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.

Although I don't know whether the semantics will change now that Achieving for Children has been launched, as technically the LA no longer employ any educational professionals. Maybe the LBRuT logo on the REEC site will be changed for an AfC one at some point. Maybe AfC are allowed a higher than

"the schools adjudicator has ruled against schools favouring children who had been to their nurseries for primary school places"

If that's the case then St Richards CE and St Elizabeth's RC schools will need to change their admissions policies.

St Richard's doesn't tend to be oversubscribed, but perhaps it might be a ground for appeal at St Elizabeth's - there may be several Catholic pupils for whom Windham nursery school is more convenient or better suited, or want to continue with the care they received before so they can stay in full-time work.

Today's RTT has: Election pledges already broken, a letter from Clive Hills, the husband of Cllr Virginia Morris, (p 19), and Why send your child to a bilingual school, advertorial by Penny Jones of King's Group Academies (p 26).

The board of the King's group (i.e. the bilingual school proposal) isn't very diverse - the only woman is the wife of the chair.

I don't accept that it will meet the need for mainstream places generally, as well as providing something niche. From this article it looks like it makes a profit from exporting a British style education to Spain and Panama. Rather like GEMS, by going under the name of King's College Group there, it uses names of British universities and/or public schools to evoke a connection.

The group operates one school in this country - St Michael's College, a boarding school. The ISI report is here:

www.isi.net/schools/7499/

Interesting extracts from the 2013 boarding inspection:

'All of the pupils are from overseas ... (currently 25 nationalities)'

'The college does not meet all the National Minimum Standards for Boarding Schools 2011' (it did not have a central register of appointments as recommended in an Ofsted inspection three years previously).

'a majority of boarders expressed reservations about the food ... a significant minority expressed dissatisfaction with the programme of activities ... some access paths are poorly lit after dark'.

The 2010 standard inspection was generally good - until 2005 the vast majority were Spanish students studying a Spanish curriculum. But some interesting caveats:

'Within the limited range of opportunities available to the students outside the classroom, there has been a modest, but notable, number of achievements in recent years. ... They are able to reason and argue cogently when speaking informally, but there are fewer opportunities for this in lessons and they do not show sufficient confidence in working independently.'

'The standard of pastoral care is good in different areas of the school but lacks a coherent approach to monitoring the progress of the whole student.'

mum I don't understand why they are so determined to apply to open in Richmond when they are clearly going to be behind GEMs and Bellevue in the queue. It is highly unlikely that the DofE is going to want to be seen to have granted permission to 5 new primary free schools (and two secondaries, one potentially with another primary, hopefully) all in one borough, even given the need? Or am I missing something? It is also worrying that these International players are planning to exploit government funding and the desperate needs of local parents as a (cheap) way of improving their brand overseas without even bothering to talk to local parents about their needs. Given the track record on running St Michaels, that is a damning report from ISI who, made up of other members of indie senior leadership teams, usually carry out a rubber stamp exercise that schools can include in their marketing, they very rarely raise substantial areas requiring improvement, you wonder whether they could put together a successful bid. Clearly Turing required a lot of expert input from a sponsor with experience and a proven track record.

You know what reservations I have about free schools and academy chains. But yes, the difference to me between TH and the GEMS/Bellevue/Kings proposals is that the last three, all global private/international school operators, is that RET have expertise in UK state education - standards, safety requirements, inspection and monitoring, etc.

I did read something recently (in either the Richmond Magazine or RTT) about a group of local mothers who think the Spanish primary school is a fab idea and are getting behind it. I wonder if they know anything about the proposer however.

I suppose if there is only limited physical space and huge demand that the local authority can't meet by expanding existing schools any further, the D of E will have to get used to giving permission for lots of little primary free schools in the London Boroughs given there is no room for a few bigger ones? New-to-school parents generally like the idea of little primary schools for little children. I am still bemused as to where the proposers think all these schools are going to be located. Even the redundant office buildings are now being converted to flats under the new planning rules.

Lottie If you look on the website they have clearly initiated a word of mouth campaign from within the Spanish community starting with briefings at the embassy and undercover posts on mumsnet. I don't have any problem at all with the creation of a school that offers a Spanish bilingual education and I think International Schools offer a really mind broadening education. The problem is that I wouldn't want to see such a school diverting funding and resources like precious sites from meeting the desperate need for mainstream education that meets the needs of local parents, or for local parents to find themselves only with the offer of a place at a Spanish bilingual school. It is the same issue as we have discussed in relation to faith schools. Choice is all very well but only if it is a choice and in a borough with such a desperate shortage of places it won't be. I think as a parent I would be just as annoyed about being offered only a place at a Spanish or French bilingual school as I was at being offered only a place at a faith school. I might be tempted by the offering of a Mandarin bilingual school but I am sure that those parents who want a bilingual Spanish school would be very annoyed to have only the offer of that.

An advertorial in the RTT 2 weeks ago by Penny Jones of the King’s Group said that they were seeking expressions of interest and support and inviting parents to register at kingsgroupacademies.org.uk/contact-us/:

. . We are planning to start with two reception classes (60 pupils) in either 2015 or 2016. If there is sufficient demand we will admit children up to and including Year 5 so that siblings can join the school at the same time. Read more about the project here . . We are authorised to set up two schools. We are looking at Fulham (SW6) and Richmond (TW9/TW10) as possible locations . .

They warn:

. . Please remember that Free Schools are funded by the tax payer and the admissions policy must comply with The School Admissions Code published by the DfE. This code allows anyone to apply to send their children to our school. If the school is oversubscribed being a Spanish national or having family from Latin America or speaking Spanish at home will not guarantee your child a place at the school . .

