Richmond Borough Schools Chat 6

[BayJay2]

Hello! This is the latest thread in a series originally triggered by Richmond Council's Education White Paper in Feb 2011. We chat about local education policy, the local impact of national policy, local school performance, and admissions-related issues.

Please do join in. 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.

If you have a few hours to spare and want to catch up on 4 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 run in parallel, as one was started on the national Mumsnet site, and the other locally:

1a) New Secondaries for Richmond Borough? (Feb 11 - Nov 11)
1b) New Secondary schools for Richmond! (Feb 11-Nov 11)

1. New Secondary Schools for Richmond 2 (Nov 11-May 12)
2. New Secondary Schools for Richmond 3 (May 12-Nov 12)
3. New Secondary Schools for Richmond 4 (Nov 12-Oct 13)

1. Richmond Borough Schools Chat 5 (Oct 13-Nov 14)
2. Richmond Borough Schools Chat 6 (Nov 14 - ????) : This thread!

clearly not the only one with a concern!

On the other bit of your post heathclif for primary schools you can't do fair banding tests or lotteries, you need community and you can't expect little legs to walk too far. But proximity to other schools creates unnecessary surplus and potentially unfair competition. It's wrong. So location is absolutely top priority and the idea of saving money on capital budgets just to waste it on excess places is bonkers.

With regard to outside space, etc. you just can't have two-tier standards for state schools and you can't compare with the private sector which is always, always selective, and always a voluntary choice.

"The thing is, really fair admissions include lotteries and banding tests."

Only that's not what happens as lotteries and banding tests actually result in oversubscribed schools becoming more selective. Why? Because they 'crowd out' the local children from the less educationally-engaged families (i.e. the children that are harder to teach).

Just think about it - if you don't give a stuff about your child's education you're going to choose the school next-door even if it's crap. Conversely, if it's fantastic and there's now a lottery, perhaps half of these disadvantaged children now won't get in. They'll be replaced by less local children from families that are prepared for them to travel because they think the better school is worth it. And children are much more likely to succeed academically if their families value education...

Y6 parent here with Turing offer, and first time poster.We were at the TH meeting for y6 families 2 weeks back at HHJS and were told the permanent site isn't decided yet. We wouldn't mind if it was whitton. It might put some people off, but it's not far away. We know families who live over there and they are happy at the Heathland school, but I suppose it might bother people who aren't in catchment for that. Lots of families down that way use the faith schools in Hounslow too.
Turing has built a strong bond with hhjs and Stanley primaries so the new admissions point makes sense to me. Trafalgar seems more bonded with Twickenham Academy.
Would prefer teddington site if possible though as would seem awkward to be bussed past another school.

if you don't give a stuff about your child's education you're going to choose the school next-door even if it's crap

I find that quite upsetting. If you don't have the money to go private, and you can't afford to move house, or live in Teddington as opposed to Whitton, and aren't Catholic, you have no option but the local school. You're prepared to make the best of it and even get involved, but it's run by a Swedish company that fiddles around with different exam boards and puts too much emphasis on its 'knowledge portal'. It doesn't offer regular GCSE single sciences or many languages, and the only school trips are to Sweden so their students can practise their English on you. When you try to get involved you find that it's not a governing body like your primary school where you have lots of parent and community governors but some sort of 'local board' full of appointees.

Anyway, Teddington pupils would find the bus journey harder to Whitton than to REEC or Kingston Academy (which offered places as far as Fulwell this year). And Teddington's catchment has widened by 500 m or so. There will therefore be a lot more competition for TH from the Teddington admissions point. REEC may help Whitton too initially. Things may change at Twickenham Academy when funding agreement runs out. So it's all up in the air.

I don't understand your point, muminlondon - I'm talking about those parents who probably wouldn't even know if their local school is "run by a Swedish company that fiddles around with different exam boards and puts too much emphasis on its 'knowledge portal'", let alone care about it. Their children are the most disadvantaged, but it would seem that no-one cares about them.

I don't think you should make judgements like that about any parents, especially not on the basis of where they are living.

Distance is a logical criteria because it's about reducing car travel, creating community links, being closer to the school for after-school activities, etc. It's the main criteria used for the majority of places in the borough apart from at StRR. That uses faith selection, which is contentious, but the use of lottery and parish boundaries spreads the catchment widely and makes it a Richmond borough school. Academic selection is contentious, and thankfully isn't to the detriment of the best comps in Richmond, although it affects Kingston more. Selection by gender has its critics but it's very easy to understand and (if balanced by single sex schools of both genders) generally spreads the catchment area wider so justifies some travel.

But postcode selection hasn't been tried to that extent. I'm still not sure that parents in Twickenham/Fulwell are that happy about 15% of Waldegrave coming from Richmond's Area B, but they'd be even less happy if 85% came from posher Richmond - that would definitely make the RTT...

