET have very much been the understated knights in shining armour, on so many fronts, and are certainly not inclined to pull out. They have given the DfE a very clear deadline for October though.

The complacency started with the LibDems whom the Conservatives criticised for putting two schools with the same sponsor.

'Call to reject academy plan at Hampton Community College'
'Richmond Tories attacked over 'hypocritical' stance on Swedish schools system'

But the council committed to the projects to get badly needed cash for rebuilding. Delays and uncertainty were starting to harm those schools. They have a duty to supply places and the Tories are acting out of collective responsibility. Yes, they prioritised the Catholic school, but they had promised that already and so had Vince Cable way back in 2004. They know that had Turing House opened last year, the other academies would be half empty.

I'm not a Tory, or anything to do with the council or the academies, but there is a more complex history behind these decisions and the statutory duties of the council as they stand now.

But in fairness to the LibDems, my guess is that they were anxious to press on with the academies while the money was still available and before the 2010 election. They had already had a setback with Shene School (now RPA) and had decided to change its sponsor from E-ACT to AET:

'Academy blow for Shene School'

They had a lucky escape from E-ACT:

www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/damning-ofsted-reports-into-academy-chain-schools-heap-pressure-on-michael-gove-9215332.html

The complacency - in terms of having proper due diligence and oversight over sponsors - started with the Labour government and continues with the Coalition and local politicians negotiate their own path around whatever policy gets them cash.

mum there is no point hashing old arguments. They may have promised a new Catholic School but they didn't promise to give the site that was needed for a new school to serve the local community in the near future (and was already desperately needed in the case of the primary school) for an exclusive Catholic school when it would do nothing to serve the community need for places , particularly in terms of places for the most disadvantaged in the community, which is fundamental to their social duty as a Council. They have made themselves a laughing stock in local government circles.

I agree that there is not much to chose between the past complacency of the parties but I do think that Lord True's legacy project was actually a departure from complacency into new territory altogether.

Surely you can see that the desperation of Turing parents who are considering moving or home schooling demonstrates the wrong headedness of regarding pupils as sheep to be herded into schools regardless of whether their parents have confidence in them.

I really hope that Hampton and Twickenham Academy do win the confidence of the local community, I know from personal experience that there are exciting things going on at Hampton Academy at least. But they cannot rely on balancing the budgets by pupils being sent their way, they have to win the confidence of parents so that they want to send them there, there are more than enough pupils in need of places, not do almost anything (and in my household a decision to homeschool would be beyond desperate and would probably threaten my sanity) to avoid them.

I can understand that opening Turing House last year might have been too early but I can't see why that means that Clifden had to be given over to a school that doesn't serve the local community in Twickenham. Why the hurry to get the site occupied? RACC haven't even moved out yet so having an inclusive secondary school opening there this September or even September 2015 would have been fine. An inclusive primary school could have opened there last year without causing any problems for other primary schools. I think at election time it's important to weigh up who can most be trusted and this involves pointing out the horrible mistakes that the current Tory administration have made. I do agree that the Lib Dems were silly to hand two schools over to the same rather experimental sponsor but I don't think they would have handed over the only available site to the Catholic Church, although they were pretty slow off the mark in realising why that wasn't a good idea. I am not sure yet whether 6th forms in all the schools and running down the College is a good idea - we shall see in a couple of years time. Neither party exactly fills me with confidence, but most of us accept that we have to choose one of them to vote for or throw our vote away!

hashing old arguments

I'm sorry but you do hash them quite a lot too!

An inclusive primary school could have opened there last year without causing any problems for other primary schools.

Yes, that is a really good point LProsser because that is where the shortage is - 2013 and possibly even 2014 were too early for a new secondary but primary has been a growing problem. I am sorry for parents whose expectations have been raised. But we have absolutely no idea what conversations go on behind closed doors and I feel there must have been some negotiation over those 10 open primary places at StRR because there is no other precedent for that sort of deal in other Catholic schools. When it was proposed to DfE, Turing House did not bid for primary places and RET has not opened any other primary school so they have no track record on that either, so for the council it was the best way to guarantee extra primary places. But I'd still agree that another faith primary in an area with so many CofE place, as well as a very large RC primary, will not suit many and still doesn't meet demand anyway.

muminlondon2 - . . my guess is that they were anxious to press on with the academies while the money was still available . .

Correct - I recall that at party meetings I attended the leadership made it clear to objectors that this was the only route to capital grants from government. So they reluctantly went along with it.

LProsser - . . I do agree that the Lib Dems were silly to hand two schools over to the same rather experimental sponsor . .

They were the only sponsor offering to take on the second school, I think. I agree that the Kunskapsskolan method is an uncontrolled experiment which may fail - or require several years of development to adapt it to England - or only work with a higher staff-student ratio to make the tutorials work - so it would have been prudent to restrict them to a single school.

. . I don't think they would have handed over the only available site to the Catholic Church . .

Correct - the party’s roots lie in 19th-century Non-conformity now largely transmuted into humanism with a small religious minority in surprising places. So the party’s support for a Catholic-only school was only for one whose capital costs were paid for by the church.

The leadership recognised that one of Lord True’s aims was to divide the Lib Dems and portray them as against all faith schools. The rank-and-file anticlericalism of some activists was successfully held in check but only with difficulty.