See also: Facebook.

"An advertorial in the RTT 2 ..."

For context, the RTT allows schools who pay for an advert on their education pages, to also submit a short editorial and photo. It's not guaranteed to be published, but obviously they want to incentivise schools to buy more advertising space in future, so most probably are.

Of course they also sometimes publish press releases from schools that don't advertise with them, but those would have to be particularly "newsworthy".

Agree with heathclif. Even in Richmond it's interesting to see the rise of UKIP among middle class Conservatives, and number of defections or statements from Tory councillors (Councillor Morris's husband's letter in the RTT suggests unfair procedures for allocating places). If they opened a bilingual school here while the number of unplaced children grew even higher, I think the sense of dissatisfaction at unfair priorities, and waste of money, could intensify.

I am really concerned by these stories about the child abuse at Southbank International School. According to a recent Guardian article this teacher worked at Cognita's Southbank school from 2009 until 2013 but applied to other British schools, including 'King's College School' (there's one in Cambridge as well as Wimbledon). He moved from Southbank International school to Nicaragua. The idea that teachers can be employed without qualifications, who can evade checks by moving abroad sends shivers down my spine. I know that I would feel safest with a school that has full union representation, full qualified with QTS and where the majority have followed their career in the UK.

Mum, they are shocking, but "full union representation, full qualified with QTS" wouldn't have prevented it, and given that he was caught in Nicaragua, and not in the UK, I'm not convinced that following a UK career is a guarantee either. Frequent international moves should prompt careful checks by any educational employer, but he was drugging his victims, and was only caught by chance through computer evidence.

They're all safeguards for me - union representation means teachers are likely to have opted for the teacher's pension and their liability insurance, which in turn suggests they are likely to have followed a career in the UK (many private school teachers moving from the state sector retain their union membership to make it easier to keep their pension).

A career in the UK means they are less likely to evade CRB checks by moving abroad. But it isn't a guarantee if they have not been caught.

QTS is a slightly separate issue from safeguarding but I would not accept a school that employed unqualified teachers unless they were working towards it.

Hmm, sounds tenuous to me. Not all state-school teachers aren't members of unions, and I haven't seen any stats to suggest abuse is more common in private schools than in state schools.

I know what you mean about the international movement, but many state schools are having to employ overseas staff too. Supply agencies are importing them on mass for subjects such as maths which are difficult to resource.

Here is the 2010 Ofsted report for St Michael's College as I was concerned about the lack of central register mentioned in the 2013 ISI report.

www.ofsted.gov.uk/inspection-reports/find-inspection-report/provider/CARE/SC043045

They did have CRB checks, which is a relief. And overall the provision is good. But they appear to have been slow at implementing statutory procedures in general.

'haven't seen any stats to suggest abuse is more common in private schools'

In those circles, abuse is deeply hidden and there wouldn't be stats. There are many areas for which stats are not available for private schools. I haven't heard of a case like Southbank International in the state system, however. I feel very strongly that the state sector is safer, although not without risk.

The ISI report for St Michael's College did say their programme of extra-curricular activities was 'limited' so perhaps that might also limit risk, given the paedophile in the Guardian article was deliberately looking for such opportunities.

A report into Southbank International also showed a weakness in vetting procedures. While the school denied this would have made a difference, it's shocking for me to see how many private schools do not take this seriously.

Sorry, link here

The Guardian has Labour vows to rub out Michael Gove's education reforms: Plan to introduce network of local school commissioners aims to roll back 'unmanageable Kafkaesque caricature' and Labour would put schools in local hands: The party's education policy would ensure local oversight of free schools and academies to drive up standards by David Blunkett:

. . With the commissioning of new schools undertaken by a local director of school standards, decisions will be fair and transparent, rooted in the needs of the local community. The admissions code and the role of the adjudicator will also be strengthened to provide fairness for all children. Local authorities will focus on being the voice and advocate for pupils and parents, and will once again be able to open new community schools. By working with the director of school standards, they will ensure local intelligence and data are at the heart of decision-making.

The recommendations laid out today represent hard-edged delegation of responsibilities away from an overstretched and remote Department for Education. This is an agenda of high standards for all and one that I am proud Labour is committed to offer in the general election.

Rick Muir writes in the New Statesman: We need Directors of Schools Standards to make academies work for all: Michael Gove has centralised power without any kind of mediating local tier between schools and the government.

. . These Directors of Schools Standards . . would also hold open competitions for new schools, following local authorities assessment of where places are required and proper consultation with local communities . . Beyond this, Blunkett envisages the DSS to have a role in promoting school improvement by brokering collaboration between successful and struggling schools, as was promoted through the successful London Challenge programme.

Also an interesting brief article and comments discussing the four free schools in special measures, suggesting a fifth has been inspected and staff informed of special measures but no report as yet. The head of a German-English school in Herne Hill has left after six months (it is run by the chain CfBT), and likewise the heads of Bedford and Greenwich free schools (recently rated 'Requires improvement').

www.theguardian.com/education/2014/apr/29/free-schools-ofsted-failure-rate-higher-state

And another (bilingual) free school found to have financial irregularities in its accounts:

www.localschoolsnetwork.org.uk/2014/04/whistleblowers-claims-about-brighton-free-school-had-some-substance-said-funding-watchdog/

Today’s RTT has two letters (p 23): Getting the top choices, Cllr Hodgins’ reply to the complaints of Cllr Morris and her husband, and School achievements missing from Jeremy Rodell: why is the new Catholic-only school not listed as an achievement by the Tory Council?

There is also Support grows for free school, another advertorial for the King’s Group.