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!

Wait until there is a suitable site and until then, what? Even if the lid stays on the massive pent up demand for good school places amongst those who move or go private because they do not live in the catchments of the vastly oversubscribed outstanding comprehensives (and the surge in demand for Richmond Park Academy now it is more positively percieved locally is evidence of that) there are still far too many pupils going to be emerging from Richmond Primaries in coming years for the school place planning strategy currently in place to cope without a Turing. Where are the pupils going to go whose families don't have the resources to avoid the crisis? Neighbouring boroughs face a similar if not worse bulge of pupils seeking places. It is bonkers to just hope the problem goes away just because none of the sites is perfect and won't upset anyone. It is going to have to be about pragmatism and compromise, and unfortunately these schools, primary and secondary are going to end up affecting the amenity of residents. Look at the past planning application for Twickenham Green Primary, or the current planning application for St Richard Reynolds, and the residents comments there about the dire problems the traffic will cause, and St RR traffic also serves pupils traveling from some distance. However places are needed and unless we are going to build that second storey on Twickenham, or burrow, we are all going to have to be conciliatory and represent our interests as parents and residents, whilst seeking to understand the interests of others.

If there is demand for secondaries in a particular area, does that mean that there are more families applying for those places that live in those areas or that the area has more sought-after schools that more people from outside the area apply for. As we have previously said, out-of-borough applications are equally valid.

Interesting about RPA being more positively perceived. I think this is in great part due to the HT at Barnes Primary who has been persuading parents that if they go there en masse, standards will improve... A friends has a son who travels daily from Sheen to Streatham to go to an outstanding school there rather than to RPA which is a five minute walk. Not everyone has the 'perception' of Sheen improving.

Heathclif, agreed it is a big problem. But by not even addressing or discussing some of the issues with the sites the problems regarding those sites does not get resolved. I highlighted some of the issues earlier and most haven´t even been discussed.

I also asked what the particular issues were with the other site in Teddington but no-one seems to want to answer that. I´m constantly being referred to the TH website rather than having a proper discussion about it on MN.

Hightsma while you can't put a wall around the borough there is a Catch 22: the Local Authority are responsible for ensuring enough places for all the in-borough children. So, they have to make sure there are enough places to satisfy demand from both inside and outside the borough. That is very difficult to do in Richmond because it is long, thin and split in two by the river. If we were round, and all the schools were in the middle it would be easier. Weighting places away from the borough boundary helps. That's not to say this policy is perfect for every site. I think everyone can agree it would have been better for the site to have been decided before the admissions policy was set, but the process didn't allow for that.

Neverthess the website does clearly say the policy will be kept under review.

The TH website

If I were a Whitton resident I would be strongly against this, and as a Richmond resident, I fully support any Whitton resident who thinks this is unfair. It is a ridiculous situation.
And to refer people back to 'the website' is a cop-out.

Hightsma, there are a lot of answers to your questions on the TH website, because a lot of effort has been put into making sure common issues are addressed there. It would be silly to repeat it all here.

And if you don't get an answer to something it's possible that you're simply asking the wrong people.

does that mean that there are more families applying for those places that live in those areas
I saw a good map someone did of the expanded primary schools and major housing developments – can’t find it now but it showed clearly where demand was coming from. Will post if I locate it.

This one shows the sec schools (not my map) ... not the housing developments and expanded primary schools. But it does show how TH are trying to locate the point away from other schools.
www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zTCMhftEzN0s.kw1Ravf9ueCo

This one shows the sec schools (not my map) ... not the housing developments and expanded primary schools. But it does show how TH are trying to locate the point away from other schools.
www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=zTCMhftEzN0s.kw1Ravf9ueCo

Blustars its linked from the bottom of the Local Need page on the TH website .

The whole TH situation seems utterly bonkers.

Might not vote the same way as you MrsSalvo but agree on a lot of the points in your recent posts. Interesting to see acknowledgement from Fulwell parents that they want TH to have a better choice. While I think it was also wrong to give both HA/TA to the same sponsor, the schools have had a stable community and consistent pattern of applications for years, and that could change anyway. TH will impact them both directly.

It seems inevitable that even just the two undersubscribed sixth forms would be more effective combined, or cost-effective to close them, as students could benefit more from Richmond College. The sixth form in Colin Mackinlay's old school (as academised) in Coulsdon was closed down. So of course there is room to expand if necessary.

But it would be a waste of money to have three or even four schools with 70-120 pupils each, within a mile or two of each other, and something is going to give. That sort of wastage is going to be under the spotlight after 7 May, because whichever party in power will have to placate the DUP or SNP with billions of pounds, spend even more on constitutional changes, referenda or new elections, and education budgets might be cut even more than planned (and there are cuts of 10-15% coming up for Richmond schools as it is - that's why they're so keen to take extra pupils).