One way or another, TH would certainly work better with a site nearer to that location, both in terms of reflecting the community around the school (which is leafy, but there's leafier still in this borough) and making travel easier. I'm sure that's what RET and those offered a place are hoping for.

I saw an interesting post on this Whitton forum - a ward councillor for that area comments that he had heard nothing about this site before it figured in the RTT. So I'd really like to know why the RTT supposes this is the council's 'favoured site'.

Gosh TH are in a tricky position aren’t they? A really popular community driven proposal, set up to meet the specific need of the Twick/Fulwell/Teddington “black hole”, which has lost sites near the area of need (Clifden, NPL and Udney Pk Rd (last year anyway)) and may be shunted over to Whitton. Whitton has no real need of places, TA and Heathlands (outstanding) are right there (and am I right in thinking Heathlands is planning to expand?). Obviously children living on the schools doorstep need to have access (hence the 20% rule) but it’s in no-one’s interest for TA to be undermined and a greater % split would surely do that. How does TH meet its commitment to the community that initiated and backed it without an 80/20 split? Creating a school for a different community (one where demand has not been demonstrated) is not the free school proposal that was accepted by the DfE and they would come in for the same criticism Deer Park school is seeing if they changed.

As for transport from Fulwell to Whitton there is the 481. An inadequate service at the moment but could presumably be increased by TfL when need be. Other schools (such as Teddington) have dedicated school busses so I don’t see that as being a big problem. There are problems though, the A316 is a psychological as well as a physical barrier for many.

I really hope TH wins the bid for Udney Pk Rd. What I don’t understand is why our local MP and councillors are not out there campaigning for it. Are they really so scared of wealthy nimbys? Supporters of TH should be inundating their representatives demanding support for the site. Surely the council’s backing for a site has an influence on the EFA and can help secure it for TH. But the process seems so opaque so who knows!

The site is so important. No private school has a geographical admissions point, so there's little precedent even there for mass transit of pupils in from one area to another. There'll always be confused and resentful people with that arrangement.

I'm curious to know if Teddington School supporters feel a little threatened by the admissions point moving closer. Udney Park is too close to that school if it'sstill an option, so there's definitely a good case for the admissions point being just a bit further out, without being too anomalous. Teddington would be in a stronger position to compete (and if its catchment expands, there'd still be demand).

The Richmond College site makes a lot of sense in terms of the council's long-term planning for need. Small schools can be a risk but the College removes the risk in terms of the sixth form. It's got good transport links in a central location so can serve a wider borough as well as any school with a 'distance' criterion. The 281 bus goes from Teddington directly so if it had opened earlier it would have helped out in the short term. The original proposal of TH with 50% from Clifden Road and 50% from near Waldegrave characterised it originally as a school serving West Twickenham, so that's where some of the original support came from, although it was turned down. Then this year it's 100% from Waldegrave, which moves it closer to Fulwell, but following the consultation that becomes 80% from Somerset Gardens in Teddington proper. Very confusing to know where the other 20% will be coming from and it's quite a different community now, thought I don't dispute that Fulwell was an inbetweeny area with less and sometimes no choice.

There's no long-term advantage, financial or social, in rushing into a site that doesn't work, or might affect other schools. I see that rush as political and something that only works for the school building project management companies (e.g. the Place Group).

Somerset Gardens is in Fulwell ward muminlondon, though apparently also in Teddington village.

mum I am not arguing with you in terms of what would happen in a perfect world. However I am arguing with thinking we can put off providing school places until that perfect world is achieved. I do think the proposed Deer Park School looks like being a step too far in terms of pragmatism, there does not seem to be anything positive going for it in terms of benefit to the community, and I certainly agree that primary schools should be for local children, indeed ditch faith selection and we would be able to give a lot more parents that option, it would be interesting to see how it would fall out if there were not so many faith places in Twickenham, though inevitably other black holes would materialise because there are not enough places to go round.

My point is that parents and residents need to recognise that given the current situation there do need to be compromises.

The point about TH is that it is satisfying a demand for a good inclusive secondary on the model of the oversubscribed schools like Waldegrave (but inclusive in terms of gender). RPA now being oversubscribed to the point that it is excluding most Lowther pupils, and others across Barnes, Mortlake and Kew demonstrates that if you meet that demand the parents will apply, and will do so even if a journey is involved. At the moment TA is not doing that, hence my suggestion it consolidates with HA to provide choice but to free resources to a school that does.

The new admission point is still 1.5 km away from where it was, and would take up to 45 more pupils from that point, so it moves the community further away, doesn't it? Although that might help with gender balance (I saw it described on a private/secondary Mumsnet thread as 'Waldegrave for boys' which may be misleading).

