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!

Christ's School seems to have decided against conversion.

Lack of joined up policies example 2: primary schools providing free school meals are now missing out on pupil premium because there's no incentive for parents to register as being eligible.

Good evening, first time I have posted on this thread but I have often read it with interest.

Just received the below text from the Chair of Governors from Barnes Primary. I appreciate it is just at the initial consultation stage but I'm just trying to decipher what it actually means and whether it is a good idea or not.

Any comments would be welcome.

----

Dear Parents and Carers,

First of all, we’d like to wish everyone in our community a very happy new year; we hope that you all enjoyed a relaxing break and are ready for the term ahead!

This year will in many ways be challenging for all in education as we head up to the General Election. We will continue to be imaginative in the way we work to deliver the best possible provision for our children in the face of ever-increasing external demands and pressures placed on schools.

To this end, we will be participating in a conference organised by the Local Authority looking at different models of governance, including multi-academy trusts (MATs), where a small group of schools work strongly and collaboratively together to improve standards and share resources in the most efficient way possible.

At the request of Nick Whitfield, Director of Children’s Services for Richmond and Kingston Boroughs, we have met with East Sheen Primary and Richmond Park Academy – our two closest schools – for exploratory discussions about collaborative working. A governors’ working party with representatives from all three schools will be meeting to start looking at some of the available options and to determine their suitability and viability. These include a multi-academy trust: you may already be aware that Grey Court and Waldegrave, two highly successful borough secondary schools, are working in partnership with their local primary schools as part of two separate multi-academy trusts.

We are always looking at ways to improve and we’re excited about the possibilities ahead. Rest assured that at this point no decisions have been made and none will be taken without proper consultation. Any of the governors will be happy to discuss this letter with you, and we will keep you regularly updated as our discussions progress, including how and when to participate. At the forefront of our mind is always the welfare and happiness of the children at Barnes Primary School, and the unique identity that we feel is so important a part of the school’s success.

Interesting. It's a bit different to Waldegrave, because that is an outstanding conversion academy, that has taken a primary requiring improvement under its wing, converting it to academy status in the process.

It's also different to Grey Court, which is also an outstanding converter academy, federated with Hollyfield School in Surbiton, which is a secondary academy that requires improvement.

So, in both cases it's a "helping hand" relationship.

In contrast Barnes and East Sheen primaries are both outstanding, and RPA is Good. And of course RPA is already part of a (very large) multi-academy trust. So it seems to be a different sort of relationship that is proposed - and no doubt a way of encouraging the two primaries to convert to academy status (it's council policy to encourage that, but so far most local primaries have resisted).

That's not to say it's automatically a bad thing - there will no doubt be pluses and minuses, all of which will be considered as part of the process - but it's a bit misleading to directly compare it to the other school federations.

Oh, and as far as I know Grey Court isn't federated with any primaries - but happy to be corrected on that if I'm out of date.

Apart from Nelson (which is the one Waldegrave is federated with) there aren't any other primary academies in Richmond Borough. There are three in Kingston (Knollmead, Latchmere School and St Agatha’s), but as far as I can tell, Grey Court isn't federated with any of them.

Hi kittybloom - thanks for that. The Conservatives have been pushing this since 2010 but the last tried they tried to induce primaries to convert, the primaries said no.

I think primaries should continue to resist - my opinion. The only difference here is that a multi-academy trust with the Richmond and/or comprehensive Kingston converter secondaries may be marginally better than going it alone or being taken over by a chain. Still better to be LA maintained in my view and most primaries remain so. The problem with some chains is that they can be very rigid in imposing their pedagogy, admin, procurement choices etc. which vary enormously. Profit-making companies have even more problems. Just think of whether you'd be prepared to nan the tombola if the director of the MAT is being paid a performance bonus while the school relies on parent volunteers for reading help.

The idea of the next primary free schools being sponsored by an existing secondary converter is a pragmatic solution - better than another GEMS. The idea of Barnes Primary becoming part of the AET chain with RPA is not good, however, as the chain has been criticised for its academic and financial performance.

Sorry for typos

Was going to make BayJay's point about existing relationships with primaries - be really clear about spin from council. Grey Court has worked well with feeder primaries since before it converted. It will carry on doing so.

Not just council spin either - there may also be some pressure and a visit from a DfE academies broker.