• But it would be a waste of money to have three or even four schools with 70-120 pupils each, within a mile or two of each other

To clarify, you mean in the sixth form?

And to refer people back to 'the website' is a cop-out.

That is exactly what I thought MrsSalvoMontalbano

something is going to give

muminlondon2, yes agreed. That sort of wastage will be under the spotlight after 7th May. Particularly with those sort of cuts you described. I assume you are also referring to this:

www.richmondandtwickenhamtimes.co.uk/NEWS/12925313.No_answers_over_Achieving_for_Children_s___7_5m_spending_cuts/

*its linked from the bottom of the Local Need page on the TH website" - that's funny! :)
Wish I could find that other one though ....

Bluestars the map you want is there too.

"And to refer people back to 'the website' is a cop-out."

Hmm, well, it seems to me that people who want answers from the school need to ask the school, and people who want answers from the LA, the EFA, etc, need to ask there, not here.

Mumsnet can give you opinion, and if you're lucky people will also point you to primary sources of information as a reference. I've tried to help by doing that, but if it's not enough then you will need to go direct to the right place.

need to ask there, not here

then you will need to go direct to the right place

I can´t speak for anyone else, but I don´t want answers from the LA, EFA nor the school or it´s website, I want to chat with others here on MN.

the map you want is there too
Yes I know, sorry, being glib :)

So Hightsma - do those maps explain the Fulwell issue? From my personal point of view I want my DC to go to the same local school as his friends and neighbours and without TH and the link system that was very unlikely to happen. Girls go to Waldegrave or Teddington on our street, the boys are scattered far and wide. I want a new local school to solve that. I'm not being snobby about TA or HA but I think that particular teaching method should be opted into and not forced upon me. It's not right for my child.

I think everyone agrees that Whitton is a bad choice of site. Teddington would be much better. Or if a site could be found in Fulwell then even better but that doesn't seem to be on the cards.

Hightsma I might throw the debate right back at you. I don't know if what you say about traffic and access etc is a showstopper in terms of using that site for a school. I would say that the traffic etc was a showstopper for St RR because I am going to have to live with the increased traffic, gridlock, bad behaviour etc. However the Planning process which hopefully aims to balance my needs with those of St RR parents, hopefully with the input of experts who are a little more objective and knowledgeable about possible solutions than the average Mumsnet poster seems to me a more helpful way of reaching the fairest possible conclusion for all. And the same applies to the Whitton site if it is even going to get to a Planning process.

So unless you are going to come up with similar well researched, evidenced
and objective evidence to contribute to the debate, and
the Turing House website seems as good a place to start as any,then I am really not any more interested in getting involved in a debate that will just dissolve into partisan emotive nimbyism and rehashing old debates and misunderstandings than you are / would be in getting involved in a debate about St RR's impact on my neighbourhood..........

I think everyone agrees that Whitton is a bad choice of site. Teddington would be much better. Or if a site could be found in Fulwell then even better but that doesn't seem to be on the cards.

Absolutely, yes I totally agree bluestars.

From my personal point of view I want my DC to go to the same local school as his friends and neighbours

Fair enough. It is important to have a choice and if Waldegrave and Teddington have no places (or if you have a boy) and you don´t agree with TA or HA teaching methods then TH is the answer for you.

hopefully with the input of experts who are a little more objective and knowledgeable about possible solutions than the average Mumsnet poster seems to me a more helpful way of reaching the fairest possible conclusion for all

Heathclif, I´d love to have a debate here with others about the pros and cons of both sites. I´ve put forward some of the cons of the Whitton site and happy to hear from others about the cons of the Teddington site.

I think it´s unfair to say that Mumsnetters aren´t knowledgeable. There are many knowledgeable people here. Maybe not all objective, as everyone´s opinion is influenced somewhat but that is that completely true of all individuals involved in the planning process?

Hightsma, if you go back through the debate since those who are against the possible Whitton site got involved you will indeed find that LottieProsser did in fact highlight a number of issues with the Teddington site in terms of access and traffic. And it isn't in the Turing catchment either, but then it would be unlikely to threaten Teddington Schools viability if it is sited that close. For me though the biggest issue with that site is that Imperial are going through a commercial auction process for the site. it doesn't matter what the pros and cons are, nobody can force them to sell it to the EFA for a school, or pursue any course of action but to get the best possible deal. It is not in public ownership. All these conspiracy theories about Lord True and his rich mates are not actually relevant on this one, though they were on other sites that were or came into public ownership . We all hope that Imperial do the right thing and reach a deal that benefits the community but they have their own interests, actually ones that are also important in terms of educating the citizens of the future.....

And I said the average mumsnetter, some of us are indeed far more knowledgable than we would ever have wished to be about both education and the Planning Process thanks to past experience