Agree that TA and HA should combine on one site. And would be happy with RET taking over and a (smaller) proportion reserved for other admission points. If a school is going to provide an innovative e-learning based education approach, it's got to be a positive choice and proven benefit, not hold a monopoly of places in the area and be a way of employing underqualified teachers.

Muminlondon, we did discuss some time ago (Sun 22-Feb-15 13:56:14) the fact that TH's catchment is very unlikely to be circular around the admissions point for a variety of reasons. Due to the position of Waldegrave, it is also unlikely to be homogonous in its density (never mind gender intake), with demand likely to be lower in the direction of Twickenham. (And especially when REEC comes online)

There is, on the other hand, a lot of demand from Hampton Hill, much of which is outside of Waldegrave's catchment, never mind Teddington's and Orleans Park's.

Sorry, I should let this go... I do really feel for those with an offer who don't know where their children might be travelling to in two years' time. The suspense is too much.

No worries MiL. Unfortunately TH can only ever be a sticking plaster pragmatic local solution, not an answer to everything.

The Guardian has: Is London's ethnic diversity driving its school success story?Government policy is credited for the capital’s educational turnaround – but others say it is the result of more children from aspirational ethnic minority families at its schools:

Twelve years ago, London’s secondary schools were undeniably failing and, in an era when politicians had money to spend, the answer was political intervention – in the form of the London Challenge.

When it was (started) . . the capital’s schools were among the worst in the country, with just 39 % of pupils getting at least five good grades at GCSE (A*-C including English and maths). Now, 62 % is the comparable figure and London’s schools are the envy of the entire country – and beyond. The scale of the transformation is staggering, how it was achieved is less clear-cut . .

This study suggests it might be more complex: outer London has seen less dramatic change than inner London, which had a bigger concentration of disadvantaged pupils, and schools with above average pupils have not outperformed the rest of the country. Richmond was fourth to the bottom in terms of improvement between 2004 and 2011 (p.35) despite one of the highest rates of gentrification. I think it's shifted up a gear since then, though.

On the other hand, research has found that 'Immigrants are better educated and younger than their UK born counterparts, especially those from the 15 countries that were members of the EU prior to 2004 (the EU15). The most recent immigrants are better educated still ... Almost 40% of all immigrants now live in London' (and see Table 2).

Mum in London - you asked whether the Teddington School community would feel threatened by Turing House moving into its catchment area. I've never heard anyone mention that as a threat, although I haven't had discussions about it. I think Teddington School is too well established and popular especially now it has a new Head to be seriously threatened. People in Central & South Teddington and Hampton Wick see Teddington School as their school (partly because no one has any real choice about going there) whereas those in what is sometimes called "North Teddington" (ie. the Stanley Road area up towards Fulwell where the TH admissions point is are) considered to have less loyalty to Teddington School as they have more choices - particularly Waldegrave for the girls. With several 4 form years coming through Collis and 3 form years coming through Hampton Wick/St John's it is going to be increasingly hard for people from North Teddington to get into Teddington School.

where does this new admissions point now leave people who are just out of catchment for Orleans Park ie by Twickenham Green - we are now going to be out of catchment for TH too.

From 2017 the Green area will be well served by the REEC school, just a short hop over the railway bridge. It's hard to say whether the TH catchment will stretch to the Green for 2016, but as it says here, it is likely to start out relatively wide, then shrink over time.

I think the adjustment came about because people in Twickenham will now be able to go to the new school at Richmond College if they can't get into OP and that school wasn't known about when TH was originally proposed. Therefore the TH admissions point has moved to the spot in the Borough that is furthest from any school ie. the most difficult place from which to get a school place if you are a boy. Bay Jay will be able to explain it a lot better!

O she got there whilst I was writing!

I think probably Orleans Park catchment will also change shape or lengthen as there will be a small overlap with REEC. Kingston Academy seems to have had this effect on Teddington too.

From the report, Lessons from London Schools: Investigating the Success (Centre for London 2014) cited by muminLondon at 1800:

‘ . . Gentrification–have changes to the socio-economic profile of the London population contributed to the transformation? School performance worldwide is heavily influenced by the economic and parental background of students. If these factors have changed in London, that could constitute a major causal factor.

We conclude that . . neither gentrification nor ethnicity nor better opportunities constitute explanations for the London improvement . . There is dramatic variability in terms of the rate of gentrification, from places like Tower Hamlets and Islington, that have witnessed a change in population profile to many outer London boroughs that have been relatively unaffected by gentrification.

. . Gentrification is defined here as the change in the % of residents belonging to the two highest socio-economic classes (higher managerial and professional, and lower managerial and professional) between 2001 and 2011. Higher and Lower Managerial occupations (HLM) are the top two categories in the National Statistics Socio-economic classification . . ‘

The change for LBRuT = + 5 %; the median = 2 % (Hammersmith and Redbridge); Kingston = + 1 %; Hounslow = -1 %.