All the secondaries work with their main feeder primaries don't they? It sounds like a lot of weasel words and I agree that going into a partnership with a secondary that is part of a not very successful chain requires a lot of clarification. In this case the primaries have been much more successful than the secondary so not sure that they need formal support. It must be about AET wanting money and the Council seeing another opportunity to push the Tory ideological belief in Councils being run on a commissioning only basis.

One interesting scenario could be if RPA left the AET chain and formed. MAT with the local primaries instead. I'm just not sure if that could be achieved, because AET presumably wouldn't give it up willingly.

Going back to the schools strategy document, BayJay2 is money no object now to Department of Education in the pursuit of sites in LB Richmond? Needed for Turing House, two new primaries in Twickenham, possibly also the bilingual primary and now this new primary in Teddington? I think buying Livingstone House in Teddington would be pretty expensive as it's an existing occupied office building where the owners have already applied to extend the office space and build 14 flats. Also on corner of two busy roads with high air pollution levels so not ideal for a school. Even worse than Heathgate House in many ways as at least that has a back entrance!

Lottie, the EFA have to demonstrate value for money. Paying x to purchase/rent a building for a well supported school is justifiable, so long as x is the market value of the property.

On the other hand if the seller tries to demand an unjustifiably higher price because it knows the government has deep pockets and is under pressure to find sites, then it is less likely to go through. The EFA have had a lot of those sorts of problems, which is why they are so cautious about confidentiality.

Thanks for the feedback on this. Lots of good points. I thought the tone of the letter was very much "This is a good thing, promise" which made me a little suspicious. Mentioned it to DH last night and his view was that as BPS and East Sheen are outstanding and RPS is very much on the up, it could be a good thing if we were all in it together. My instinct is that I can't really see the advantage when already there are big links between these two primaries and RPS.

Anyway, I'll report back if there are any futher developments.

Is that true about Waldegrave taking an extra 16 girls for 2015 entry? OMG!

I'd read the DfE Financial Notice to Improve and Ofsted inspection of the AET chain. I think Richmond Park Academy itself has improved but that's down to the head and staff rather than the chain. I don't see any advantage for Barnes or East Sheen to join the chain.

Yes DarkBlueEyes it's true - see here for confirmation. It's a temporary increase in PAN for the 2015 and 2016 intakes, and, unlike the other bulge classes that are reportedly being planned on a contingency basis, it seems to be something that's in place irrespective of whether Turing House opens.

BayJay2 since I wrote earlier I have passed Livingstone House and it now has an "under offer" sign. It's still being advertised as office/residential - but maybe the D of Education has made them an offer? Or maybe it's now out of the picture or maybe it was never really a realistic option? I can't see how the Department of Education could have negotiated a "value for money" price for it on the basis of it being the future site of a well supported school when the Council has only just revealed that it might be a good site for a primary school and no one has asked local parents to express support yet?!

Well maybe our snowball's chance has just got a little more possible!

Twickenham Academy's latest monitoring inspection has been published (see here) and looks positive. That's very good news for pupils and staff, and as noted a few posts earlier, will keep the pressure up on the school place planning process.

It's faring better than Ipswich Academy, the Suffolk school in the chain.

Have lurked on this thread since the beginning but think this is the first time I have posted.

Does anyone know anything about the 2 catchment areas for Waldegrave? In particular I wondered which has the fastest moving waiting list and do they operate idependently from each other i.e. if a place is turned down from Catchment B, a place is offered to someone on that waiting list and not from Catchment A? Many thanks.

In case anyone wonders I am a parent from Richmond who has been overseas for 2 years, returning to the area in the summer and hoping for a snowballs chance of a place for a Year 7 to be DD.

According to the admissions criteria 'Any places subsequently refused will be re-offered, using the same method, to the priority area in which they were originally offered. ' So that means there would never be more than 15% of places offered on the Richmond side with the waiting list depending on refusals in the priority area you live in. It's a popular choice, however. Have you seen the 2014 allocation map?

Yes I have muminlondon2 and thank you for the response. So I suppose I have to take a gamble on whether to live in Catchment A or B. Do you (or anyone else) know if the council would be likely to divulge which one puts me in a better position if I was to speak to them sometime in March/April after the initial offers have been made/taken up?

They can give you information about cut-off distances after the offer day in April. I think also there is a meeting of the Admissions Forum on 2 February (they publish an agenda a week in advance) that might discuss demand this year.

Beyond that you should choose where you want to live according to where you can afford, where you work, etc. If Turing House opens this year there will be more choice for Twickenham residents but one reason demand is so strong on the Middlesex side is because there are few alternatives from the green westwards.