The RTT Has:Anger at Turing House School meeting, but little hope of opening:

. . Parents expressed their anger at the heated meeting, a day before RET’s meeting with Lord Nash. One parent said: ‘There is a feeling of betrayal. We went into this with good indications and we were told that we were going to have a good school. I cannot convey how unfair this feels to us. We arranged our lives around this.’

. . Richmond Council said it was relying on the school opening by at least 2015 and it needed two new schools by 2017 to cope with the school place demand. Under the free school system, power is devolved from the council to the Government’s education department, which is responsible for the funding . .

Today’s RTT has No chance at all that school will open in 2014.

Chris, the quote further down the article from KL puts the Headline into context ... "Without the prospect of a permanent site, I cannot see any change of mind is possible".

To be precise, it's a business decision that is based on a fixed set of parameters applied to a portfolio of information. The decision can only change if the information changes sufficiently for the parameters to be met.

To put it another way, the decision is a risk assessment. Unless the perception of the risk changes, the decision can't change.

The Surrey Comet has New North Kingston free school principal expects to walk to work:

Sophie Cavanagh was unveiled yesterday as the principal-to-be for the new North Kingston secondary school which is due to open in the North Kingston Centre in September next year. The former Tiffin girl is currently deputy headteacher at Graveney School in Wandsworth . . She said the new school which has not yet been named, would focus its curriculum on science, technology, engineering and maths, and would benefit from all that Kingston University and Kingston College has to offer . . Miss Cavanagh, who . . played hockey for Surrey, started her teaching career in Hampshire and has a degree in sports science from Southampton University.

Chris - thanks for the update on religious affiliations of the LD party. I find the subject of political parties and religion as seen through the secondary school choices of senior politicians quite confusing. LDs led by an atheist who gets his son into London Oratory without bothering to look at local comprehensives. Top Tories manage to get into C of E schools with enormous catchment areas for the right people. No doubt if Ed Milliband is living in 10 Downing Street the Fortismere/Parliament Hill/Holland Park catchment areas will prove to be much larger than previously realised too!

Was the local authority forced to hand over TA, HA and RPA because they were judged not good enough by Ofsted or did it decide it had to for rebuilding money? Not easy but I think one Swedish school would have been enough. HA seems to have done better than TA on the whole. I suppose five years later there would have been a bit more choice of sponsors or free school partners.

Well this site thing is very sad and I can't think of much more to say about it other than less golf courses not a problem so far as I'm concerned. I hope if a site is eventually secured it will be a golf course rather than a proper public open space.

Lottie It isn't the golf course, it is wasteland behind David Lloyd/ Amida and next to the golf course. It isn't even managed natural open space. Basically a couple of acres of uneven ground covered in perennial weeds. As long as there is access to the gold course it really will not be a loss to anyone apart from yoofs who want somewhere discreet to smoke weed.......

Here’s a story to upset the TH campaigners:

Exclusive: Anger over new free school set to be Britain's most expensive:

The Education Secretary, Michael Gove, has approved a plan to spend £45m on a free school, making it almost certainly the most expensive in the country even though it has just 500 students, The Independent has learnt. The cost of setting up the Harris Westminster Sixth Form for high-achieving students is six times the average cost of establishing a free school and equates to around £90,000 per pupil.

The decision comes months after the National Audit Office questioned the Government’s controversial free schools programme and accused the Department for Education of failing to exert control over its rising capital costs. The Independent understands that the budget for this project – which is being sponsored by Westminster School – has been the subject of internal criticism within Whitehall.

Senior officials have privately questioned the value for money of the school which aims to send half of its pupils to Oxford or Cambridge and will prioritise children who are on subsidised school meals or who come from deprived areas, provided they first pass its selection test. The school said that of the 167 children offered places for its opening in September 61 % met those criteria.

. . Today’s revelation comes just a month after The Independent revealed that existing state sixth-form colleges had suffered more than £100m in budget cuts over the past three years – forcing some to abandon A-level options such as maths and languages. At the same time, there is expected to be a shortage of 240,000 primary school places by 2015 and pressure on places is acute in London.

So far the Government has spent £743m on establishing 174 free schools for 80,000 pupils. Capital costs of securing premises have been almost double DfE predictions . . It is understood that the £45m cost was subject to a “significant difference of opinion” within the DfE where critics say that by concentrating large resources on the brightest children at a time when budgets are constrained means other children might miss out. “At the end of the day it was Michael Gove’s decision,” said a source. “And no one could stop it.” . .

There was a story a month ago about a free school proposal that was rejected by Lord Nash, despite being popular among parents. It had a site provided by Camden council, and was to be sponsored by the Institiute of Education, rated outstanding as a teacher training provider, so it would have had teaching school status like Waldegrave - a centre of excellence for a wider group of schools. In short, the kind of free school you'd think invites consensus and pleases everyone.

news.tes.co.uk/b/news/2014/02/19/gove-rejects-plans-for-an-institute-of-education-free-school.aspx

Which is why I watch with great interest to see if Islamic bond-financed GEMS or the Swiss equity-backed Bellevue Place group get permission from the next round of approvals.